Status
Not open for further replies.
Probably this one.
http://ntsb.gov/ntsb/GenPDF.asp?id=ERA09LA477&rpt=p
"The propeller hub and the front of the reduction gearbox were removed to examine the internal
gearbox components. The gearbox contained four primary gears; an engine shaft output gear, two
gears machined on a common shaft, and a propeller input gear. The gearbox geometry was such that
the engine output gear drove the aft gear on the two-gear shaft, and the forward gear on that shaft
then drove the propeller input gear. The forward gear of the two-gear shaft was found to be
completely devoid of all teeth."
 
Was this a gen-3 gearbox?

It would be interesting to know if the builder had done the swap to the gen-3 gearbox or not.

Best hopes for pilot and family for recovery.
 
gearbox failure

Horrible, especially the part about being numb from waist down. We'll say a prayer for the pilot and family. Flying since '05 - an older gearbox? Bill
 
scsmith said:
It would be interesting to know if the builder had done the swap to the gen-3 gearbox or not.

Best hopes for pilot and family for recovery.
Click to expand...

The pilot posted about his accident on one of the Subaru lists.

Answer: no, this was the GEN 1 gearbox.

Since there are many of the GEN1's still flying on EJ-25 engines, often with high times on them, and since he didn't get any funny noises or anything from the gearbox, he felt confident that his gearbox would be okay.

Apparently it turned out differently.

Hans
 
Not a good month for RVs altogether :( As well as that, in that NTSB summary for Aug 09 4 other RV accidents, 7 fatalities...
 
Prayers for a full recovery!

Does anyone know the current status of the pilot's health?

The discussion about the powerplant is not necessary.
 
N62XS said:
Does anyone know the current status of the pilot's health?

The discussion about the powerplant is not necessary.
Click to expand...

IMO, discussion of the cause is always important. I read the NTSB reports three times a week, after they are released. The cause, always has much to do with the condition of the pilot and passengers. The cause is something I want to know.

L.Adamson --- RV6A
 
?

N62XS said:
Does anyone know the current status of the pilot's health?

The discussion about the powerplant is not necessary.
Click to expand...

We all pray for the family, and in my opinion, discussion (adult in nature) is encouraged to help others learn about what went wrong. If I were to have some issue I needed to know about, I would hope others would contribute.
Best
Brian Wallis
 
brianwallis said:
We all pray for the family, and in my opinion, discussion (adult in nature) is encouraged to help others learn about what went wrong. If I were to have some issue I needed to know about, I would hope others would contribute.
Best
Brian Wallis
Click to expand...

The issue is the choice in an unreliable powerplant. The reason discussion is unnecessary, is that it has been debated here from all opinions and its track record and its vendor speak for themselves.

L.Adamson said:
IMO, discussion of the cause is always important. I read the NTSB reports three times a week, after they are released. The cause, always has much to do with the condition of the pilot and passengers. The cause is something I want to know.

L.Adamson --- RV6A
Click to expand...

I agree that knowing the cause is important, but the cause here is a bad choice.

My direct experience with the Egg can best be described as an "I told you so" scenario. Once the Egg package was removed from my friend's RV and placed in the corner of the hangar, thereby preventing another NTSB report and being replaced by a real airplane engine and a Catto prop, the RV finally increased performance by nearly 20% and met the minimum Vans factory performance specs for the first time since first engine start several years ago. Between SC issues, high temp issues and expensive gearbox replacements, the Egg package cost more than 40K plus 30K for its replacement.

I'm not trying to start another debate, but the discussion is what caused the failure and it was the powerplant, gearbox failure. Things that have been covered here many times and to ignore the obvious is, IMHO, dishonest.

Now, all I really want to know is the condition of the pilot. My hope is that he is recovering and again, I pray for a complete recovery.
 
N62XS said:
The issue is the choice in an unreliable powerplant. The reason discussion is unnecessary, is that it has been debated here from all opinions and its track record and its vendor speak for themselves.



I agree that knowing the cause is important, but the cause here is a bad choice.
Click to expand...

N62XS said:
The issue is the choice in an unreliable powerplant. The reason discussion is unnecessary, is that it has been debated here from all opinions and its track record and its vendor speak for themselves.


I agree that knowing the cause is important, but the cause here is a bad choice.
Click to expand...

You are showing your bias against the eggenfellner product bobby. IF he was flying with an old gearbox he has no one to blame but himself. "the factory" has a mandatory replacement for the first two models of the gearbox.

the accident date was August 23, 2009. the factory mandatory replacement info is dated January 26th 2008. However long he owned the plane, that was over a year and a half to change to the safer design.

I hope no one else flies on recalled gearboxes, whatever the discussion of the cost entails i hope anyone with an old design realizes it is not worth it.
 
Danny7 said:
You are showing your bias against the eggenfellner product bobby. ............. the cost entails i hope anyone with an old design realizes it is not worth it.
Click to expand...

I'd put that $4500.00 for a new generation 3 gearbox towards a Lycoming. I'm also biased against these Eggenfellner's. I have good reasons too. A friend
has gone through a lot of problems with his. Radiator mods and scoops all over the place. It finally appears that this plane can finally get some hours on it without overheating. But it's took a year and a new gearbox change to get there.

L.Adamson --- RV6A/ Lyc 0360
 
Danny7 said:
You are showing your bias against the eggenfellner product bobby. IF he was flying with an old gearbox he has no one to blame but himself. "the factory" has a mandatory replacement for the first two models of the gearbox.

the accident date was August 23, 2009. the factory mandatory replacement info is dated January 26th 2008. However long he owned the plane, that was over a year and a half to change to the safer design.

I hope no one else flies on recalled gearboxes, whatever the discussion of the cost entails i hope anyone with an old design realizes it is not worth it.
Click to expand...

Correct me if I'm wrong here but, don't recalled products offer a replacement at no charge?
My Superior ryton sump was replaced at no charge plus installation cost.
I installed myself and Superior even paid for my time.
 
DanLandry said:
Correct me if I'm wrong here but, don't recalled products offer a replacement at no charge?
My Superior ryton sump was replaced at no charge plus installation cost.
I installed myself and Superior even paid for my time.
Click to expand...

Sure, if you are buying from some large corporation. eggenfellner is a 2 man shop, last time i looked. I have no way of knowing how much he makes, or how much superior makes, but if you want to compare the two it is pretty plain that one is better able to absorb recall costs. edit- we can also compare to XP, i wonder how many recalls they are paying for.

like i said about 3 posts up, the cost is minimal compared to the safety aspect.
 
Last edited:
The pilot is doing - relatively - fine

This is what the pilot wrote himself:


Hay all --
Crashed my RV-9A on Aug 23. Plane was total loss I survived and in rehab in Atlanta, GA Shepherd Spinal Chord Center,Had the Egg 4 cyl with Gen 1 gearbox. No warning whatsooever. ZIf you have an Egg with Gen 1 box, run don't walk for latest upgrade or consider changingto Lycoming. Sure wish I had -- done either. Not sure the latest gear box woulg have made aby change but the thought is there,
 
Danny7 said:
You are showing your bias against the eggenfellner product bobby. IF he was flying with an old gearbox he has no one to blame but himself. "the factory" has a mandatory replacement for the first two models of the gearbox.

the accident date was August 23, 2009. the factory mandatory replacement info is dated January 26th 2008. However long he owned the plane, that was over a year and a half to change to the safer design.

I hope no one else flies on recalled gearboxes, whatever the discussion of the cost entails i hope anyone with an old design realizes it is not worth it.
Click to expand...

dannie, Its ROBBY, with a capital R!. Time to do a search and read the facts of the past. A bias is based on an opinion. My statements are based on facts, failures from the past and the factual experiences of others, only in my general area, the SE US.

It seems odd to me that you choose to call the "upgraded gearbox" a "safer design" and not a safe design. I think that speaks volumes.

Everyone is entitled to a civil opinion. While I sit here and bite my tongue as yet another RV/Egg has crashed, I hope everyone will do extensive research, both on the web and in discussion with other builders, before making a decision that may well result in the circumstances that caused this thread. My "opinion", based on historical facts.
 
lufthans.nl said:
This is what the pilot wrote himself:


Hay all --
Crashed my RV-9A on Aug 23. Plane was total loss I survived and in rehab in Atlanta, GA Shepherd Spinal Chord Center,Had the Egg 4 cyl with Gen 1 gearbox. No warning whatsooever. ZIf you have an Egg with Gen 1 box, run don't walk for latest upgrade or consider changingto Lycoming. Sure wish I had -- done either. Not sure the latest gear box woulg have made aby change but the thought is there,
Click to expand...

Thanks Hans.
 
I can't resist...

...to not chime in again.

The "friend" Robby mentions is also a friend and farmer/customer of mine and we were there through all the unresolved high temp, low performance and gear box issues.

I have also given a gent from Atlanta a BFR in his Sube powered -8. He blew a gearbox with his son aboard and was fortunate enough to land on a nearby airport. His temps ran very hot...240* IIRC and we had to climb very shallow.

Now the poor guy in the -9A is undergoing spinal rehab!!... Sheesh.

Think twice about your engine choice,
 
Last edited:
Do not put any alternative engine on unless you are willing to be a test pilot every time you fly, you have vast knowledge of airplane structures and engine systems, you are surrounded by many knowledgeable people and you have deep pockets. For me it has been a great experience but I have a lot of persistance and the quest for knowledge. I trust my airplane as much as I trust any airplane, not very much. Currently there is NO FWF package out there for alternative engines that you can bolt on and go. You will be a test pilot. Again you will be a test pilot. Don't believe what ANY alternative engine builder says about proven systems because there are no completely proven systems yet for the RV. Would I put a Lyco on my RV-10? Not in a million years! But remember if you don't put a lyco on you are much more of a test pilot than if you do put a Lyco on.

Cooling for some reason seems to be an area that some alternative engine builders just don't get. I think many of the problems are cooling related even some of the PSRU problems. If your oil is at 240-250 degrees what do you think your PSRU is at?
Just my $.02.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.