Hello Al,
Why don't you capitalize your name? Just curious.
Embedded comments.
> From: al p wick <alwick@juno.com>
> Date: 2005/06/01 Wed PM 05:53:06 EDT
> To: Cozy_Builders@mailman.qth.net
> Subject: COZY: Rotary risks
>
> I'm part way thru measuring Rotary risks. Using Tracy's newsletters
as basis (what a neat guy). One thing is abundantly clear, it is a
very high risk install. Substantially higher than the Lycoming. I
know this is going to upset a lot of people. I don't want to remain
silent when I have facts that may save a life.
I am sure we all appreciate your concern. None the less, as a means of
effective/convincing communication, this line of statements is rather
lacking. If you wish to truly be less upsetting (which is an intent that
you haven't (IMHO) demonstrated), please provide the details of your
analysis at the same time your make the dire warnings.
Are you suggesting that the Lycoming engine is fundamentally lower risk,
or just the installation details? I realize that the two are related.
> Each change you make to a system increases your risk.
Is this always, absolutely true? It would seem some changes can be made
to lower risk. On the surface, your statement doesn't seem reasonable.
Please explain.
Tons of
changes. Marginal cooling of oil and water 6+ years later. Having to
watch something is a root cause of pilot oversight.
This seems like a really good point. I totally agree.
> High shut down risk of his EFI system(too bad, as his EFI could be a
huge risk reduction if designed differently).
Specifics! You don't have to explain them all. Just one, but in detail.
> Repeat root cause failures to design changes... the same pattern to
all the failures.
>
> Doesn't mean don't use rotary, Perry had much lower risk as he didn't
modify all those systems. It means, if you go that route, you better
make sure you use every skill you can muster to anticipate failures
and qualify each change while on the ground.
Another good point. I think lots of people view ground testing (maybe on
a test stand), as extra work instead of work/worry savings. They don't
realize that the airplane won't be useful/fun until it's reliable.
>
> I'll itemize the risk items in future, too many pans in fire right
now. I also have to look at other info sources.
So, what was your point of posting this message prior to having any real
data? Are you just trying to get people fired-up? Do you expect people
change to Lycoming or Subaru just based on your dire warnings?
>
> Risk is not measured by how many moving components you have. That is
propaganda. As are terms like "hand grenade" and "melting aluminum".
Doesn't parts-count mean something? Doesn't low parts-count suggest
simpler risk analysis?
It's the total system that counts.
Agreed.
>
> Fire away!
I don't think any of us are looking to 'Fire' (nor anything else really
confrontational). Calm discussion is the most effective means to arrive
at an understanding of the simple concepts that are involved in system
design. I'll bet most of us would be happy to learn methods for
minimizing risk through better design and implementation..
>
> -al wick
> Artificial intelligence in cockpit, Cozy IV powered by stock Subaru
2.5 N9032U 200+ hours on engine/airframe from Portland, Oregon
> Prop construct, Subaru install, Risk assessment, Glass panel design
info: http://www.maddyhome.com/canardpages/pages/alwick/index.html
Most excellent accomplishments. The apparent reliability and performance
of your airplane is a really nice example of how experimental aviation
(IMO) should be done..
Paul Lamar wrote:
What sources of data are you using for your risk assessment?
Paul Lamar
Tracy newsletters. Excellent source, as the guy is so forthright.
-al
Paul Lamar wrote:
I did not know he was still publishing them. What is the last issue you
received?
How does one go about assessing the risk?
Paul Lamar
FMEA is the best way. You can read about the method on my web page. Hope
I'm not being unfair, but I get the impression that you are heavily
influenced by your emotions. You might have a difficult time seeing any
merit to the process.
-al wick
Notice he did not answer both questions. Tracy published the last
newsletter in the year 2000.
BTW Good way to impress your potential customers is to first insult them
:)
Paul Lamar
The Rotary Engine NewsLetter. Powered by Linux.
ACRE NL web site. http://www.rotaryeng.net
Copyright 1998-2005 All world wide rights reserved.
Regards,
Matt-
VE N34RD, C150 N714BK
The Rotary Engine NewsLetter. Powered by Linux.
ACRE NL web site.
http://www.rotaryeng.net
Copyright 1998-2005 All world wide rights reserved.