wrote in message
oups.com...
On Apr 27, 8:57 am, "Morgans" wrote:
"B A R R Y" wrote in
gy.net...

Peter R. wrote:
The source stated that the engine of the
airplane was not running right as the aircraft taxied by the small
crowd
that
was invited to watch the flight. There was no at-length run-up
performed
before takeoff.

Stuff like that, if true, simply blows my mind.

Yet we hear and read it again and again...

Yep. I hope that a record of this whole incident is kept as a record of
what not to do for an airplane's first flight.

Let's see; what can we list, so far.

*Taking a second, unnecessary person along during the testing period.
*Not performing a nose high (climb attitude) extended full power engine
test
run.
*Adding to the pressure of taking off on a certain time and place,
because
of an invited, interested, significant
person crowd being present for first flight.
*Allowing contaminants to be present in the fuel system.
*Not doing a runup before first flight.
*Taking off with a rough running engine.
*Attempting to do the deadly "return to the runway turn" at too low of an
altitude.

Man, even back when I was flying RC planes a lot, I always did a full
power extended engine test before flying a new model, and would tilt
the nose of the plane up, and down through the vertical to make sure
that it wouldn't cut out. That was all just to keep from wrecking a
plane that I had put lots of hours into. Now if my ass was going in
the plane that I had just built, I would want to be at least as
thorough in confirming that the engine was running reliably, and I
would wring out the flight controls and double inspect all structural
elements, and invite as many experienced builders to do the same as I
could find willing to help me...

I just can't understand why anyone would do anything less.


Also, the EAA has a very successful Flight Advisor Program. Where were
they? Would the Pilot not accept the advice? As you have all said, too
many
things wrong.

Al G
EAA Flight Advisor