RV6A down in Seattle area

Ron Wanttaja wrote:
On Mon, 18 Feb 2008 11:38:29 -0900, "Ron Webb" wrote:

As for the safety record of Lyc vs others, I have to grant that I'd have to
pick my examples pretty carefully to find an uncertificated homebuilt with a
better record. Such examples exist. http://www.rotaryaviation.com/ for one.

I did a study of homebuilt accidents over a ~8 year period. Didn't have fleet
sizes for Lycosaur and Auto conversions, but instead looked at how often the
engine was the *cause* of the accident.

Out of 744 homebuilt accidents involving Lycoming, Continental, Franklin,
Jacobs, or Pratt and Whitney engines, 104 were due to some form of engine
failure.

Out of 219 homebuilt accidents in the same period involving auto-engine
conversions, 63 were due to engine failure.

Lycosaur: 14%
Auto Engines: 28%.

Offhand, I'd say the Lycosaurs are safer.

For the purpose of my analysis, I counted the following as "due to engine
failure":

Internal failures (pistons, cranks, etc.)
Fuel System on the engine side of the firewall
Ignition systems
Drive systems (e.g., PSRUs)
Oil System
Carburetor or fuel injector failure
Cooling system failure
Undetermined loss of power


Ron Wanttaja


I've followed your articles on accident stats for several years; thank
you for doing the research. I wonder, though, if your conclusion about
Lycs is really valid.

If we factor in the reality that Lyc installations are more or less
'standardized', with help almost always available from knowledgeable
predecessors, compared to auto conversions where each is nearly unique,
and we factor in the unpleasant fact (sorry guys) that many of the
people most willing to do an auto conversion are the least qualified to
tackle it, how much should we weight the percentages? Only if you add
the word 'installation' to each category can you reach the conclusion
that Lycs are actually safer, in my opinion.

What do you think?

Charlie

"Charlie" wrote

compared to auto conversions where each is nearly unique, and we factor in
the unpleasant fact (sorry guys) that many of the people most willing to
do an auto conversion are the least qualified to tackle it,

If you are trolling, nice try. Otherwise, how do you support this
conclusion?

Nice slap in the face to all those guys that have auto installations humming
happily along. There are bunches of them, and it WOULDN'T be a stretch to
say that they are pretty darn clever bunch, indeed.

Anyone capable of building a kit with all the holes drilled and all the
parts included can hang a Lyconental. It takes a clever person to use an
auto engine. I would hardly classify that as "least qualified."
--
Jim in NC

Morgans wrote:
"Charlie" wrote

compared to auto conversions where each is nearly unique, and we factor in
the unpleasant fact (sorry guys) that many of the people most willing to
do an auto conversion are the least qualified to tackle it,

If you are trolling, nice try. Otherwise, how do you support this
conclusion?

Nice slap in the face to all those guys that have auto installations humming
happily along. There are bunches of them, and it WOULDN'T be a stretch to
say that they are pretty darn clever bunch, indeed.

Anyone capable of building a kit with all the holes drilled and all the
parts included can hang a Lyconental. It takes a clever person to use an
auto engine. I would hardly classify that as "least qualified."
Not trolling; just stating facts. If I said that the majority of a/c
accidents were due to pilot error, it might feel like a slap in the face
to pilots who don't make mistakes, but it would still be true.

I *want* alternative engines to succeed. I believe that many of them can
succeed, if done right. I've spent years learning everything I can about
one design that I hope to install on a homebuilt one day.

The fact that almost any klutz can hang a Lyc, and it takes a lot more
expertise to do an alternative installation, is precisely my point.

I've concluded, from quite a few years of talking with & observing guys
doing alternative engines, that many do not have any feel for what it
takes to make an engine installation succeed. The 1st clue is wanting to
hang 350-400 hp (& an extra 200 lbs) on a plane designed for 180 hp.
Think about how often you hear that, and see the attempt to do it. There
are lots of specifics, like not being able to either solder or run a
crimping tool, not having any idea of what makes air flow through a heat
exchanger efficiently, etc.

My point, which I believe Ron's answer supports, is that the 2X accident
rate for alternative engines is driven by the lack of adequate expertise
on the part of (some) builders, not the engines themselves. This is not
a knock on all alternative engine installers. I'm just saying that those
who truly understand the challenges & would probably have a better
chance of success, often choose Lyc because they really do understand
the challenges. Many (not all, but many) who forge ahead with
alternative installations do so with no understanding of what it takes
to do a successful installation.

I hope that you'll see this like telling a low-time pilot friend that he
really shouldn't take off in a 200 mph homebuilt on a long cross country
under a 1000 ft ceiling & unstable weather. You aren't putting him down;
you're just asking him to realistically evaluate his experience &
abilities, relative to the task at hand.

Charlie

On Feb 20, 2:21*pm, Charlie wrote:
Morgans wrote:
"Charlie" wrote

compared to auto conversions where each is nearly unique, and we factor in
the unpleasant fact (sorry guys) that many of the people most willing to
do an auto conversion are the least qualified to tackle it,

If you are trolling, nice try. *Otherwise, how do you support this
conclusion?

Nice slap in the face to all those guys that have auto installations humming
happily along. *There are bunches of them, and it WOULDN'T be a stretch to
say that they are pretty darn clever bunch, indeed.

Anyone capable of building a kit with all the holes drilled and all the
parts included can hang a Lyconental. *It takes a clever person to use an
auto engine. *I would hardly classify that as "least qualified."

Not trolling; just stating facts. If I said that the majority of a/c
accidents were due to pilot error, it might feel like a slap in the face
to pilots who don't make mistakes, but it would still be true.

I *want* alternative engines to succeed. I believe that many of them can
succeed, if done
Charlie- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

to do a successful installation. on the part of (some) builders, not
the engines themselves. This is not
a knock on all alternative engine installers. I'm just saying that those
who truly understand the challenges & would probably have a better
chance of success, often choose Lyc because they really do understand
the challenges. Many (not all, but many) who forge ahead with
alternative installations do so


There is a reason we call these Experimental homebuilt planes...
According to the FAA we build them for the "educational and
recreational aspect. Hell, a trained monkey can assemble any one of
the new quick build kits on the market, all it has to do is cleco,
rivet and fly....

Ben ( an auto engine junkie) Haas
www.haaspowerair.com
N801BH,

PS, I just got a video camera and shot some footage this mornin of my
beast. If I can figure out how to load it to YouTube or something
similar you can view an auto engine powered homebuilt boring holes
through -6 f skies here in Jackson Hole....

"stol" wrote

There is a reason we call these Experimental homebuilt planes...
According to the FAA we build them for the "educational and
recreational aspect. Hell, a trained monkey can assemble any one of
the new quick build kits on the market, all it has to do is cleco,
rivet and fly....

Jim: - - - Well, at least a dedicated trained monkey, anyway!

Ben ( an auto engine junkie) Haas
www.haaspowerair.com
N801BH,

PS, I just got a video camera and shot some footage this mornin of my
beast. If I can figure out how to load it to YouTube or something
similar you can view an auto engine powered homebuilt boring holes
through -6 f skies here in Jackson Hole....

Jim: - - - Right oN! !

Jim: - - - Do something else, for us auto engine junkie admirers. Some time
when you have the cowl off, give a close up video tour of the installation,
and narrate about some of the pitfalls you have had to avoid, what has
worked out well, and what you want to improve on. That kind of thing, you
know. I'm sure you could get creative and make up your own program, but I
can never get enough of poking around a good fire wall forward auto engine
installation, up close and personal!
--
Jim in NC

On Feb 20, 5:10*pm, "Morgans" wrote:
"stol" wrote

There is a reason we call these Experimental homebuilt planes...
According to the FAA we build them for the "educational and
recreational aspect. Hell, *a trained monkey can assemble *any one of
the new quick build kits on the market, all it has to do is cleco,
rivet and fly....

Jim: - - - Well, at least a dedicated trained monkey, anyway!

Ben ( an auto engine junkie) Haaswww.haaspowerair.com
N801BH,

PS, I just got a video camera and shot some footage this mornin of my
beast. If I can figure out how to load it to YouTube or something
similar you can view an auto engine powered homebuilt boring holes
through -6 f skies here in Jackson Hole....

Jim: - - - Right oN! !

Jim: - - - Do something else, for us auto engine junkie admirers. *Some time
when you have the cowl off, give a close up video tour of the installation,
and narrate about some of the pitfalls you have had to avoid, what has
worked out well, and what you want to improve on. *That kind of thing, you
know. *I'm sure you could get creative and make up your own program, but I
can never get enough of poking around a good fire wall forward auto engine
installation, up close and personal!
--
Jim in NC

I have a conditional inspection coming up next month so a video
walkaround and comments on do's and don't is a great idea. What we
learn will benefit the future auto engine powered experimentals and I
want to help out where I can. Now if I can get Steven. P McNicolls to
narrate it, Bertie to do the comedy act and barnyard BOb to direct it
it should get me an Oscar. !! { : - ))....

Ben
www.haaspowerair.com
Lifetime EAA member.

"stol" wrote

I have a conditional inspection coming up next month so a video
walkaround and comments on do's and don't is a great idea. What we
learn will benefit the future auto engine powered experimentals and I
want to help out where I can. Now if I can get Steven. P McNicolls to
narrate it, Bertie to do the comedy act and barnyard BOb to direct it
it should get me an Oscar. !! { : - ))....

Throw in Ken Tucker to tell you how to fly it, and if you can get all of
that in one place and on film, you should go broker a peace deal in the
Middle East.
essaesseeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeff

"Charlie" wrote

I hope that you'll see this like telling a low-time pilot friend that he
really shouldn't take off in a 200 mph homebuilt on a long cross country
under a 1000 ft ceiling & unstable weather. You aren't putting him down;
you're just asking him to realistically evaluate his experience &
abilities, relative to the task at hand.re are


OK; I'll take your comments at face value, with the attitude of not being a
put-down, but don't throw the baby out with the bath.

You need to keep in mind all the people that do not enter an alternate
engine installation with rose colored glasses, and do their homework. It
seems like many people with exceptional mechanical skills are ones that
forge ahead, and make their installation a success. No doubt that there are
people that do get in over their heads, but please, don't forget the people
that are intent on making a special display of their mechanical abilities.

They deserve all of the special recognition they can get. I've seen some
pretty spectacular alternate engine installations. Works of art, describe
them well.

I guess I am sensitive because I hope to one day engineer a system. I will
definitely be ready for it, if/when I do it. Part of my plan is to build an
air boat, and run the snot out of the system on the water, where if
something does not work, the result will be getting a trolling motor out.
One of the ones that run on a battery, not a newsgroup! g

I wish you luck if you end up putting something together. It would be a
source of great pride for you, I'm sure.
--
Jim in NC

Morgans wrote:
"Charlie" wrote

I hope that you'll see this like telling a low-time pilot friend that he
really shouldn't take off in a 200 mph homebuilt on a long cross country
under a 1000 ft ceiling & unstable weather. You aren't putting him down;
you're just asking him to realistically evaluate his experience &
abilities, relative to the task at hand.re are


OK; I'll take your comments at face value, with the attitude of not being a
put-down, but don't throw the baby out with the bath.

You need to keep in mind all the people that do not enter an alternate
engine installation with rose colored glasses, and do their homework. It
seems like many people with exceptional mechanical skills are ones that
forge ahead, and make their installation a success. No doubt that there are
people that do get in over their heads, but please, don't forget the people
that are intent on making a special display of their mechanical abilities.

They deserve all of the special recognition they can get. I've seen some
pretty spectacular alternate engine installations. Works of art, describe
them well.

I guess I am sensitive because I hope to one day engineer a system. I will
definitely be ready for it, if/when I do it. Part of my plan is to build an
air boat, and run the snot out of the system on the water, where if
something does not work, the result will be getting a trolling motor out.
One of the ones that run on a battery, not a newsgroup! g

I wish you luck if you end up putting something together. It would be a
source of great pride for you, I'm sure.

I hope to do the same, & I've had the same thought about using a boat
(probably dragging a sea anchor to keep the speed safe) for testing.

I very reluctantly bought a Lyc core last fall for my project airplane.
I may yet sell it & go back to my original goal of alternative power; it
really is frustrating to build a basically pre-fabbed airframe & not do
at least a little experimenting. :-)

Charlie

On Tue, 19 Feb 2008 20:44:57 -0600, Charlie wrote:

If we factor in the reality that Lyc installations are more or less
'standardized', with help almost always available from knowledgeable
predecessors, compared to auto conversions where each is nearly unique,
and we factor in the unpleasant fact (sorry guys) that many of the
people most willing to do an auto conversion are the least qualified to
tackle it, how much should we weight the percentages? Only if you add
the word 'installation' to each category can you reach the conclusion
that Lycs are actually safer, in my opinion.

What do you think?

I understand your logic, but don't agree with it. I look at the powerplant as a
*package*. If the engine itself is more reliable, but it's difficult to achieve
an installation that allows it to show its reliability, I don't feel that it
exonerates the engine as an aircraft powerplant. That's why my statistics
include fuel system problems FWF as an engine-related failure...if all else were
equal, Lycomings and, say, Fords should see the same rate of fuel FWF accidents.
If there's a difference, that means one is more picky as to the quality of the
fuel system install. FWIW, auto-engine conversions seem to have fewer instances
of FWF fuel system problems than certified engines.

The very standardization of the LyConts means that the average builder has a
better chance of achieving a reliable installation.

One has to understand what statistics in these cases really *mean*. The fact
that 25% of aircraft accidents aren't caused by "N" DOESN"T mean that *you* have
a 25% chance of having an accident due to "N". It means, out of 100 owners, 25
of them will suffer that kind of accident. If "N" is due to installation
errors, and you spend extra care on your installation, get advice, use quality
materials, etc., then you are less likely to experience that kind of accident.

BTW, I do track installation errors (I call them "builder errors") in my
analyses.

Ron Wanttaja