Lightspeed Battery Box Warning

Tsk, tsk, Sydney... Bad hair day?

Denny

"Sydney Hoeltzli" wrote in message
...
What seems strange to me is your perception, actually, but that
wouldn't be the first time.

Assuming the problems reported are legit, this seems to indicate a quality
assurance issue with the manufacturer. I was just looking over the
Lightspeed web site and didn't see any indication that their headsets were
TSO'd. Now I will be the first to admit I'm a newby so I my impressions may
be in error and as such take anything I say with a grain of salt but my
understanding of what TSO means is that 1: the product was type accepted,
passed testing to insure that it did what it was supposed to and was
compatible with and did not interact negatively with the other aircraft
systems, and 2: that the manufacturer has quality assurance programs in
effect that would insure all products coming off the line met the same
performance standards as the samples submitted for approval. I may be
wrong, but it seems to me to be foolish to buy non-TSO'ed equipment for
permanent aircraft installation or for use by the PIC or FO if there is one.
If my understanding of the QA issues regarding TSO is correct, this would
certainly increase the price of the product because testing of each and
every unit coming off the line is certainly going to be more expensive than
testing randomly selected samples. Because of the unforgiving nature of
aviation, uncertainty of product quality where safety of flight is concerned
is something I personally can't afford at any price and battery packs that
spontaneously burst into flame certainly seem to me to be a safety issue,
even if they're carried enclosed in fire resistant pouches.


"Dennis O'Connor" wrote in message
...
LS owners seem to fall into two groups... Those who have never had any
problem over a number of years of continuous use, and those who seem to
lurch from crises to crises... Strange...

Denny

"Justin Case" wrote in message
...
Lightspeed seems to know everything about all of their problems and
they all seem infrequent. Just too many infrequent problems for me.

Steve House wrote:

I was just looking over the
Lightspeed web site and didn't see any indication that their headsets were
TSO'd.

Well, I just checked out the Bose, Sennheiser, and David Clark web sites,
and it seems that none of their ANR headsets are TSO'd either.

George Patterson
The optimist feels that we live in the best of all possible worlds. The
pessimist is afraid that he's correct.
James Branch Cavel

Check again - DC says all theirs are. Haven't looked at Bose and Sennheiser
lately.


"G.R. Patterson III" wrote in message
...


Steve House wrote:

I was just looking over the
Lightspeed web site and didn't see any indication that their headsets
were
TSO'd.

Well, I just checked out the Bose, Sennheiser, and David Clark web sites,
and it seems that none of their ANR headsets are TSO'd either.

George Patterson
The optimist feels that we live in the best of all possible worlds. The
pessimist is afraid that he's correct.
James Branch Cavel

"Steve House"
shared these priceless pearls of wisdom:

Now I will be the first to admit I'm a newby so I my impressions may
-be in error and as such take anything I say with a grain of salt

OK, that's a good start.


but my
-understanding of what TSO means is that 1: the product was type accepted,

Nope. It means the manufacturer tested the unit in accordance with the
Technical Service Order and it met some arbitrary specification. Look up the
TSO for audio panels some day. There are still vestiges of vacuum tube
terminology.

-passed testing to insure that it did what it was supposed to and was
-compatible with and did not interact negatively with the other aircraft
-systems,

Nope. That's the installer/approver's job.


and 2: that the manufacturer has quality assurance programs in
-effect that would insure all products coming off the line met the same
-performance standards as the samples submitted for approval.

Nope. That's PMA.

I may be
-wrong, but it seems to me to be foolish to buy non-TSO'ed equipment for
-permanent aircraft installation or for use by the PIC or FO if there is one.

And how many airplanes did you say you have owned or paid the maintenance bill
on?


-If my understanding of the QA issues regarding TSO is correct, this would
-certainly increase the price of the product because testing of each and
-every unit coming off the line is certainly going to be more expensive than
-testing randomly selected samples.

Even if the FAA approved testing procedure calls for random sampling? Not
hardly.


Because of the unforgiving nature of
-aviation, uncertainty of product quality where safety of flight is concerned
-is something I personally can't afford at any price and battery packs that
-spontaneously burst into flame certainly seem to me to be a safety issue,
-even if they're carried enclosed in fire resistant pouches.

Did anybody say anything about bursting into flame? Sydney said the damn thing
got hot to the point of softening the plastic case. Don't build hysteria with
wild-ass projections.

And, if you are so worried about product quality, then build 'em yourself. That
way you have 100% control over the product and performance.

www.rstengineering.com {;-)


Jim



Jim Weir (A&P/IA, CFI, & other good alphabet soup)
VP Eng RST Pres. Cyberchapter EAA Tech. Counselor
http://www.rst-engr.com

And, if you are so worried about product quality, then build 'em yourself.
That
way you have 100% control over the product and performance.

Hey Jim -- why don't you guys build us some GOOD ANR headsets?

I'd buy 'em!
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Steve House wrote:
Assuming the problems reported are legit

In other words, maybe I'm an idiot or making this up? Good start....


, this seems to indicate a quality
assurance issue with the manufacturer.

No argument there.

I was just looking over the
Lightspeed web site and didn't see any indication that their headsets were
TSO'd.

True. Neither are any of the other ANR headsets AFAIK

Now I will be the first to admit I'm a newby so I my impressions may
be in error and as such take anything I say with a grain of salt but my
understanding of what TSO means is that 1: the product was type accepted,
passed testing to insure that it did what it was supposed to and was
compatible with and did not interact negatively with the other aircraft
systems, and 2: that the manufacturer has quality assurance programs in
effect that would insure all products coming off the line met the same
performance standards as the samples submitted for approval.

Negative. What TSO'd means is that the product met the "type
standards order" the FAA has produced for that type of product.

The TSO for a given product may literally be decades old, and a
product which meets it may (of necessity) be inferior to a product
which does not.

The TSO says nothing about testing/compatibility with other
aircraft systems.

The TSO says nothing about quality assurance. It simply says that
the product, as designed and evaluated, met the standards of the order.
QA is what a "PMA" is supposed to be about.

I may be wrong, but it seems to me to be foolish to buy non-TSO'ed
equipment for permanent aircraft installation or for use by the
PIC or FO if there is one.

We-eeeel, when you're making your purchasing and maintenance decisions,
you're entitled to chose according to your convictions.

Just remember this: Bernoulli not Marconi makes the plane fly.

And here's another little tidbit for you: I've been in the
clag with a TSO'd transponder which was emitting smoke and the
charming odure of frying electronics. So I wouldn't bet the
rent on the TSO quality thing.

is something I personally can't afford at any price and battery packs that
spontaneously burst into flame certainly seem to me to be a safety issue,

Who on earth talked about "battery packs that spontaneously burst
into flame?"

Jay (who has not experienced this problem) wondered if this could
happen, and I explained: no.

The thing did get durned hot, and could conceivably have melted
low-temperature plastic on which it was placed. It was not hot
enough to ignite either paper or plastic and was unlikely to become
so, because the plastic deformed and ended the short circuit
long before that point.

HTH,
Sydney

Nope - does not mean I'm either an idiot OR making it up. It means I'm
aware that my knowledge is incomplete. Sheesh, from the sounds of your and
Jim's posts, anyone with less experience than an airline captain or a
military flight instructor who also hold advanced engineering degrees should
just keep their mouths shut in the presence of their betters. Now where was
that cotton you needed pickin'?



"Sydney Hoeltzli" wrote in message
...
Steve House wrote:
Assuming the problems reported are legit

In other words, maybe I'm an idiot or making this up? Good start....


, this seems to indicate a quality
assurance issue with the manufacturer.

No argument there.

I was just looking over the
Lightspeed web site and didn't see any indication that their headsets
were
TSO'd.

True. Neither are any of the other ANR headsets AFAIK

Now I will be the first to admit I'm a newby so I my impressions may
be in error and as such take anything I say with a grain of salt but my
understanding of what TSO means is that 1: the product was type
accepted,
passed testing to insure that it did what it was supposed to and was
compatible with and did not interact negatively with the other aircraft
systems, and 2: that the manufacturer has quality assurance programs in
effect that would insure all products coming off the line met the same
performance standards as the samples submitted for approval.

Negative. What TSO'd means is that the product met the "type
standards order" the FAA has produced for that type of product.

The TSO for a given product may literally be decades old, and a
product which meets it may (of necessity) be inferior to a product
which does not.

The TSO says nothing about testing/compatibility with other
aircraft systems.

The TSO says nothing about quality assurance. It simply says that
the product, as designed and evaluated, met the standards of the order.
QA is what a "PMA" is supposed to be about.

I may be wrong, but it seems to me to be foolish to buy non-TSO'ed
equipment for permanent aircraft installation or for use by the
PIC or FO if there is one.

We-eeeel, when you're making your purchasing and maintenance decisions,
you're entitled to chose according to your convictions.

Just remember this: Bernoulli not Marconi makes the plane fly.

And here's another little tidbit for you: I've been in the
clag with a TSO'd transponder which was emitting smoke and the
charming odure of frying electronics. So I wouldn't bet the
rent on the TSO quality thing.

is something I personally can't afford at any price and battery packs
that
spontaneously burst into flame certainly seem to me to be a safety
issue,

Who on earth talked about "battery packs that spontaneously burst
into flame?"

Jay (who has not experienced this problem) wondered if this could
happen, and I explained: no.

The thing did get durned hot, and could conceivably have melted
low-temperature plastic on which it was placed. It was not hot
enough to ignite either paper or plastic and was unlikely to become
so, because the plastic deformed and ended the short circuit
long before that point.

HTH,
Sydney

Just got back from our annual jaunt to NW MA. Might write more
later (have I mentioned recently how much I abhore flying or
driving through the state of Ohio, no offense intended to anyone
living there)

Driving I can understand, but flying through and around Ohio is a
wonderful. With the exception of the southeast corner of the state, you
are almost always withing gliding distance of a landing field.
Where's your beef? (Pun intended, Wendy's is based in Columbus OH).

EDR wrote:
Just got back from our annual jaunt to NW MA. Might write more
later (have I mentioned recently how much I abhore flying or
driving through the state of Ohio, no offense intended to anyone
living there)

Driving I can understand, but flying through and around Ohio is a
wonderful. With the exception of the southeast corner of the state, you
are almost always withing gliding distance of a landing field.
Where's your beef? (Pun intended, Wendy's is based in Columbus OH).

Our beef is that flying through OH in summer no matter what the
forecast is when we take off from MA or NY, we always seem to
wind up with the worst kind of convective activity to dodge
(convective activity with clouds in multiple layers). Ohio
seems to be like a cork in a bottle with Lake Erie to the N
holding the wx in place and the gulf to the s. pumping in
moisture whenever there's a high in the right place (often).
The forecast may be for benign IMC (no tstorms, no ice), one
gets into the clouds and .... uh-oh. Or, the forecast is for
reasonable VFR 2 hrs later .... uh-oh.

Or, as the FSS briefer said to me when I responded to his forecast
with "well, I'm concerned if we do *that* we'll run into *this*,
even though it's not forecast": "you've done this before, haven't
you?" He was also somewhat amused that I responded to his canned
"VFR not recommended" with "well, this isn't good IFR weather"

Ohio is one of the main reasons a stormscope is tops on our want
list.

Florida is the other.

Anyway, as far's I'm concerned Ohio is a giant flight-block lying
between the NE and the midwest. When we visited IAG several times
a year we flew home N of the lake half the time just to stay away.
Yesterday we flew from Ohio to St. Louis via Lexington KY. Gack.

Coshocton, OH is a really nice place, though.

Cheers,
Sydney