WWI Replica Safety

Leatherhead · 21 October 2009, 07:45 AM

When I read the -12 degrees thrust angle, I nearly fell out of my chair. How could a builder not see that, or see it and not question it?

Joe Perkel · 21 October 2009, 08:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RobW

We can all sit here and do a lot of second guessing and supposing... but unless we can get Mr. Krueger to jump in and add to the discussion, I don't think we'll get anywhere.

Rob

Rob,

Careful here, I know this subject is touchy even for the general pilot population. Analysis of one's own mistakes, as well as those of others is pretty powerful preventative medicine. Most folks, do not do well in self evaluation of thier own actions, the natural "fight or flight" response kicks in.

All of these accidents, and I mean all going back to antiquity, shine the spotlight on the decision chain. Our mental attitude, is the single most crucial element. As a former CFI yourself, I'm sure you'll agree.

hank jarrett · 21 October 2009, 10:47 AM

I don't see ANY way this plane could have taken off and gotten to 2,000' with 12º of down thrust. There is also no way the pilot wouldn't have noticed or the engine could have even fit within the cowl. I suspect (not based on ANY evidence yet) that either there was 1.2º of excess down thrust (in which case he shouldn't have crashed, he should have just had poor performance) or (and this is the BIG one) something came loose and the engine actually MOVED in flight (in which case that should have been a MAJOR finding in the accident report).

Bottom line as an accident investigator is, I would want to see the actual accident report and see the pictures. There is something MAJOR missing here.

I hope that this group is like the Naval Safety Center. We aren't here to throw rocks or pass judgment. We are here to learn and help keep this from ever happening again. If the folks actually involved feel insecure talking to the group about this, they can contact me directly. We had MANY accidents where the REAL cause didn't come out until there was a chance for a "one on one" in a non-attributed environment. The goal is safety and to spread the knowledge gained, not to make anyone look bad. That's why they are called accidents.

Hank

Joe Perkel · 21 October 2009, 11:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hank jarrett

I don't see ANY way this plane could have taken off and gotten to 2,000' with 12º of down thrust. There is also no way the pilot wouldn't have noticed or the engine could have even fit within the cowl. I suspect (not based on ANY evidence yet) that either there was 1.2º of excess down thrust (in which case he shouldn't have crashed, he should have just had poor performance) or (and this is the BIG one) something came loose and the engine actually MOVED in flight (in which case that should have been a MAJOR finding in the accident report).

Bottom line as an accident investigator is, I would want to see the actual accident report and see the pictures. There is something MAJOR missing here.

I hope that this group is like the Naval Safety Center. We aren't here to throw rocks or pass judgment. We are here to learn and help keep this from ever happening again. If the folks actually involved feel insecure talking to the group about this, they can contact me directly. We had MANY accidents where the REAL cause didn't come out until there was a chance for a "one on one" in a non-attributed environment. The goal is safety and to spread the knowledge gained, not to make anyone look bad. That's why they are called accidents.

Hank

Hank,

Precisely my point and quoting myself....

Quote:

If the report is accurate, I find it nearly incredulous to believe that a builder (manufacturer) can find himself "unaware"

Before any emotions get out of hand on anyones part, let me shed some light on my goal with this issue....

The public no longer considers neither us, nor our flying machines to be “magnificent.” They see us now on the local news channel, as a potential threat to their life and property every time one of those “dangerous” little airplanes falls from the sky.

If I as an aviator can prevent either myself or a single colleague from this fate, then I have positively contributed to a better world.

RobW · 21 October 2009, 12:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joe Perkel

Rob,

Careful here, I know this subject is touchy even for the general pilot population. Analysis of one's own mistakes, as well as those of others is pretty powerful preventative medicine. Most folks, do not do well in self evaluation of thier own actions, the natural "fight or flight" response kicks in.

All of these accidents, and I mean all going back to antiquity, shine the spotlight on the decision chain. Our mental attitude, is the single most crucial element. As a former CFI yourself, I'm sure you'll agree.

Joe,
I think you missed my point... I wasn't trying to be critical of anyone. I was more along with what Hank wrote later... that there is way to much info missing from that simple report to come to any conclusions about what happened. It seemed obvious to me at least that what was written in the report could not possibly be completely true... or at least needed more detail to make it a plausible explanation.

The only way for us to better understand what happened would be to have the pilot talk about the rest of the story... as unlikely as that would be.

What I was begining to see was not a critical self analysis... but instead a lot of "holy cow... how could he not have known!" or "How could he miss something so obvious..."

Generally, if someone, who would normally be considered reasonable, is doing something absolutely stupid... it is probably because they know something about the situation that you don't understand. Of course, sometimes they are just stupid... but I try to take a broader view before I rush to judgement (sometimes that approach is hard, especially when driving in Northern Virginia).

My point was that trying to draw lessons from this particular incident, with the info we had would be almost pointless (because we would all be guessing), unless we were blessed with a discussion with the pilot or were able to see all the data.

rob

Joe Perkel · 21 October 2009, 01:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RobW

My point was that trying to draw lessons from this particular incident, with the info we had would be almost pointless (because we would all be guessing), unless we were blessed with a discussion with the pilot or were able to see all the data.

rob

....and an excellent point it is Rob,..Let's ask him! I'm going to write him a letter to see if he would shed some light on this. If others would as well, it may add some weight.

From the public database.........

Name : KRUEGER, PHILLIP EUGENE
Airman's Address : 8662 HOUSTON RD
FREETOWN, IN, 47235-9624
FAA Region : Great Lakes
Date of Medical : Jul, 2009
Class of Medical : 3
Expiration of Class 3 : Jul, 2011
Airman Certificates : Private Pilot
Airplane Single Engine Land
Mechanic
Airframe and Powerplant

Machinbird · 5 December 2009, 08:27 PM

There is new safety technology available for aircraft which can be adapted to most replicas and can save your life. Take a look at AmSafe AAIR
Yes, it isn't a Sutton harness, or a Fokker harness, but as long as you don't throw the straps over the side of the cockpit, most people won't know it is there. With authentic gun butts sitting in front of your face, you need all the help you can get.
Be sure to check out the accident video reports.
Sid

RAF56_Ball · 9 December 2009, 08:14 AM

Went to the site, but it says the video is no longer available.

BTW, I blocked all their cookies, I always do to unknown sites. Some sites will refues to upload if you do. Better that than Bull-loney tracking cookies.
But that is a rant for another forum, heheh.

Roadhog · 9 December 2009, 08:39 AM

Good for you Pilot Ball! Cookies will be the death of many of us I'm afraid. Is there some other way to upload the video or do you think that it has been pulled off of the site permanently? Roadhog

Machinbird · 9 December 2009, 03:00 PM

Don't know guys. I just went to their site and was able to see the movies. The message was valuable although it was a form product advertising.

Regarding cookies. Most are relatively benign and are used to find out how many unique people are viewing a site, or so that we can be recognized on Forums such as the Aerodrome site. Sometimes they are being nosy and trying to find out where you go next (tracking cookies). With regard to such things, it is a risk & reward thing. If you are absolutely unwilling to take any risk, you should not expect any rewards. Cookies in general are relatively benign and on the scale of 1 to 10 in hazard or annoyance they rate a 1.
Sid