Crash after 3D printed air intake collapses. Good heads up for us kit builders

[danny_galaga]

Plane totalled, landing short of runway.Pilot only minor injuries. A good reminder I guess that it gets toasty under the hood!

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c1w932vqye0o

[facthunter]

3d Printing LOOKS like a good  solution But often is Not. Your plane is only as good as the worst bit. Nev

[danny_galaga]

6 minutes ago, facthunter said:

3d Printing LOOKS like a good  solution But often is Not. Your plane is only as good as the worst bit. Nev

There are of course different materials and methods. So maybe a 3d metal print would work. No idea what that would cost though. I've only used pla and abs. I left a pla print id painted out in the sun to dry the paint faster. It warped within an hour 😄

[Thruster88]

I will never understand why people modify or replace the proven components the make a standard Lycoming engine reliable.  Non standard fuel injection system fitted, why why why.

[skippydiesel]

2 hours ago, Thruster88 said:

I will never understand why people modify or replace the proven components the make a standard Lycoming engine reliable.  Non standard fuel injection system fitted, why why why.

Simple - Our species, is for the most part (always exceptions) hardwired to try new things, that either go faster, handle better, make more/less noise, increase efficiency, look better (faster?), etc ALL of which is often in the perception of the modifier,  sometimes its an actual improvement😈

[facthunter]

They love to fiddle with things. You Have a Plane Go fly it. The Standard stuff is time tested. Proven in the field. That is worth More than you might think. Change things and YOU become a test pilot. . While that Might suit your  Ego it may NOT enhance your Longevity and you Might not be alone at the time either.

[KRviator]

1 hour ago, facthunter said:

They love to fiddle with things. You Have a Plane Go fly it. The Standard stuff is time tested. Proven in the field. That is worth More than you might think. Change things and YOU become a test pilot. . While that Might suit your  Ego it may NOT enhance your Longevity and you Might not be alone at the time either.

What is standard now was 'state of the art' 50,60 years ago. What is 'state of the art' now will become the norm in time.

I'm putting about to order a full EFI kit to replace the mechanical fuel injection because it offers several benefits over and above the existing system. Just because something has been around for yonks doesn't mean we should stick with it.

[skippydiesel]

1 hour ago, KRviator said:

What is standard now was 'state of the art' 50,60 years ago. What is 'state of the art' now will become the norm in time.

I'm putting about to order a full EFI kit to replace the mechanical fuel injection because it offers several benefits over and above the existing system. Just because something has been around for yonks doesn't mean we should stick with it.

Just be careful😈

[facthunter]

Depends on whether you want to fiddle or fly. It still gets back to that. If you are flying you Need Currency of both Kinds.  . If you are Playing with your Plane you are not a focussed on flying it. There have been Plenty of examples.   Nev

[Peasant_Pilot]

Really depends on the filiments used, the Nylons and high temp stuff (PA6-CF, PA6-HT etc) is perfectly fine for under the hood, the new ultam 1010 materials are self extinguishing and aimed at aerospace, just not enough saturated knowledge or experience yet around these products

[BurnieM]

Its experimental.

You need to do a lot of research on the materials and design.

This experiment failed.

 

[Thruster88]

We need to consider the consequences of failure. In the above case with the Cozy a wreaked aircraft and possibly no insurance payout is really a minor inconvenience compared to what could have happened. 

[turboplanner]

27 minutes ago, Thruster88 said:

We need to consider the consequences of failure. In the above case with the Cozy a wreaked aircraft and possibly no insurance payout is really a minor inconvenience compared to what could have happened. 

True, but most companies would be using that material for the shape to build the tooling to produce the part in another material which has the specifications for the job. 

 

The aim for RA should be to strive for less failures, less injuries and less fatalities.

[skippydiesel]

"The aim for RA should be to strive for less failures, less injuries and less fatalities."

 

This is the Big Brother/Cotton Wool approach - it's not the job of RAA to become directly involved in overseeing/controlling individual risk taking.

 

For sure RAA should be fostering a culture of risk management/awareness but should never ever stifle innovation.

 

The very fact that you can get into a machine, that is reasonably airworthy/safe and fly, is the result of generations of aeronautical risk taking.😈

[BurnieM]

1 hour ago, skippydiesel said:

 it's not the job of RAA to become directly involved in overseeing/controlling individual risk taking.

Pretty sure it is a big part of their mandate.

 

[turboplanner]

2 hours ago, skippydiesel said:

"The aim for RA should be to strive for less failures, less injuries and less fatalities."

 

This is the Big Brother/Cotton Wool approach - it's not the job of RAA to become directly involved in overseeing/controlling individual risk taking.

 

For sure RAA should be fostering a culture of risk management/awareness but should never ever stifle innovation.

 

The very fact that you can get into a machine, that is reasonably airworthy/safe and fly, is the result of generations of aeronautical risk taking.😈

Yes it is the job of RAA; they have a duty of care to ensure safe operations.

 

In this case the material used for the part was not compatible with the heat level where it was being used, nothing to do with innovation, and something drilled into me in my first year of drafting.

 

[facthunter]

You stuff it up for others as well when you aren't thorough. More Bad Press, Higher insurance costs more restrictions. Test it on the ground where you don't hurt anyone. There's enough unknown risks in flying without taking Known potential ones with you.  It takes very little to go wrong to ruin your day ( and maybe someone else's as well.) Nev

[skippydiesel]

1 hour ago, BurnieM said:

Pretty sure it is a big part of their mandate.

 

 

I am all for fostering a safety culture BUT NOT for imposing on the rights of the adult individual to take whatever risk they deem appropriate, as long as that risk is taken by them alone ie by flying an experimental aircraft, you are not endangering others on the ground or in the air, any more than that imposed by a certified aircraft.

 

I may call those who do not follow available safety precautions/systems  "stupid"  however I am ideologically apposed any attempt to force an adult, to adopt measures for their own wellbeing/safety. Of course this is conditional on the adult not risking the safety of others (on the ground/in the air).

 

Australian authorities have been over regulating/eroding individual freedoms in this sort of area for many years - its time this stopped and laws forcing the individual to adopt safety measures for their personal well being repealed.😈

[facthunter]

Your Cavalier attitude to safety (as you show it here), is NOT the Norm,, fortunately. IF you were Running the show, you would end up in front of a court in no time, and you would LOSE your House. Nev

[BrendAn]

Have to agree with Skippy to an extent. If you fly alone you should be allowed to do your own thing without being silly about it.

The minute you put a passenger in the plane they are putting their life in your hands.  The nanny / Big brother  is a pain in the a. 

Doesn't work too well either. Victoria is a good example. Worst drivers in the world even though it's the biggest nanny state in the country.

Edited Saturday at 12:49 AM by BrendAn

[skippydiesel]

Thanks BrendAn,

 

You have understood that I am talking about - an adult (18+ in this country) making a decision, that may involve enhanced risk, about themselves alone.

 

Once you bring others into the equation, then there must be protection, by law, from the actions of the instigator.

 

To clarify the last point - An individual who takes a risk, that results in their injury/death, will effect others, emotionally and possibly financially, HOWEVER this is a cost that we must accept IF the individual freedom to be responsible for our own wellbeing is to be preserved.

 

I am a vocal advocate for the maintenance/creation of a strong safety culture. 

[facthunter]

YOU are "ALL over the Place" on this ONE, SKIP Nev

[turboplanner]

No Idea.

[rodgerc]

I’m trying to determine how “RAA” (RA-Aus) became implicated in this post, given the accident occurred in the UK as a likely result of a component made and purchased in the USA 🤔….

 

In any event, I was informed by my CASA Authorised Person that it was not their job to determine the airworthiness of any experimental aircraft, nor could they deny a Special CoA, even if the aircraft was built out of Clag, paddle pop sticks and Bunnings bolts. 
 

CASA will issue a AC21-4 Special Certificate of Airworthiness (Experimental) but the restrictions placed upon the aircraft as a result of their risk assessment (Test area, Phase 1 duration etc) may make it impractical. 

 

[BrendAn]

19 minutes ago, turboplanner said:

No Idea.

He is saying we should be able to enjoy our hobby and have freedom to do it within reason.

No need to be wrapped in cotton wool all the time. 

If I do something to my AC and stuff up .it will be my problem. I don't fly near people or cart passengers.

ii don't see how raaus have a duty of care really when the panel has placards saying fly this aircraft at your own risk. And this is not a a certified aircraft.

There are many rules in life designed to protect us from ourselves. People should be accountable for their actions not fall back on duty of care rubbish.