Matronics Email Lists :: View topic

Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists

Get Email Distribution Too! FAQ Search Memberlist Usergroups Register

Profile Log in to check your private messages Log in

AAIB report G-HOFC

Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> Europa-List

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author Message

david.corbett5(at)btinter
Guest

Posted: Fri May 09, 2008 2:39 am Post subject: AAIB report G-HOFC

The report into the accident to G-HOFC was published by AAIB yesterday. Go to:  

   

www.aaib.dft.gov.uk   and look in the May 2008 Bulletin link.  

   

David  

       [quote][b]

DuaneFamly(at)aol.com
Guest

Posted: Fri May 09, 2008 9:06 am Post subject: AAIB report G-HOFC

After reading the report I am left not fully understanding which came  first.....thus causing the second. 

  

 Did the rear lift/drag pin of the right wing fail, causing enough up and  down movement to overstress the tailplane enough for it to disengage from the  tailplane drive pins, causing significant up and down gyrations to cause the  further and final failure of the right wing?

  

 Or did the tailplane disengaging cause the failure of the right wing rear  lift/drag pin?

  

  

 Mike Duane  A207A

Redding, California

XS Conventional Gear

Jabiru  3300A

Sensenich R64Z N

Ground Adjustable  Prop



Wondering what's for Dinner Tonight? Get new twists on family favorites at AOL Food.

  [quote][b]

kheindl(at)msn.com
Guest

Posted: Fri May 09, 2008 9:47 am Post subject: AAIB report G-HOFC

I think the report is very detailed. The failure of the drag pin caused the whole scenario. The tailplanes had nothing to do with it. But who knows, if the tailplanes had remained in place, would a survivable crash landing been possible ?

  

 Karl



<html><div></div></html>

 [quote]  From: DuaneFamly(at)aol.com

Date: Fri, 9 May 2008 13:01:12 -0400

Subject: Re: AAIB report G-HOFC

To: europa-list(at)matronics.com



  After reading the report I am left not fully understanding which came first.....thus causing the second. 

  

 Did the rear lift/drag pin of the right wing fail, causing enough up and down movement to overstress the tailplane enough for it to disengage from the tailplane drive pins, causing significant up and down gyrations to cause the further and final failure of the right wing?

  

 Or did the tailplane disengaging cause the failure of the right wing rear lift/drag pin?

  

  

 Mike Duane A207A

Redding, California

XS Conventional Gear

Jabiru 3300A

Sensenich R64Z N

Ground Adjustable Prop



   Wondering what's for Dinner Tonight? Get new twists on family favorites at AOL Food.

 	  Quote: 	
		  



arget=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Europa-List

p://forums.matronics.com

blank>http://www.matronics.com/contribution



	
[b]

dg.watts(at)talktalk.net
Guest

Posted: Fri May 09, 2008 9:57 am Post subject: AAIB report G-HOFC

Mike,

  

 I know that for some time now the AAIB and the PFA/LAA have been looking at  the failure of the right hand wing rear drag pin being the cause of the accident  and you can certainly read that into the report, but I agree that it does take  some reading to figure it all out.

  

 Dave Watts

 G-BXDY

 [quote]   ---

rampil

Joined: 04 May 2007
Posts: 870

Posted: Fri May 09, 2008 10:12 am Post subject: Re: AAIB report G-HOFC

Karl,



I don't see how failure of the drag pin leading to flap flutter and

dissolution of the wing would have been survivable in case.

_________________
Ira N224XS

ami(at)mcfadyean.freeserv
Guest

Posted: Fri May 09, 2008 11:32 am Post subject: AAIB report G-HOFC

Chicken or egg?

 I think that was the underlyng conclusion (i.e. they don't know) although  the BBC has interpreted in its news 'report' that it was the wing  pin failure that caused the aeroplane to crash; which in a way is true, but  possibly an oversimplification.

  

 The AAIB report has the flavour of having been poorly drafted, then amended  a number of times by a number of other people. Either way, the report uses the  would "if" a lot of times and the word "would" where one would expect "could".  But otherwise it would read even more speculatively.

  

 DuncanMcF

 do not archive

 [quote]   ---

davidjoyce(at)doctors.org
Guest

Posted: Fri May 09, 2008 1:26 pm Post subject: AAIB report G-HOFC

Duncan, I disagree. I think the report reads as  a very well thought out 

account of detailed detective work, and that the conclusion that the wing 

lift pin failure was the primary cause is entirely convincing. I would 

rather have believed that the tail was the primary problem, but the lack of 

metallurgical or other evidence of tailplane flutter, together with the 

findings of the opened up holes in the outer alloy plates securing the Right 

lift/drag pin, is enough to convince me.

        Having said that I don't feel that a prolonged discussion of the 

minutiae of the report will be a great help to William and Paul's relatives.

        Regards, David Joyce G-XSDJ



---

ami(at)mcfadyean.freeserv
Guest

Posted: Fri May 09, 2008 2:40 pm Post subject: AAIB report G-HOFC

David,

<<...prolonged discussion of the

 	  Quote: 	
		   minutiae of the report will be a great help to William and Paul's 

 relatives.

..>>
	




I agree with that.

Rgds.,

Duncan.



---

Trevpond(at)aol.com
Guest

Posted: Fri May 09, 2008 2:47 pm Post subject: AAIB report G-HOFC

[quote][b]

Trevpond(at)aol.com
Guest

Posted: Fri May 09, 2008 2:59 pm Post subject: AAIB report G-HOFC

I don't believe that the experts, the AAIB, publish these reports lightly -  and I certainly don't think that their findings should be queried on this site  by a lot of people who think they know better..

  

 If you want to talk about it do it verbally, but out of respect for William  and Paul's relatives, leave it out of print.

  

 Trev Pond

 G-LINN

     [quote][b]

willie.harrison(at)tinyon
Guest

Posted: Fri May 09, 2008 10:03 pm Post subject: AAIB report G-HOFC

I visited the AAIB a few weeks ago and by chance got to speak to the lead inspector on G-HOFC. He was very clear that it was the wing drag/lift pin which initiated the break up and they had abandoned their earlier hypothesis that the tail failed first.. 



Also, I'd have to add how utterly sobering it was to look at the wreckage - if you set out to cut a Europa into so many pieces with a chainsaw it would be a day's work.

Willie



On 9 May 2008, at 18:01, DuaneFamly(at)aol.com (DuaneFamly(at)aol.com) wrote:[quote]  After reading the report I am left not fully understanding which came first.....thus causing the second. 

  

 Did the rear lift/drag pin of the right wing fail, causing enough up and down movement to overstress the tailplane enough for it to disengage from the tailplane drive pins, causing significant up and down gyrations to cause the further and final failure of the right wing?

  

 Or did the tailplane disengaging cause the failure of the right wing rear lift/drag pin?

  

  

 Mike Duane A207A

Redding, California

XS Conventional Gear

Jabiru 3300A

Sensenich R64Z N

Ground Adjustable Prop



Wondering what's for Dinner Tonight? Get new twists on family favorites at AOL Food.

  	  Quote: 	
		  

href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Europa-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Europa-List

href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com

href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution



	
[b]

josok-e(at)ukolo.fi
Guest

Posted: Fri May 09, 2008 11:53 pm Post subject: AAIB report G-HOFC

With all respect to the AAIB and all others involved, i have difficulties understanding the bearing of the report. Since there are a lot of flying Europa's, mine being one of them, i would prefer to ask explanation and remaining questions to be answered, even if this keeps wounds open. 

 

Witnesses saw and heard the plane. How many witnesses and where were they standing? The radar had a possible bird echo. Have any of the witnesses seen a flock of birds and the plane trying to avoid them? Has the question been asked to them?



The plane was inspected and given the green signal just before the accident. The paperwork was excellent. Does that mean the obligatory VNE dive had already been done that day? 



There is no validation in the report about the quality of the inspection, although the plane broke up shortly after. There is no recommendation for improvement of these inspections, other then a case triggered inspection on the points involved. I have seen only a few PFA inspected builds and planes myself, and some of them had obvious build and or repair AND inspection failures. There seems to be a culture of trying to keep problems under the table and out of sight. This all makes me wonder where the responsibilities are and should be. 



Others have landed with disengaged anti-trim-tab lift pins, although the forces were excessive. However, disengaged trim tabs are not taken in account as the failure triggering event. Did i miss the reasoning behind that? 



Regards,



Jos Okhuijsen

Visit -  www.EuropaOwners.org

carl(at)flyers.freeserve.
Guest

Posted: Sat May 10, 2008 12:07 am Post subject: AAIB report G-HOFC

Whilst it is understandable we should all want to  get at the truth, endless debate is pointless and (as has been said) is  distressing to William and Pauls friends and relatives.

  

 In the aftermath of the accident the subject  was discussed at length here and many of us came to a similar conclusion to the  one the AAIB has now reached. Now that it has  been published, their report leaves leave little room for doubt  although the precise details we will never know.

  

 It would be better if those who feel the need  to discuss this matter further do so in private (ie: not on a public  forum).

  

 Carl Pattinson

 G-LABS

 [quote]   ---

ptag.dev(at)tiscali.co.uk
Guest

Posted: Sat May 10, 2008 1:40 am Post subject: AAIB report G-HOFC

Hi!Jos/all

I agree with Jos. 



However I too would wish no further grief be subjected to the bereaved

relatives who have shown great composure to even want to ever see

another damn Europa.



In the meantime I do not agree that further discussion should be banned,

but perhaps should continue under private communication, not in the

general public domain. We all have a considerable investment in our

aircraft and so have a vested interest financially as well as personal

safety to consider, along with our own relatives concerns.

Not withstanding that the potential to save further loss of life should

be the automatic driving force of any such debate.



In the absence of any Europa Club committee proposals I am prepared to

be involved privately in running an e-mail address list of parties who

declare a wish to conduct discussion. I and another Europa

Builder/Engineer have some information which I wish to explore and

eliminate which is very relevant to the questions in hand.



Should the Europa Club Committee have any wish to countermand my

statement or offer any alternative (which I would respect) then :-



May I be presumptious that people wishing to debate this position

further please clearly declare an interest and e-mail me at :-

ptag.dev(at)ukonline.co.uk 



Regards



Bob Harrison G-PTAG



--

DuaneFamly(at)aol.com
Guest

Posted: Sat May 10, 2008 11:42 am Post subject: AAIB report G-HOFC

To All,

  

 I am sorry to have started this question. It seems to have scratched a raw  nerve. That was not my intention. I have all the respect in the world for  builders, inspectors, and the public agencies that we deal with. But the bottom  line is, and will always be the pilot. If you build an aircraft, do so with the  notion that it's gonna be your "Butt" in the seat if anything goes wrong. That's  why it's called "Experimental" or "Homebuilt".

  

 Here in the USA we do not have the dogged restrictions that seem to be  evident in the UK and Europe. The FAA figures that you built it, if the  paperwork is right, and there are no really glaring problems noted, then you  have the God given right to risk your life to fly it. No amount of inspection by  a third party can remove that responsibility.

  

 Now I asked the question because I thought the initial failure mechanism in  this accident was the disengagement  of the tailplane drive pins. That is  why I thought Mods 73 and 74 were instituted. But with the realization that a  wing's rear drag/lift pin failed first, my concern is with the original  problem. I don't see any mods dealing with the drag/lift pin? If the  original failure placed severe stresses on the tailplane, and that caused it's  failure, then I don't want to get into a mode of finding the weakest link in our  aircraft, beefing it up, then go on to the next weakest link, etc. Next thing  you know, you won't be able to find an engine with enough power to lift that  "tank" off the ground.

  

 I agree with Bob, that if this discussion is to be continued then it should  be done off Forum....in a private chat amongst those wishing to know what "they"  might have to do in order to feel better about "their" build. Without  accusations of blame or slander......open, honest, and respectful.   

 Mike Duane  A207A

Redding, California

XS Conventional Gear

Jabiru 3300  

Sensenich R64Z N

Ground Adjustable  Prop





Wondering what's for Dinner Tonight? Get new twists on family favorites at AOL Food.

  [quote][b]

dg.watts(at)talktalk.net
Guest

Posted: Sat May 10, 2008 12:27 pm Post subject: AAIB report G-HOFC

Mike

  

 Mod 74 deals with the wing pin. It only applies to Classic (foam inside)  winds as the XS wings are factory built.

  

 Mod 73 dealts with the tailplanes

  

 Dave Watts

 G-BXDY

 [quote]   Now I asked the question because I thought the initial failure    mechanism in this accident was the disengagement  of the tailplane drive    pins. That is why I thought Mods 73 and 74 were instituted. But with the    realization that a wing's rear drag/lift pin failed first, my concern is with    the original problem. I don't see any mods dealing with the drag/lift    pin? If the original failure placed severe stresses on the tailplane, and that    caused it's failure, then I don't want to get into a mode of finding the    weakest link in our aircraft, beefing it up, then go on to the next weakest    link, etc. Next thing you know, you won't be able to find an engine with    enough power to lift that "tank" off the ground.

    

      Mike Duane    A207A



[b]

Display posts from previous:

	Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> Europa-List	All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Page 1 of 1

Jump to:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum