FAA, Let us make our planes safer!

Ted DuPuis said:
An attitude that says some things are obvious when you don't have enough technical knowledge to really understand what you don't see?

Take torque to yield bolts. Anyone can look at them after torquing and say they look just fine. So let's reuse them! Wait a second, the fact that they are designed to torque into the yield zone means when you retorque them they will be in a weaker zone and may fail. But you don't know that by what's obvious.

Your cupholders may get drilled in through a fuel line.

Your seat belts may not be tied into a proper structural mounting point if you need to add a shoulder harness. Or even if you have a shoulder harness, let's say you add a 4-point setup, where do you tie that in to work?

The electronics that you mount and are depending your life upon may have a software flaw that causes it to crash at inopportune times when you need it most (happened to me).

Should I go on? I'm not saying that these things shouldn't be allowed at your own risk, but the whole point of certified is that there is some level of protection with other people who have a clue looking over the idea and testing it. That's why we have E-AB, which you haven't yet given a valid reason why it doesn't fit your needs given your wants.
Click to expand...

I am not suggesting taking the intelligent and trained mechanic out of the picture. No, I don't want to screw the bolts or drill the holes. I just want to be able to do the same thing with my car and my airplane--call a mechanic, say to fix or do something and have it ready for me within an hour or two of the time needed to do the work.

Let's face it, today, there are examples (as you just said) where even the best intentions of the regulations leaves us with flawed design or implementation. But, for the most part, we rely upon informed and intelligent mechanics.

My beef is that it costs too much to add safety to aircraft. My beef is that safety suffers because of that cost. My beef is that much of what is called "pilot error" can be mitigated with more, cheaper safety equipment.

This is not an attack on the bottom line of mechanics. I know that there are mechanics going out of business because they don't get enough work to do. Let's say that I have the opportunity to add a safety item to my plane that costs $100 retail and $100 labor if it were for a car. If it costs $2000 to add it to my plane, I won't do it and my mechanic doesn't get that business. If it costs me $200 to add it to my plane, the mechanic does get that business, my plane is safer and we all win.
 
What does the Brazil group charge for a turn-key "show-room ready" RV-10 with full glass panel and all-new components that would be an apples-to-apples comp with a Cirrus?

QUOTE=Geico266;1225360]Someone talked about factory build RV's. You can buy a factory built RV right now. There is a company ( one of several) that will custom build your RV in Brazil. It is a very modern factory producing RV's at 5-10 a month and shipping them around the world. GA dead? Only for certified planes. ;)

Regulations prevent any new aircraft design from being built in the US at a "reasonable " price. A Cirrus is now pushing $750k? Really? :mad2:[/QUOTE]
 
What makes you think the mechanic knows the answer per se? Some things are not obvious to him, either.

No, not everything is perfect, it is flawed. But your "in the name of safety" is funny given the contradiction between wanting safety and not making sure it actually is safe.
 
Ted DuPuis said:
Should I go on? I'm not saying that these things shouldn't be allowed at your own risk, but the whole point of certified is that there is some level of protection with other people who have a clue looking over the idea and testing it. That's why we have E-AB, which you haven't yet given a valid reason why it doesn't fit your needs given your wants.
Click to expand...
It is not about me and my needs. It is about the safety of the kind of flying we do. You and me and Don and EdFred, and all the rest. It is about the statistics that say our kind of flying is killing people and not getting any better. It is about the declining number of pilots who fly like we do because it costs too much and because it is unsafe. It is about making flying as easy and safe and fun as possible.
 
In that case, the vendor (mechanic) needs defined standards to work to. Since you freely admit you are not in a position to specify those standards, and since the vendor has both a threat of litigation and a moral responsibility hanging over his head, the standards have to come from somewhere. So they come from a disinterested 3rd party, the government. The government also grants an exemption to people who are able to provide standards on their own, that is the E/AB community. To your credit you seem to recognize that you need the help, which by default puts you back under the unbrella of the government.

AuntPeggy said:
I am not suggesting taking the intelligent and trained mechanic out of the picture. No, I don't want to screw the bolts or drill the holes. I just want to be able to do the same thing with my car and my airplane--call a mechanic, say to fix or do something and have it ready for me within an hour or two of the time needed to do the work.

Let's face it, today, there are examples (as you just said) where even the best intentions of the regulations leaves us with flawed design or implementation. But, for the most part, we rely upon informed and intelligent mechanics.

My beef is that it costs too much to add safety to aircraft. My beef is that safety suffers because of that cost. My beef is that much of what is called "pilot error" can be mitigated with more, cheaper safety equipment.

This is not an attack on the bottom line of mechanics. I know that there are mechanics going out of business because they don't get enough work to do. Let's say that I have the opportunity to add a safety item to my plane that costs $100 retail and $100 labor if it were for a car. If it costs $2000 to add it to my plane, I won't do it and my mechanic doesn't get that business. If it costs me $200 to add it to my plane, the mechanic does get that business, my plane is safer and we all win.
Click to expand...
 
JHW said:
In that case, the vendor (mechanic) needs defined standards to work to. Since you freely admit you are not in a position to specify those standards, and since the vendor has both a threat of litigation and a moral responsibility hanging over his head, the standards have to come from somewhere. So they come from a disinterested 3rd party, the government. The government also grants an exemption to people who are able to provide standards on their own, that is the E/AB community. To your credit you seem to recognize that you need the help, which by default puts you back under the unbrella of the government.
Click to expand...
Why does it have to cost ten times as much as putting the same thing in a car?
 
Ted DuPuis said:
What makes you think the mechanic knows the answer per se? Some things are not obvious to him, either.

No, not everything is perfect, it is flawed. But your "in the name of safety" is funny given the contradiction between wanting safety and not making sure it actually is safe.
Click to expand...
Why does it have to cost ten times as much as putting the same thing in a car?
 
AuntPeggy said:
Why does it have to cost ten times as much as putting the same thing in a car?
Click to expand...
for the same reason a position sensor from mercruiser costs 10X the same type of part from ford. Because it is a small market and a recreational vehicle.
 
AuntPeggy said:
And your point is... that everything is OK and the cost of improving the safety of aircraft has only a beneficial effect on the safety of aviation in our community. Right?
Click to expand...

Gizmos in the cockpit just as in the automobile do not make things safer. Unless of course you think texting and driving doesn't cause a loss of situational awareness. Or looking at a GPS instead of looking at the brakelights in front of you.
 
AuntPeggy said:
It is not about me and my needs. It is about the safety of the kind of flying we do. You and me and Don and EdFred, and all the rest. It is about the statistics that say our kind of flying is killing people and not getting any better. It is about the declining number of pilots who fly like we do because it costs too much and because it is unsafe. It is about making flying as easy and safe and fun as possible.
Click to expand...

None of what you have suggested will make flying safer.

When are you installing your AoA indicator with audible warnings? That will very much help prevent stall/spins when used properly, and is an FAA minor change, not requiring a 337 and easy to install.
 
AuntPeggy said:
It is about the declining number of pilots who fly like we do because it costs too much and because it is unsafe.
Click to expand...

JHW said:
assumes facts not in evidence
Click to expand...
Have you looked at the interviews with people who decide not to fly in little planes? Have you looked into why people quit flying?
1. safety
2. cost
 
Ted DuPuis said:
None of what you have suggested will make flying safer.

When are you installing your AoA indicator with audible warnings? That will very much help prevent stall/spins when used properly, and is an FAA minor change, not requiring a 337 and easy to install.
Click to expand...


The airplane, when used properly is stall/spin resistant.
 
AuntPeggy said:
I am not suggesting taking the intelligent and trained mechanic out of the picture. No, I don't want to screw the bolts or drill the holes. I just want to be able to do the same thing with my car and my airplane--call a mechanic, say to fix or do something and have it ready for me within an hour or two of the time needed to do the work.

Let's face it, today, there are examples (as you just said) where even the best intentions of the regulations leaves us with flawed design or implementation. But, for the most part, we rely upon informed and intelligent mechanics.

My beef is that it costs too much to add safety to aircraft. My beef is that safety suffers because of that cost. My beef is that much of what is called "pilot error" can be mitigated with more, cheaper safety equipment.

This is not an attack on the bottom line of mechanics. I know that there are mechanics going out of business because they don't get enough work to do. Let's say that I have the opportunity to add a safety item to my plane that costs $100 retail and $100 labor if it were for a car. If it costs $2000 to add it to my plane, I won't do it and my mechanic doesn't get that business. If it costs me $200 to add it to my plane, the mechanic does get that business, my plane is safer and we all win.
Click to expand...

My guess is certification process is only a fraction of that $2000.00, like say $2.00 worth of it.

AP, there are tons of old 30 year old Buicks out there that could use airbags, ABS etc.. etc.. etc... even if somehow we suspended the laws of economics and made a retrofit for them available for $500 bucks. The safe bet would be that the owner would chose to install new rims and a new stereo instead of an add on airbag system.

In the aviation world, most of us here are the guys buying and flying the 40 year old mopeds.

If you want safety, it can be bought, it costs what it costs and certification regulations likely aren't contributing much to that. Supply and Demand mixed in with a lot of liability.
 
Ted DuPuis said:
None of what you have suggested will make flying safer.

When are you installing your AoA indicator with audible warnings? That will very much help prevent stall/spins when used properly, and is an FAA minor change, not requiring a 337 and easy to install.
Click to expand...
Very soon now. Would have done on the last annual, but life got in the way. So, this is one thing that has been loosened up lately. In how many years? We also want to add an engine monitor, but put that off for awhile, too.

Sigh, now this thread is back to being about me. :dunno:
 
AuntPeggy said:
Have you looked at the interviews with people who decide not to fly in little planes? Have you looked into why people quit flying?
1. safety
2. cost
Click to expand...

Who is refusing to fly because of safety? Hu?

Please... I have folks terrified of flying strapping in with a triple amputee for their first flight!
 
Well, you are asking for changes to be made when you aren't taking advantage of changes that exist. So apparently others will?

It's not about you.
 
bartmc said:
My guess is certification process is only a fraction of that $2000.00, like say $2.00 worth of it.

AP, there are tons of old 30 year old Buicks out there that could use airbags, ABS etc.. etc.. etc... even if somehow we suspended the laws of economics and made a retrofit for them available for $500 bucks. The safe bet would be that the owner would chose to install new rims and a new stereo instead of an add on airbag system.

In the aviation world, most of us here are the guys buying and flying the 40 year old mopeds.

If you want safety, it can be bought, it costs what it costs and certification regulations likely aren't contributing much to that. Supply and Demand mixed in with a lot of liability.
Click to expand...
Right. And, if a new Buick and a new Cessna cost the same to buy, there'd be lots more new Cessnas in the parking lot than 30-year-old ones.
 
AuntPeggy said:
Have you looked at the interviews with people who decide not to fly in little planes? Have you looked into why people quit flying?
1. safety
2. cost
Click to expand...

more like...

1 cost
2 cost
3 wife
4 cost
5 kids
6 cost
7 cost
8 time
9 cost
10 cost
.
.
.
34566 cost
34567 safety
 
Embry riddle just installed AoAs into all of their training planes.
 
AuntPeggy said:
Have you looked at the interviews with people who decide not to fly in little planes? Have you looked into why people quit flying?
1. safety
2. cost
Click to expand...

People have irrational fears of flying, snakes, the dark, pit bulls and all sorts of other things.

Costs. If perhaps someone cannot afford to be flying a plane fitted with all the safety features they deem necessary for their risk tolerance level, perhaps they should take up another hobby. A new Boeing 747 wouldn't have been enough safety features for my father largely due to my first point, so he didn't fly.
 
AuntPeggy said:
Right. And, if a new Buick and a new Cessna cost the same to buy, there'd be lots more new Cessnas in the parking lot than 30-year-old ones.
Click to expand...

No there wouldn't. You need to take a class on production costs.
 
Ted DuPuis said:
Well, you are asking for changes to be made when you aren't taking advantage of changes that exist. So apparently others will?

It's not about you.
Click to expand...
It is going to happen soon. We've been too busy to fly lately. We (between the 2 of us and Hubby's students) put 65 hours on the Hobbs meter between annuals and since then, only one short flight last night that was aborted because of a mechanical failure. Once we get moved and the plane gets flown to our new home, we'll do the upgrades.

Yes, I expect that the number of people who learn about the added safety and the low cost of AOA will increase. It is taking a while for the message to get out. Once it does, I expect to see more added to the aging fleet. Just as, despite the cost, GPS is being added to the aging fleet. I think that glass is also making its way slowly into the fleet, but not mine.
 
AuntPeggy said:
Right. And, if a new Buick and a new Cessna cost the same to buy, there'd be lots more new Cessnas in the parking lot than 30-year-old ones.
Click to expand...

Right and if new Formula One racers did too, we'd see a lot more of those in the parking lot, just look at the safety features those cars have. If only they'd make those features affordable for the guy's driving the $500 buicks.
 
AOA's have been available for several years. I have one, as do a few others on the various aviation forums. Many pilots poo-poo the need and benefits on the basis that they know everything they need to know from the ASI and looking out the window. Other pilots equate every expenditure for any capital improvement to their planes in terms of number of gallons of avgas they could buy with the same money.

Bottom line is that the AOA's are minor alterations, don't require STC or 337, and if they cost $150 rather than $1500 I'd guess substantially more pilots would own them. But maybe not.

Do you have Amsafe seat belts?


AuntPeggy said:
It is going to happen soon. We've been too busy to fly lately. We (between the 2 of us and Hubby's students) put 65 hours on the Hobbs meter between annuals and since then, only one short flight last night that was aborted because of a mechanical failure. Once we get moved and the plane gets flown to our new home, we'll do the upgrades.

Yes, I expect that the number of people who learn about the added safety and the low cost of AOA will increase. It is taking a while for the message to get out. Once it does, I expect to see more added to the aging fleet. Just as, despite the cost, GPS is being added to the aging fleet. I think that glass is also making its way slowly into the fleet, but not mine.
Click to expand...
 
My observations of the GA fleet are that glass is very slow to get into the fleet, with the biggest players being in higher priced planes as you'd expect. GPS is more popular, but ones with Terrain awareness less so, and to me that is equally if not more important.

And then there's the Cirrus fleet, which indicates that pilots don't necessarily use these tools properly, or else take such greater risks as to offset the benefits.
 
meantime it's sad to witness the demise of motorcycling and snow skiing because, as with general aviation, safety has plateau'd after a steady improvement in the prior decade. At least, I have to assume those hobbies are dying out if the reason is valid.
 
EdFred said:
I'd say you wasted your money on that degree if you can't figure out the differences at this point.
Click to expand...
(Its about me! :wonderwoman:)
Those Dean's List and Cum Laude thingies don't make any difference because you know so much more than the university.

(Its about you! :rollercoaster:)
 
AuntPeggy said:
Right. And, if a new Buick and a new Cessna cost the same to buy, there'd be lots more new Cessnas in the parking lot than 30-year-old ones.
Click to expand...

I think I'd like to buy a beachfront mansion for the same price as a trailer home too.
 
JHW said:
meantime it's sad to witness the demise of motorcycling and snow skiing because, as with general aviation, safety has plateau'd after a steady improvement in the prior decade. At least, I have to assume those hobbies are dying out if the reason is valid.
Click to expand...
Could you please state what you mean more clearly for someone who has not ridden a motorcycle in 40 years and has gone snow skiing only once.
 
AuntPeggy said:
(Its about me! :wonderwoman:)
Those Dean's List and Cum Laude thingies don't make any difference because you know so much more than the university.

(Its about you! :rollercoaster:)
Click to expand...

Well, while you're throwing qualifications out there that don't have engineering backing (physics trumps business), I'll remind you that I make my living on dealing with certified aircraft and certification related items as an engineer, so I have a good idea what the reality of the situation is.
 
AuntPeggy said:
(Its about me! :wonderwoman:)
Those Dean's List and Cum Laude thingies don't make any difference because you know so much more than the university.

(Its about you! :rollercoaster:)
Click to expand...

Based on the Stanford Business School graduates that I have to deal with that have zero clue how to run a business that actually has to interact with customers, I would say yes, universities don't know **** about how to properly run a business. It's all theory and no practice. I've watched them run an industry leader into a has been. Go Cardinal!

Let me break it down for you.

It takes Johnny 100 million dollars to set up production. Johnny sells 5,000,000 cars. How much in start up costs must be put into the price of the car?

Mary spends the same 100 million in set up. She only sells 5,000 airplanes. How much in start up costs must be put into the price of the plane?

Did they teach you that ? Evidently not. Ask for a refund.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top