BREAKING NEWS -- BROKEN CRANK

On Wednesday, December 24, 2014 4:48:38 AM UTC-8, AMuzi wrote:
On 12/23/2014 9:09 PM, Phil W Lee wrote:
John B. Slocomb considered Mon, 22 Dec 2014
13:14:13 +0700 the perfect time to write:

On Mon, 22 Dec 2014 00:20:31 +0000, Phil W Lee
wrote:

John B. Slocomb considered Sun, 21 Dec 2014
12:59:55 +0700 the perfect time to write:

On Sun, 21 Dec 2014 01:51:26 +0000, Phil W Lee
wrote:

John B. Slocomb considered Sat, 20 Dec 2014
08:00:47 +0700 the perfect time to write:

On Fri, 19 Dec 2014 22:47:19 +0000, Phil W Lee
wrote:

John B. Slocomb considered Fri, 19 Dec 2014
19:04:23 +0700 the perfect time to write:

On Thu, 18 Dec 2014 23:15:16 -0500, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 12/18/2014 9:13 PM, Phil W Lee wrote:
Frank Krygowski considered Wed, 17 Dec 2014
00:14:49 -0500 the perfect time to write:


IME, Loctite just works.

On aircraft, the certification usually specifies a positive mechanical
locking system, which usually translates to locking wire, a locknut,
or a cotter pin.

I imagine one of the main motivations for that is that it allows visual
inspection.

Loctite might work as well, except that if it were not applied, the
threaded connection would look no different, and could erroneously pass
a visual inspection.

Maybe.

On a Bell helicopter there is a nut, called the "Jesus Nut" that is
all that holds the main rotor on the shaft .

I'm not sure that the pilot preflighting the chopper would take kindly
to the mechanic saying "Don't let the missing cotter pin worry you
Boss, we locktighted it".

Although I never had a rotary wing license, I know enough pilots who
do to be in furious agreement with you :-)

The nuts holding the flaps on some light aircraft are just as critical
though - if one flap comes off (even at one end) when fully extended,
the resulting asymmetric lift at low speed and low altitude (the only
time you ever use full flap extension) is very unlikely to be
recoverable.
Some of the small Cessna models are notorious for having real "barn
door" flap arrangements, which if applied to only one side of the
aircraft at below flapless stall speed would (and occasionally have)
cause instant and terminal loss of control.
I particularly remember that one because there was an Airworthiness
Directive mandating adding a check on the flap extension mechanism
bushes during pre-flight (they may have issued a modified design
since I last flew one though).
This was after a dual fatal when a worn bush allowed the extension
mechanism to become detached from it's track in conditions of maximum
load (i.e. at maximum flap extension on a steep approach), which
(given that flapless stall speed is considerably higher than full flap
stall speed) meant that when the flap on one side suddenly retracted
itself, that wing stalled while the other was still giving enhanced
lift due to the full flap deployment.
500ft on short finals, no recovery possible.
Impact with the ground was short of the field, never mind the runway,
inverted, at 75deg.
Reading the details of stuff like that does have a tendency to
increase the vigilance of one's pre-flight inspection.

A B-29 flaps were operated by a long torque tube that ran from an
electric motor in the aft bomb bay out through the wings. I remember
once, on an airplane that parked on the next hardstand, the tube
twisted off in flight and when they put the flaps down for landing the
airplane tried to stand on one wing. The co-pilot was smart enough to
(very quickly) reverse his act that had made the airplane tip over and
they flew around a bit trying to figure out what to do.

One of the approach checks in most, if not all, aircraft I've flown
has been for symmetric flap extension, which means you only ever have
a single stage of asymmetry except in the hopefully unusual situation
of uncommanded control movements (in whichever direction).

My understanding of the incident I described was that it hadn't been
necessary to check for flap symmetry, it sort of announced itself,
dramatically :-)

Well, yeah.
It was probably incidents like that which resulted in the inclusion of
checking for flap asymmetry in the approach checklist :-)

Eventually they had no alternate but to land without flaps. They would
have been pretty light at the end of a flight but the B-29 had a
rather weak braking system so a great time was had by all and when
they successfully got down and stopped and back on their hardstand the
pilot had some extremely harsh things to say to the ground crew.

The Cessna "spotting" planes in Vietnam also had occasional problems
with their flap system but the runways were long enough to take a
"big" airplane so other then excitement there wasn't much of a problem
:-)

I haven't flown taildraggers, so can't comment on them, but a problem
of flapless landings in nosewheel aircraft tends to be tail-strikes..

The B-29 and I think all the other big tricycle landing gear (Air
Force) planes have a tail skid and some of the tail skids have big
gouges and scratches on them.

The small stuff has little if any protection though (might be a weight
thing) so it is more of a concern.

Of course, in the lightweight stuff that I flew, runway length was
rarely a problem. I can think of only one airstrip I used on which a
flapless landing would not have been possible except in a strong
headwind.

Whatcha gonna to do? You are up there and the flaps don't work.

That's what diversions are for.
You go somewhere with a longer runway, to get it fixed :-)

Mind you, that was the same place that they taught you that in the
absence of a decent breeze down the runway, if the stall horn wasn't
sounding as you came over the hedge, go around, because you're too
fast (although it wasn't actually quite that bad except in the wet -
you can't use much wheel braking on wet grass).

When I was, maybe 10 years old, my father was a charter member of a
"flying club" that bought a Piper J-3 which was brakeless. I remember
discussions about the feasibility of installing brakes but it was
finally decided that flying from a grass strip there was no need for
brakes.

Of course the J-3's stalling speed was pretty slow :-)

Yeah, 33 kts if I recall correctly, and not much faster than running
speed, if there's even a slight breeze to land into - even slower than
a C152.
I did once manage a near-vertical landing in a C152, into a strong
headwind, but at least it was straight down the runway.
I had to add power on approach, because the runway was gaining on me -
heck of a thing to find you are flying backwards :-)
At least as I descended, the wind reduced in speed (as it normally
does), or I'd have been landing at an airspeed which would have made
taxiing impossible.
I think my rollout was about 30ft, with only partial flaps, to avoid
wheelbarrowing it on. Flaps past about 15deg increase the angle of
attack of the wing quite a bit, so you lower the nose to compensate -
that's why flapless landings tend to result in a tail strike, unless
it's a fast landing (at least in airspeed terms). like that one had to
be.
I stopped on the runway and called for assistance for taxiing, because
I'd have been flipped over if I'd turned crosswind without someone
hanging onto the upwind wingtip.
I knew it was going to get "interesting" as my navigation got more and
more challenging to maintain. Un-forecast heavy crosswinds in a slow
single crew aircraft are the time when you really learn how good your
mental trigonometry is.
I had the most recent met office forecast when I took off, but
sometimes the weather just does the unexpected.
By my flight log, calculating afterwards, that wind was roughly 75kts
at 3000ft, and 50+ on the ground.
In fact, to drag this at least vaguely back on topic, I'd have
hesitated to even attempt cycling in that wind.


I remember either my father, or one of his friends, talk about
following the railroad (primitive cross country navigation) and the
trains were faster than he was :-)

IFR = I Follow Railways :-)
A year or after the J-3 they
upgraded to a 65 HP Aeronca, war surplus sort of thing, and it had an
actual elevator trim, with a crank on the ceiling to adjust it. Wow!

The Cessnas had a big wheel between the front seats (that's the only
seats in a 150 or 152, of course)

By the way, 50 K of wind is, in nautical terms, a Gale and 75 K is a
Strong Gale :-)

Yeah, I've seen it at sea level too, crewing out of Burnham-on-Crouch.
The only time I was really scared on a yacht was in a force 10 gusting
11 on the North Sea, when we broke a sea anchor off the inch and a
half line and ended up streaming a big bight of line over the bow to
keep us facing into wind. We couldn't carry a scrap of canvas at all.
Thankfully, we had just enough sea room to leeward to ride it out, and
managed to avoid an unplanned crossing to foreign parts - which would
have been slightly embarrasing at best, owing to the lack of
passports.

As an island nation subject to the vaguaries of the jetstream, it's no
great wonder that we have a reputation for being obsessed with the
weather.


meh. As a continental nation bereft of a jet stream we're
also obsessed with the weather.

Except for San Diego maybe
[Weather Report: 'It's nioe today again']

I was born and raised in California, and I used to do a lot of riding with a guy from Portland. I'd meet him over at his apartment in San Jose, and he'd walk out and say "another nice day" -- and then crack a smile. I never knew what he was getting at until I moved up here. He would go back to Portland around the 4th of July to see family and race track at a multi-day series at the Alpenrose track. http://media.oregonlive.com/cycling_...8cf0dc1f60.jpg
I was astounded when he would come back to San Jose and tell me that it rained in Portland -- on the 4th of July! Incroyable!

What's odd to me is that some bad-weather places have big cycling communities, like Madison or Portland. Alpenrose sees a lot of action. Even during winter, when there are a thousand-plus riders at the Cross Crusade. http://www.flickr.com/photos/bikeportland/8065467630/ http://bikeportland.org/2012/10/08/c...lpenrose-78565

By the way, I've ridden in 60mph+ wind riding up past Crown Point. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AzITfqD4txg I highly recommend against 50+mm rims in that kind of wind.

-- Jay Beattie.

On 12/24/2014 11:31 AM, jbeattie wrote:
On Wednesday, December 24, 2014 4:48:38 AM UTC-8, AMuzi wrote:
On 12/23/2014 9:09 PM, Phil W Lee wrote:
John B. Slocomb considered Mon, 22 Dec 2014
13:14:13 +0700 the perfect time to write:

On Mon, 22 Dec 2014 00:20:31 +0000, Phil W Lee
wrote:

John B. Slocomb considered Sun, 21 Dec 2014
12:59:55 +0700 the perfect time to write:

On Sun, 21 Dec 2014 01:51:26 +0000, Phil W Lee
wrote:

John B. Slocomb considered Sat, 20 Dec 2014
08:00:47 +0700 the perfect time to write:

On Fri, 19 Dec 2014 22:47:19 +0000, Phil W Lee
wrote:

John B. Slocomb considered Fri, 19 Dec 2014
19:04:23 +0700 the perfect time to write:

On Thu, 18 Dec 2014 23:15:16 -0500, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 12/18/2014 9:13 PM, Phil W Lee wrote:
Frank Krygowski considered Wed, 17 Dec 2014
00:14:49 -0500 the perfect time to write:


IME, Loctite just works.

On aircraft, the certification usually specifies a positive mechanical
locking system, which usually translates to locking wire, a locknut,
or a cotter pin.

I imagine one of the main motivations for that is that it allows visual
inspection.

Loctite might work as well, except that if it were not applied, the
threaded connection would look no different, and could erroneously pass
a visual inspection.

Maybe.

On a Bell helicopter there is a nut, called the "Jesus Nut" that is
all that holds the main rotor on the shaft .

I'm not sure that the pilot preflighting the chopper would take kindly
to the mechanic saying "Don't let the missing cotter pin worry you
Boss, we locktighted it".

Although I never had a rotary wing license, I know enough pilots who
do to be in furious agreement with you :-)

The nuts holding the flaps on some light aircraft are just as critical
though - if one flap comes off (even at one end) when fully extended,
the resulting asymmetric lift at low speed and low altitude (the only
time you ever use full flap extension) is very unlikely to be
recoverable.
Some of the small Cessna models are notorious for having real "barn
door" flap arrangements, which if applied to only one side of the
aircraft at below flapless stall speed would (and occasionally have)
cause instant and terminal loss of control.
I particularly remember that one because there was an Airworthiness
Directive mandating adding a check on the flap extension mechanism
bushes during pre-flight (they may have issued a modified design
since I last flew one though).
This was after a dual fatal when a worn bush allowed the extension
mechanism to become detached from it's track in conditions of maximum
load (i.e. at maximum flap extension on a steep approach), which
(given that flapless stall speed is considerably higher than full flap
stall speed) meant that when the flap on one side suddenly retracted
itself, that wing stalled while the other was still giving enhanced
lift due to the full flap deployment.
500ft on short finals, no recovery possible.
Impact with the ground was short of the field, never mind the runway,
inverted, at 75deg.
Reading the details of stuff like that does have a tendency to
increase the vigilance of one's pre-flight inspection.

A B-29 flaps were operated by a long torque tube that ran from an
electric motor in the aft bomb bay out through the wings. I remember
once, on an airplane that parked on the next hardstand, the tube
twisted off in flight and when they put the flaps down for landing the
airplane tried to stand on one wing. The co-pilot was smart enough to
(very quickly) reverse his act that had made the airplane tip over and
they flew around a bit trying to figure out what to do.

One of the approach checks in most, if not all, aircraft I've flown
has been for symmetric flap extension, which means you only ever have
a single stage of asymmetry except in the hopefully unusual situation
of uncommanded control movements (in whichever direction).

My understanding of the incident I described was that it hadn't been
necessary to check for flap symmetry, it sort of announced itself,
dramatically :-)

Well, yeah.
It was probably incidents like that which resulted in the inclusion of
checking for flap asymmetry in the approach checklist :-)

Eventually they had no alternate but to land without flaps. They would
have been pretty light at the end of a flight but the B-29 had a
rather weak braking system so a great time was had by all and when
they successfully got down and stopped and back on their hardstand the
pilot had some extremely harsh things to say to the ground crew.

The Cessna "spotting" planes in Vietnam also had occasional problems
with their flap system but the runways were long enough to take a
"big" airplane so other then excitement there wasn't much of a problem
:-)

I haven't flown taildraggers, so can't comment on them, but a problem
of flapless landings in nosewheel aircraft tends to be tail-strikes.

The B-29 and I think all the other big tricycle landing gear (Air
Force) planes have a tail skid and some of the tail skids have big
gouges and scratches on them.

The small stuff has little if any protection though (might be a weight
thing) so it is more of a concern.

Of course, in the lightweight stuff that I flew, runway length was
rarely a problem. I can think of only one airstrip I used on which a
flapless landing would not have been possible except in a strong
headwind.

Whatcha gonna to do? You are up there and the flaps don't work.

That's what diversions are for.
You go somewhere with a longer runway, to get it fixed :-)

Mind you, that was the same place that they taught you that in the
absence of a decent breeze down the runway, if the stall horn wasn't
sounding as you came over the hedge, go around, because you're too
fast (although it wasn't actually quite that bad except in the wet -
you can't use much wheel braking on wet grass).

When I was, maybe 10 years old, my father was a charter member of a
"flying club" that bought a Piper J-3 which was brakeless. I remember
discussions about the feasibility of installing brakes but it was
finally decided that flying from a grass strip there was no need for
brakes.

Of course the J-3's stalling speed was pretty slow :-)

Yeah, 33 kts if I recall correctly, and not much faster than running
speed, if there's even a slight breeze to land into - even slower than
a C152.
I did once manage a near-vertical landing in a C152, into a strong
headwind, but at least it was straight down the runway.
I had to add power on approach, because the runway was gaining on me -
heck of a thing to find you are flying backwards :-)
At least as I descended, the wind reduced in speed (as it normally
does), or I'd have been landing at an airspeed which would have made
taxiing impossible.
I think my rollout was about 30ft, with only partial flaps, to avoid
wheelbarrowing it on. Flaps past about 15deg increase the angle of
attack of the wing quite a bit, so you lower the nose to compensate -
that's why flapless landings tend to result in a tail strike, unless
it's a fast landing (at least in airspeed terms). like that one had to
be.
I stopped on the runway and called for assistance for taxiing, because
I'd have been flipped over if I'd turned crosswind without someone
hanging onto the upwind wingtip.
I knew it was going to get "interesting" as my navigation got more and
more challenging to maintain. Un-forecast heavy crosswinds in a slow
single crew aircraft are the time when you really learn how good your
mental trigonometry is.
I had the most recent met office forecast when I took off, but
sometimes the weather just does the unexpected.
By my flight log, calculating afterwards, that wind was roughly 75kts
at 3000ft, and 50+ on the ground.
In fact, to drag this at least vaguely back on topic, I'd have
hesitated to even attempt cycling in that wind.


I remember either my father, or one of his friends, talk about
following the railroad (primitive cross country navigation) and the
trains were faster than he was :-)

IFR = I Follow Railways :-)
A year or after the J-3 they
upgraded to a 65 HP Aeronca, war surplus sort of thing, and it had an
actual elevator trim, with a crank on the ceiling to adjust it. Wow!

The Cessnas had a big wheel between the front seats (that's the only
seats in a 150 or 152, of course)

By the way, 50 K of wind is, in nautical terms, a Gale and 75 K is a
Strong Gale :-)

Yeah, I've seen it at sea level too, crewing out of Burnham-on-Crouch.
The only time I was really scared on a yacht was in a force 10 gusting
11 on the North Sea, when we broke a sea anchor off the inch and a
half line and ended up streaming a big bight of line over the bow to
keep us facing into wind. We couldn't carry a scrap of canvas at all.
Thankfully, we had just enough sea room to leeward to ride it out, and
managed to avoid an unplanned crossing to foreign parts - which would
have been slightly embarrasing at best, owing to the lack of
passports.

As an island nation subject to the vaguaries of the jetstream, it's no
great wonder that we have a reputation for being obsessed with the
weather.


meh. As a continental nation bereft of a jet stream we're
also obsessed with the weather.

Except for San Diego maybe
[Weather Report: 'It's nioe today again']

I was born and raised in California, and I used to do a lot of riding with a guy from Portland. I'd meet him over at his apartment in San Jose, and he'd walk out and say "another nice day" -- and then crack a smile. I never knew what he was getting at until I moved up here. He would go back to Portland around the 4th of July to see family and race track at a multi-day series at the Alpenrose track. http://media.oregonlive.com/cycling_...8cf0dc1f60.jpg
I was astounded when he would come back to San Jose and tell me that it rained in Portland -- on the 4th of July! Incroyable!

What's odd to me is that some bad-weather places have big cycling communities, like Madison or Portland. Alpenrose sees a lot of action. Even during winter, when there are a thousand-plus riders at the Cross Crusade. http://www.flickr.com/photos/bikeportland/8065467630/ http://bikeportland.org/2012/10/08/c...lpenrose-78565

By the way, I've ridden in 60mph+ wind riding up past Crown Point. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AzITfqD4txg I highly recommend against 50+mm rims in that kind of wind.


The anemometer was interesting but not as dramatic as:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PVeB6jFU3s4

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

J Beattie.

Searching for a base for N-S seasonal trips for south birds north Orca obviously as a water rat Oregon was a choice and Yakima et al....

but itsnot the rain, its the pollution for burning fir for heat n spraying ag chemicals. GNW agbiz is waaay over the tolerable threshold on chemicals...and I live mainly in Florida currently attacked by Brazil.

NOAA doesn't do the ag chem biz but does show smoke inversions...the over the hill rain shadow areas are continuously colored gray for pollution.

I wrote a review of the Yakima for American White Water noting the dam takeout and all water intakes for irrigation are sprayed with the dam way above tolerable esp with children. NO PUEDE ENTRAR

and off course I was immediately attacked with sprayers n denied river privileges.

Monterey ? dusty coming over the hill...

XERIC !

On Wednesday, December 24, 2014 9:51:25 AM UTC-8, wrote:
J Beattie.

Searching for a base for N-S seasonal trips for south birds north Orca obviously as a water rat Oregon was a choice and Yakima et al....

but itsnot the rain, its the pollution for burning fir for heat n spraying ag chemicals. GNW agbiz is waaay over the tolerable threshold on chemicals...and I live mainly in Florida currently attacked by Brazil.

NOAA doesn't do the ag chem biz but does show smoke inversions...the over the hill rain shadow areas are continuously colored gray for pollution.

I wrote a review of the Yakima for American White Water noting the dam takeout and all water intakes for irrigation are sprayed with the dam way above tolerable esp with children. NO PUEDE ENTRAR

and off course I was immediately attacked with sprayers n denied river privileges.

Monterey ? dusty coming over the hill...

XERIC !

That's Washington. They're horrible people -- cannibals and troglodytes. They drink glyphosate. Grrr.

We don't burn fir trees in Portland. We hug them! http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/i...ugging_re.html

-- Jay Beattie.

He must've missed summer, while he was in the bathroom.

nnnnnnnnnnn

Brits move to Canada for the sunshine

On Thu, 25 Dec 2014 01:16:40 +0000, Phil W Lee
wrote:

John B. Slocomb considered Wed, 24 Dec 2014
18:03:40 +0700 the perfect time to write:

As an island nation subject to the vaguaries of the jetstream, it's no
great wonder that we have a reputation for being obsessed with the
weather.

One chap I knew in the Air force had just came back from a couple of
years in "England". He said that never once in the two years he was
there ever changed out of his winter uniform.. and that "if you get
shipped over there take two raincoats".


He must've missed summer, while he was in the bathroom.

Someone said that it was on a Sunday this year :-)

Someone also said that the underlying reason for the amazing growth of
the "Empire" was a fervent desire to get out of the rain :-)

--
Cheers,

John B.

On Thursday THIS IS CANADA SOUTH ! abt 3-5000 Cans here on BLM land deserted summers at 120, now available for $180USD water/sewer/trash 11/14-3/15

but !

http://forecast.weather.gov/MapClick...6996#.VJwvwCcA


http://goo.gl/8SYGL3


quartzite is a white mineral. At night, mixed into the road surface, quartzite reflects headlamps as bright silvery white blinks.