Resetting Cb's & Hac

[cap]

Peeshooter------if you would kindly read the Swissair Accident report (available from your MOT website), you will see that they say in very plain English and in great detail, that the major cause of the disaster was the wiring. If there's a "cover-up" here, I'd like to be indormed as to where, in YOUR opinion. I say "the major cause" because the flightdeck "brain-cramp" was again at work. The c/b "popped" indicating a problem and the Captain had it pushed back in. The c/b malfunctioned and did not "pop" again, resulting in the wire over-heating and igniting the flammable insulation that surrounded it and was throughout the a/c. As it grew, it started to take out other a/c functions and you know the result. If everyone is going to ignore an a/c's warnings then why wouldn't the engineers just push the c/b back in also, even when it made the maintenance facility? Jesus....it's put there for a reason ******.

 

Re-read the beginning of the above paragraph (which is not my OPINION...it's in the report for all to read) and YOU tell me where the problem started. The c/b "popped", with the a/c now telling the flightcrew that it had a problem. They ignored what the a/c was telling them and what the c/b was put in place and designed to do, and pushed the c/b back into operation. Now it has been determined that that type of insulation should not have been in a/c and that it should all be replaced worldwide for the stated reasons. What I read here, is that "we do not want a mistake on the flightdeck to be compounded by oher problems within the a/c". My question is...."they put caution panels, lights, c/b's, etc on flightdecks to advise and alert pilots of a problem. If the pilots are going to ignore those warnings and alerts, then what are they going to do to make the a/c functional enough to counter that stupidity". I have an excellent idea what most members of the engineering fraternity would have to say about these pilots being "typical". This should all be very simple for them and me......the s.o.b "popped" and indicates a problem......you leave it that way.....source the resultant emergency and it's seriousness and abort the flight or or return to base. In both cases they are "command DECISIONS" based on training, intelligence and experience. What didn't take place here then? The c/b and the a/c did as they were designed to do, but the flightcrew ignored them both....why have c/b's then?....get rid of them.

 

I notice that the report given on the CH-53's is given by a "Lt." Is that a Lieutenant of the US Armed Forces and did that CH-53 belong to the US Armed Forces? If so, I can assure you most defintiely that if the US Armed Forces have a problem with any manufacturer or one of it's sub-contractors, the item malfunctioning will be corrected poste haste. There were more "Tech Reps" running around 'Nam' when I was there, then there were employed on home territory in the US. No manufacturer wants to be "screwing around" with the US Military more than once and it's short-lived the first time.

 

I'm afraid that FREDDIE and I are basically on the same wave length on this subject. I possibly differ in the fact that you continually want government or regulatory agencies to cover my butt for bad decisions on the flightdeck....and they cannot do that. Companies do not want to see their a/c crash, personnel killed/maimed, insurance rates go higher still...and it's THEIR asset and income that crashes also with that a/c. Are there some that will ignore all that?....yuo bet there are... and they will ALWAYS exist in every industry. If they are going to ignore all the aforementioned, just what makes you think they would pay attention to another regulation put in place? If you aren't in place to police the highways, then putting up a particular speed limit sign ain't going to effect some.

[Peeshooter]

Cap

 

I'll agree with you on the regulatory matter, a new reg won't change a thing, you should also note that dupont added an elastomer compound to the new Kapton insulation to prevent the cracking.

 

Still doesn't change the fact that 80% of the older AC have the problem.

 

Cheers

 

PS -How much do you think it costs to rewire a 727?

[cap]

Wouldn't have a clue, but you don't want to know what it costs to re-wire a 204 or 205.......and that info is 10 years old even. It's a **** of a down-payment on a new home, I know that.

 

If some agency is going to put a "life-limit" on a/c wiring where it reaches a point that a law dictates that it must be completely re-wired, then watch the price of used, older a/c sky-rocket because a lot will be sitting because of cost. Remember, that the wiring that you suggest and install now, may be ok in 25 yrs, but not "satisfactory" by some definitions. It's a "slippery-slope" as to where you put that cut-off point. Also realize that the enviroment an a/c works in contributes greatly to the deterioration of that wiring and other components also including the skin. Anyone buying an a/c out of Galveston, etc must be very careful of that . Ditto for a/c Canada-bound from countries that owned them in the heat of the deserts.

 

Lastly, I'd get a new pair of boots when I was in 'Nam" and if I put them in my closet for a month, the the stitching was rotten and I couldn't wear them after a month and all because of the rampant humidity. That's one of the reasons the military later issued the new ones which you are probably familiar with. Imagine what it did to a/c.

[Peeshooter]

Precisely why there sold off to the 3rd world for cheap.

 

It about 1.8 million, last I heard.

 

Cheers

 

PS

[FREDDIE]

Hey guys what do you think about Brian Jenners Letter to Transport Included in Pallies Initial Question. It does not ask about resetting CB's But more about Transport's thinking they can force new policies upon us at their liking.Why circuit breakers pop is not relevant and who cares about rewiring Ac.

[Peeshooter]

If bell buys an order of aluminum form a plant and there are serious flaws that lead to structural difficulties they can then go back to the manufacturer of the product to seek damages. The maufacturer certifies the quality of the material.

 

It's the same thing for the Kapton insulation, that has been used for decades as it is light weight.

 

When the pressure was put on Dupont after the Swiss air flight , Dupont screamed bloody murder and did everything they could to stop what they called misinformation that the french had discovered during testing. Some how the whole matter was put to rest as dupont probably paid off the right people and the Kapton kept flowing. It wasn't until 2001 that they modified the insulation with an elastomer to prevent the cracking. So all wiring pre 2001 has got the same grade of Kapton on the wiring and dupont never admitted that the earlier stuff could cause problems.

 

I was the one of the people who was working with The ICAO TCB when the issue arrived, I don't know if I am in breech of confidentiallity by bring it up here in a public forum, but I can assure you 100% that this is what happened.

 

Who is enivitably responsible is any ones guess. When firestone had tires blowing up on ford vehicles you can bet that they got the grief.

 

 

Cheers PS

 

I hope this defines it a little clearer.

[CD]

If some agency is going to put a "life-limit" on a/c wiring where it reaches a point that a law dictates that it must be completely re-wired, then watch the price of used, older a/c sky-rocket because a lot will be sitting because of cost. Remember, that the wiring that you suggest and install now, may be ok in 25 yrs, but not "satisfactory" by some definitions. It's a "slippery-slope" as to where you put that cut-off point.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

The US is looking at these kinds of issues through the Aging Transport Systems Rulemaking Advisory Committee. It's very interesting to follow their work:

 

ATSRAC

 

Getting back to circuit breakers, they are not always the indication you have a problem either.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

That's the truth. Here's a TSB report of on in-flight fire on an AS 355 that resulted in part from the following:

 

"The auxiliary battery parallelling cable was not attached to the positive post of the main battery during routine maintenance.

 

The in-flight fire occurred when the unattached battery cable arced through the battery compartment forward bulkhead in flight and ignited the flammable nylon survival gear bags in the adjacent baggage compartment."

 

Aviation Investigation Report In-Flight Fire, Aerospatiale AS 355 F1 Twinstar - C-GTUI

[transquebecniece]

"...dreaded US of A." Hey now, watch it there buster. Do you mean we corner the market on greedy lawyers or do you just not like your southern neighbor much? Greedy lawyers aside, it ain't so bad here...really. No need to reply. Back to circuit breakers and wiring...

[twinstar_ca]

you have to admit, tqn, that the US is very top heavy on lawyers who want to represent you.. jim "the hammer" shapiro, zammler mellen and shiffman, christopher varjabedian are all names i recognize from the US channels...

 

not to say we don't have out share up here. either... god knows we have some winners!!!!

 

but you do have some great people down there as you have shown and in both lands, i think us good folk far outweigh the bad ones!!! :up:

[transquebecniece]

Eeww. Ouch. Tell me what you really think, why don'tcha? I asked for it. But Peeshooter, common sense tells me not to touch what you just said lest we start WWIII. Some of them is fightin' words, friend. I agree: let's not even go there. My better judgement should have told me to leave Mag Seal's "dreaded US of A" alone, especially when I'm so outnumbered. BACK to wiring and circuit-breakers already.