What's new
Van's Air Force

Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.

How many issues can you find?

Education

After reading some of the comments that this thread have generated, I am driven to make the following comments. These are not directed towards any individual or specific comment.

As a forum group, are we not here to learn? If we don't post these types of things and allow people to comment (good and bad) how can any of us understand what is "correct" and "incorrect", "good" or "bad", "acceptable" or "unacceptable"?

Is there more than one way to install a fuel injection system? Yes, the example at the start of this thread is one. There are probably other installations that are working fine, in the environment they operate. However, move the plane to the desert Southwest or the upper Midwest and things may change rather drastically.

There are "standard" practices that people use or avoid. Some work, heck all might work, but some won't and I believe most of us would rather be on the side of what works all the time in all conditions.

If we can't post these types of safety of flight issues (and having your engine die when you turn off the boost pump is a safety of flight issue) and allow for an unobstructed exchange of information, then we might as well shut the forum down as it will only post what is politically correct and deemed acceptable by the moderators (who have a tough enough job already).

(One last comment, the owner of this plane gave me his permission to post those pictures and is following this thread. He is new to the Experimental world and this has been a learning experience for him. One of his comments has been that he is thrilled to find a bunch of people who are willing to pitch in and help a stranger. As for the rest of his aircraft, it appeared to be a high quality build with just some issues in the engine installation, which have been addressed.)
 
This is my last comment on this thread.

I am in no way saying the information discussed is not of value. My issue has nothing to do with providing information for the uninitiated and I believe I already said as much.

Bill, you keep referring to the current owner of this airplane and how any comments are not directed toward him. I do not contest that idea, but my point was that the comments ARE directed toward the builder. Your original post eluded to the fact that this is that builder's 14th build. Others have posted that is a concern as well. I am saying that what is happening on this thread is a 'can you believe what this guy did' bashing contest! You even start the ball rolling by the thread's title: HOW MANY ISSUES CAN YOU FIND!

Why post on a public forum such things without addressing those concerns with the builder first? Since you are telling us information concerning the number of airplanes this builder has built prior to this one I cannot help but infer from your comments that at least you know who that builder is. I would expect common courtesy would dictate discussing the concerns you originally had with this build with him before you go using his build shortcommings as a 'TEACHING MOMENT'.

If this were my plane you posted pictures of without talking to me FIRST, I would take great offense at that action and consider it very insulting. On the other hand if you were to come to me in person and discuss the issues you saw with me, then asked for my permission to post what you found wrong with my build on a public forum in order to educate the uninitiated, I would be much less insulted by that and more inclined to be willing to contribute to the education of others. However, starting the dialog by making it a contest for others to nit pick what they see wrong in a handful of pictures is definitely not taking the high road.

I am finished commenting on this thread. Everyone here can now bash anything I have said. It is irrelevant to me if you do so. It is apparent that many on here know better what is needed in order to educate others than do I, so I bow out of the conversation.
 
Last edited:
I always appreciate other sets of eyes looking for "issues" on my plane and having been invited to do so on this example I would also offer that it appears that the ignition leads are the automotive type that come with electronic ignitions and the leads appear to be tie wrapped together. There should be stand-offs keeping the wires apart from each other and away from any metal they could arc to. This is only if they are indeed un-shielded high voltage wires.
 
This is my last comment on this thread.
This is my first comment on this thread, and I'm going to disagree with you. All of your points are valid and I would agree with you if this were a 1st time builder flying behind their own workmanship. The fact that this is a person who built this airplane to sell to another (why else would one have built 14 RVs) raises the bar to another level. Much like the FAA which places tighter reigns on commercial operations (maintenance, medical certification, inspections, etc...) I think we in the community need to hold "hired guns" to a higher standard.

While I respect Bill's decision not to name the builder, I disagree with it. I would name him publicly and advise anyone who bought one of his airplanes (at least 13 we know of) to take a close look under the hood for the same issues seen here. As others have pointed out, these are not just cosmetic issues but safety of flight issues, and safety concerns are not to be handled with kid gloves.
 
Jeff, you're speculating as to the builder's intent. You don't know what his motivation was for building 14 airplanes. You don't know if they were all different, and he was simply trying something new.

I agree with having a factual dialogue about finding problems and fixing them...and that's what Steve and a couple others have said here, as well. The issue I have is the way it's being communicated. I seriously doubt that ANY of those that have "bashed" the builder have a perfectly built airplane, and if you posted a picture on this forum of one of their problems and said "can you believe he did it THIS way??"...that guy would be pissed. If not, well, I'd be really surprised.
 
I agree

With sprucemoose. I didn't think of the builder acting like a manufacturer.
If that is the case his/her identity should be revealed.
Should we stop airworthiness directives because they may hurt Cessna's feelings?
 
Last edited:
Jeff, you're speculating as to the builder's intent. You don't know what his motivation was for building 14 airplanes. You don't know if they were all different, and he was simply trying something new.
I'm drawing the only reasonable conclusion from the limited facts presented. The legality/ propriety of hired guns is another debate for another thread. Frankly the builder's intent is irrelevant to this discussion; if he is foisting unairworthy aircraft on an unsuspecting buying public it matters little whether the intent was profit or fun.
 
builder

The guy that owns the airplanes wished to show the photos. The builder no longer owns the airplane and has no voice in the matter unless the owner has agreed to some sort of non disclosure agreement.
How many "**** previous owner" posts have there been on this site? Haven't heard any complaints about them.
 
Well at least we know the boost pump was effective combating the vapor lock. There is a bright side to everything.
 
It was interesting looking at others work, but really not too surprising considering the mass of homebuilts I have seen at OSH in the past decades. The RV group stands as a bright spot as a whole.

Specifically, my lycoming manual says a max of -2psi at the inlet to the mechanical pump. I assume that is at max fuel flow. Clearly there needs to me a temperature limit too, but I have not found one. It would seem that rather than point to this and that as bad, a good "installation" test with some numbers would allow some design/build flexibility against a hard standard. Hmmmm - - This subject might make a good article for Kitplanes.

I certainly agree that we should approach safety items (as herein) with constructive criticism and not an elevated mocking tone. The objective is to improve and promote safe practices, not to insult others or their work.
 
Last edited:
Well Said

I certainly agree that we should approach safety items (as herein) with constructive criticism and not an elevated mocking tone. The objective is to improve and promote safe practices, not to insult others or their work.

Bill, most eloquently put.

Right On.
 
I agree with Steve's comments. Something about the whole tone of the discussion just started bothering me. While I'm all about safety and education I just didn't like the way this ended up going without the builder subject to the comments not being able to defend himself.

'nough said, this is still better than looking at cat videos on Facebook.
 
All I can say is that this is why I hate the internet and all forms of social media. Someone actually refererred to the "tone" of the thread?!?! Are you serious? Tone implies hearing and these are simply written words. To get upset about the tone of a written article is absurd. Let me give an example. I say "you're an idiot." Am I insulting someone and challenging them to a dual to the death or am I telling my kid brother that I love him? You see, there is no "tone" involved. The tone is what you would "hear" that would tell you if that comment is meant to be angry, degrading, sarcastic or loving.

For the record, the builder lost all rights in my opinion, when he sold this plane. The owner now has every right.

I guarantee if you sell me **** that you installed and it threatens the life of my kids, it WILL be on this site, WITH your name right beside it. I think it is great reatraint that the builders name is not on here. However, Just because he screwed something up in one area doesn't mean the whole project is bad.

Bottom line, if we can't learn from other peoples mistakes we are doomed to repeat them. I don't know the first thing about injection installation but I am planning an m1b1 so this thread is getting tagged. Most of us learn better from what's wrong than what's right.

I bought a slightly misrepresented project and I guarantee that there are going to be pictures up here one day without the builders permission (or name) asking for advice/review/suggestions and simply so others can see what experienced people (including tech counselors) will pass off as "great workmanship". And in my opinion he only acceptable response from the builder or the tech counselor would be gratitude that their names are not in the captions.

I would expect nothing less from any of you and HIGHLY value the opportunity to learn from all this.
 
my $.02

hmmmm,

I like a thread that shows best practices; I guess we wouldn't know what that was without a 'bad' example.

in this case, what some comments miss is the 'why'.

" don't zip-tie to the engine mount BECAUSE it can wear thru the tube over time..."

then guys like us can learn from this.

Most of the thread has become about the builder, which will end up with it being closed....
have we forgotten that these are 'experimental' aircraft?...and I don't mean we should not follow best practices.
but when we get the flight permit approval, we have met some minimum standard.
when we buy an amateur-built aircraft, it does not come with a warranty, it's as is, as built, buyer must establish it's airworthiness....typically by doing an 'annual', CCI or similar.

and at SOME POINT IN IT'S PAST, it met the standards of the DAR, FAA, MOT, etc.
it may now have a Kawasaki engine, TBI, FADEC, extra wing, VG's, etc. and these are not STC'd.

yes, these are built for our education and recreation, and as such, there is broad latitude given to many systems and components.
I like photos of 'how not to do it', but I think it should stop there.
 
Actually this thread was very timely for me as I was doing my firewall forward. I picked up on a few of the comments and they helped me. My engine was a IO360 B1E and the flow divider was on the left side. I moved mine between the 1 & 3 cylinders to shorten the fuel line from the servo.
 
#2:

#3:

#4

Can you explain the AD about the fuel spider lines and why this is dangerous? I never looked inside an engine cowl of a good flyable airplane and don't know what is acceptable from the crapped out C150 most of us learned to fly on.

Thanks
 
Can you explain the AD about the fuel spider lines and why this is dangerous? I never looked inside an engine cowl of a good flyable airplane and don't know what is acceptable from the crapped out C150 most of us learned to fly on.

Thanks

Adding a second set of adel clamps reduces vibration, thus reduces the chance of one of those lines cracking.

Unfortunately, this thread turned negative with a number of people wanting to attack the builder rather than use it as a learning tool, which was the intention.
 
Thanks

Thanks for and to the original poster.
I was a hands on builder that built custom homes for a living for 40+ years and when we though we were done we would go back through the home and detail it. Usually finding more stuff to fix. Then my wife would do the same.
I have been in court many a time. Called as an expert witness against other builders.
With all the parts of big custom homes most builders are not experienced enough to get it right. The customer is relying on the 'professional' to know what they are doing. Most just screw things up or just don't do them.
Did a walk through for some friends on a "new" $550,000.00 home and found 40-50 areas needing help. Leaking pipes, no grounds, water where it's no suppose to be, on and on. Oh ya it was move in ready. Ha Ha.
Airplanes are no different just more deadly. If you don't know, how ya gonna do it right? Thanks for posters and this forum it helps.
I've built one airplane and am still looking.
Thanks again for this forum and all it's great help. Art
 
Looking at the second picture alone, how does the fuel line from the servo gets routed to the spider? Is this really running the fuel line from the back of the engine to the front and then routed all the way back thru the baffle?
Also, what are the baffle material on the firewall? I am wondering how the cowl gets fitted to the fuse. Then there is cold blasting tube from the baffle to the firewall which is not clear what it is for.
 
Looking at the second picture alone, how does the fuel line from the servo gets routed to the spider? Is this really running the fuel line from the back of the engine to the front and then routed all the way back thru the baffle?
Yep, and it is laid on top of the cylinder.

Also, what are the baffle material on the firewall? I am wondering how the cowl gets fitted to the fuse. Then there is cold blasting tube from the baffle to the firewall which is not clear what it is for.
IIRC, there were electronics up there that the builder was trying to protect.

Did you notice that the intercylinder baffles were on the top of the cylinders and not on the bottom. Not only that but one was laying on top of push tube? That alone could cause some serious issues.
 
Adding a second set of adel clamps reduces vibration, thus reduces the chance of one of those lines cracking.

In addition to the absence of the second Adel clamp, the routing of the fuel lines from the spider to the injectors is non-standard, and could easily cause issues. The standard routing is fairly direct to the injectors from the spider, running along the pushrods above the cylinders, but NOT running any where close to the cylinder heads. The extra length of those lines, just above the cylinder heads, will worsen the boiling of fuel in those lines after shutdown that makes hot starts 'difficult' as well as potentially cause vapor lock while the engine is running.
 

One example of the positive and constructive impact of this thread is the identification of this AD. I was unaware of it. At this moment, I do not know for sure if my engine has two clamps or one on each fuel line from the spider to the injector. But I will certainly check the next time my cowl is off, so THANK YOU!
 
One example of the positive and constructive impact of this thread is the identification of this AD. I was unaware of it. At this moment, I do not know for sure if my engine has two clamps or one on each fuel line from the spider to the injector. But I will certainly check the next time my cowl is off, so THANK YOU!

You?re welcome! Your A&P should run ADs on your engine and provided you with this.. pretty basic stuff, but it gets almost overwhelming with all the information out there! Also to point out, it may be due to an over abundance of caution on their part, but in the AD, (Or was it the SB) it says that if only one clamp is found (or no clamps) to replace the fuel line. I imagine because they can?t determine how much fatigue the line endured while operating unsupported..
 
You?re welcome! Your A&P should run ADs on your engine and provided you with this.. pretty basic stuff, but it gets almost overwhelming with all the information out there! Also to point out, it may be due to an over abundance of caution on their part, but in the AD, (Or was it the SB) it says that if only one clamp is found (or no clamps) to replace the fuel line. I imagine because they can?t determine how much fatigue the line endured while operating unsupported..

Well, I hold the repairman's cert. so no A&P. I checked all the AD's at the time of engine install, but I confess I do not routinely look to see if new ones are out. In this case the SB is a revision to a previous one, and I expect my engine was brought to compliance with the older version when it was overhauled to certificated standards. But I will check.

As it happens, diagram 4 of the SB which applies to my engine, shows just one clamp on the right side cylinders, and two clamps for the left side, one of the clamps being on an L bracket to a case bolt. So I will check to see if I have those.
 
Back
Top