Hotellier connections

[Mike]

I was watching my friend struggle with (AD required)safty wires for
Hotellier connectors on his recently purchased Pegasus. He said the
AD notes alternatives to the safty wires like the Wedekind sleeves.
Anyone know if these are retrofittable and where they can be obtained.
I'm sure this has been hashed out on RAS before but I'm new to the
group so apologize for the clutter. TIA:

Mike

[Jim Vincent]

try contacting http://www.mandhsoaring.com/home.html


Jim Vincent
N483SZ

[Mark Zivley]

Is your friend using safety wire or is he using the wire clips that look
kinda like a safety pin? I know that it's tough in some gliders no
matter what you're using, but the safety pins we used in our LS-1 were
pretty easy to put in and latch even though it was a totally blind
operation. Lots cheaper too! If you like you can even tether the pins
so if they fall you don't lose them.

Mike wrote:
> I was watching my friend struggle with (AD required)safty wires for
> Hotellier connectors on his recently purchased Pegasus. He said the
> AD notes alternatives to the safty wires like the Wedekind sleeves.
> Anyone know if these are retrofittable and where they can be obtained.
> I'm sure this has been hashed out on RAS before but I'm new to the
> group so apologize for the clutter. TIA:
>
> Mike

[Eduard Gorina]

I used wire clips for many years on my Pegase...... No problems.
Ed



"Mark Zivley" > wrote in message
om...
> Is your friend using safety wire or is he using the wire clips that look
> kinda like a safety pin? I know that it's tough in some gliders no matter
> what you're using, but the safety pins we used in our LS-1 were pretty
> easy to put in and latch even though it was a totally blind operation.
> Lots cheaper too! If you like you can even tether the pins so if they
> fall you don't lose them.
>
> Mike wrote:
>> I was watching my friend struggle with (AD required)safty wires for
>> Hotellier connectors on his recently purchased Pegasus. He said the
>> AD notes alternatives to the safty wires like the Wedekind sleeves.
>> Anyone know if these are retrofittable and where they can be obtained.
>> I'm sure this has been hashed out on RAS before but I'm new to the
>> group so apologize for the clutter. TIA:
>>
>> Mike
>

[Jim Vincent]

From what I've read and heard, the best thing to do is get Wedekind.

Jim Vincent
N483SZ

[Mark James Boyd]

In article >,
Mark Zivley > wrote:
>Is your friend using safety wire or is he using the wire clips that look
>kinda like a safety pin? I know that it's tough in some gliders no
>matter what you're using, but the safety pins we used in our LS-1 were
>pretty easy to put in and latch even though it was a totally blind
>operation. Lots cheaper too! If you like you can even tether the pins
>so if they fall you don't lose them.
>
>Mike wrote:
>> I was watching my friend struggle with (AD required)safty wires for
>> Hotellier connectors on his recently purchased Pegasus. He said the
>> AD notes alternatives to the safty wires like the Wedekind sleeves.
>> Anyone know if these are retrofittable and where they can be obtained.
>> I'm sure this has been hashed out on RAS before but I'm new to the
>> group so apologize for the clutter. TIA:

We put Pegasus Hotellier conections together last weekend: what a pain!
Could they MAKE the access cover any smaller? Hotelliers suck.
I think they just asked me to help because I have
tiny fingers :PPP

--

------------+
Mark J. Boyd

[Chris Reed]

I retrofitted Wedekind sleeves to an Astir CS (or more accurately, got this
done as part of the annual Certificate of Airworthiness. As I recall, the
cost was about USD15 per sleeve, with a couple of hours labour (of an
expert) for fitting all four. There are about three different types for
different kinds of hotelier, so quoting glider type, model, year etc. is
essential.

Worth every penny, because (a) connecting took seconds per Hotelier, and (b)
I knew that the security of the connection couldn't work loose in flight,
unlike the R clips we used previously which *might* (though never did) fall
out of the hole in the wedge. R clips are OK for (a), once you get used to
fitting them by feel, but often your hands are greasy, or you're just
clumsy, or life is against you. Plus, what happens if you drop an R clip
(even if tied to wires they can slide out) - only 2% of the pilots I know
would have a spare!

I own an Open Cirrus which, like the Pegase, has Hoteliers behind the spar -
this has Wedekinds for those Hoteliers which is essential, as they can only
be connected by feel. Our club Pegase has Wedekinds.

I think this is a no-brainer.

"Mike" > wrote in message
om...
> I was watching my friend struggle with (AD required)safty wires for
> Hotellier connectors on his recently purchased Pegasus. He said the
> AD notes alternatives to the safty wires like the Wedekind sleeves.
> Anyone know if these are retrofittable and where they can be obtained.
> I'm sure this has been hashed out on RAS before but I'm new to the
> group so apologize for the clutter. TIA:
>
> Mike

[mike fadden]

I got the Wedekind sleeves from a guy by the name of Jurgen Nick (in
the US) four or five years ago. I remember his name but don't have an
e-mail or address for him. They're not difficult to install and made
life MUCH easier when connecting/disconnecting the controls on my
ASW15. They were about $25@, if I recall correctly.

Mike Fadden

[Ray Lovinggood]

Are there types of L'Hotellier connectors that can't
use the sleeves?

A friend has an LS-4 with the sleeves (I guess they
are Wedekind) over his L'Hotellier's while my LS-1d
relies on safety pins in the 'wedges'.

It doesn't APPEAR that the sleeves can be used on the
type of L'Hotellier's in my glider, but I could be
wrong (a frequent occurance).

The safety pins are easy to attach, especially with
the adequately sized access hole in the turtle deck.
Could the safety pins come out? Possibly, but I don't
see how. Could the connections come loose even with
the safety pins properly in place? Possibly, but I
don't know how.

Is there any reason to retrofit the L'Hotellier's with
sleeves, if possible, rather than continuing to use
the safety pins?

Typically, I have the safety pins tied to the control
rods with dental floss. Sometimes, when removing a
wing, the safety pin snags on the fuselage and breaks
the dental floss. The pin drops into the fuselage
where I might or might not find it right away. Then,
I just go get a spare pin. To date, I have recovered
all 'lost' pins in the fuselage. Just a typical landing
or two of mine :-) shakes the pins out of their hiding
places so I can easily grab it through the turtle deck's
access hole.

Ray Lovinggood
Carrboro, North Carolina, USA
DG(LS)-1d
'W8'


At 14:12 20 September 2004, Chris Reed wrote:
>I retrofitted Wedekind sleeves to an Astir CS (or more
>accurately, got this
>done as part of the annual Certificate of Airworthiness.
>As I recall, the
>cost was about USD15 per sleeve, with a couple of hours
>labour (of an
>expert) for fitting all four. There are about three
>different types for
>different kinds of hotelier, so quoting glider type,
>model, year etc. is
>essential.
>
>Worth every penny, because (a) connecting took seconds
>per Hotelier, and (b)
>I knew that the security of the connection couldn't
>work loose in flight,
>unlike the R clips we used previously which *might*
>(though never did) fall
>out of the hole in the wedge. R clips are OK for (a),
>once you get used to
>fitting them by feel, but often your hands are greasy,
>or you're just
>clumsy, or life is against you. Plus, what happens
>if you drop an R clip
>(even if tied to wires they can slide out) - only 2%
>of the pilots I know
>would have a spare!
>
>I own an Open Cirrus which, like the Pegase, has Hoteliers
>behind the spar -
>this has Wedekinds for those Hoteliers which is essential,
>as they can only
>be connected by feel. Our club Pegase has Wedekinds.
>
>I think this is a no-brainer.
>
>'Mike' wrote in message
om...
>> I was watching my friend struggle with (AD required)safty
>>wires for
>> Hotellier connectors on his recently purchased Pegasus.
>> He said the
>> AD notes alternatives to the safty wires like the
>>Wedekind sleeves.
>> Anyone know if these are retrofittable and where they
>>can be obtained.
>> I'm sure this has been hashed out on RAS before but
>>I'm new to the
>> group so apologize for the clutter. TIA:
>>
>> Mike
>
>
>

[Kirk Stant]

(Mark James Boyd) wrote in message news:<414ead22$1@darkstar>...

> We put Pegasus Hotellier conections together last weekend: what a pain!
> Could they MAKE the access cover any smaller? Hotelliers suck.
> I think they just asked me to help because I have
> tiny fingers :PPP

The problem isn't the Hotellier fitting, it's the small access port.
My LS6-b has 4 Hotellier fittings (dive brakes and flaperons) that
take less than a minute to attach, safety (LS sleeves that screw over
the fitting) and check all of them. Easy to do, because they are
accessed from the cockpit via a huge door over the spars. Just as
easy to de-rig.

Almost as quick as some of the "automatic" setups I've helped with!

LS4 was just as easy. OTOH, hooking up a G-102's controls is a pain
by comparison. Those hookups (not Hotelliers) suck.

Kirk

[Tony]

I never have problems with wiring the hotelliers in my Peg. All very visible
and easy to reach - unlike many gliders which require mirrors and feel.
Opening the brakes makes connecting the starboard brake hotellier a little
easier as it is the furthrest from the hatch and opening it moves it towards
the hatch.

During the summer I witnessed a Cirrus with sleeves launch with a
disconnected aileron despite having positive checks. Sleeves, pins or wires,
REALLY positive positive checks with a good amount of force applied to the
control surface/stick is a must.

Safe rigging!



"Mark James Boyd" > wrote in message
news:414ead22$1@darkstar...
> In article >,
> Mark Zivley > wrote:
>>Is your friend using safety wire or is he using the wire clips that look
>>kinda like a safety pin? I know that it's tough in some gliders no
>>matter what you're using, but the safety pins we used in our LS-1 were
>>pretty easy to put in and latch even though it was a totally blind
>>operation. Lots cheaper too! If you like you can even tether the pins
>>so if they fall you don't lose them.
>>
>>Mike wrote:
>>> I was watching my friend struggle with (AD required)safty wires for
>>> Hotellier connectors on his recently purchased Pegasus. He said the
>>> AD notes alternatives to the safty wires like the Wedekind sleeves.
>>> Anyone know if these are retrofittable and where they can be obtained.
>>> I'm sure this has been hashed out on RAS before but I'm new to the
>>> group so apologize for the clutter. TIA:
>
> We put Pegasus Hotellier conections together last weekend: what a pain!
> Could they MAKE the access cover any smaller? Hotelliers suck.
> I think they just asked me to help because I have
> tiny fingers :PPP
>
> --
>
> ------------+
> Mark J. Boyd


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.766 / Virus Database: 513 - Release Date: 17/09/2004

[Jim Vincent]

>REALLY positive positive checks with a good amount of force applied to the
>control surface/stick is a must.

I differ with you there...more important to fully deflect control surfaces
under light load throughout the range of the control movement. Have a look at
: http://www.mymedtrans.com/personal.htm

Jim Vincent
N483SZ

[Tony]

Nice presentation. Lots of good advice.

If an incorrectly rigged connection is effectively 'jammed' together by
friction, isn't it only going to be detected during a PCC if the load
applied to the control surface is greater than the load required to overcome
the friction? Without adequate pressure being applied, I'm not sure how a
jammed control would be detected through a max deflection PCC except perhaps
by someone with very sharp eyes detecting variances/abnormalities in the
deflections.

Obviously any pressure applied has to be within reason so as not to damage
the aircraft.

On a seperate note, I have a written checklist for rigging my glider which
includes PCC and cross checking. However, I've never met anyone else who
does this which seems strange as we all get distracted by people/activities
during rigging. After rigging a few hundred times, it's could be all too
easy to think that you have just connected/checked something (before being
interrupted) when it was actually the day before.

Tony


"Jim Vincent" > wrote in message
...
> >REALLY positive positive checks with a good amount of force applied to
> >the
>>control surface/stick is a must.
>
> I differ with you there...more important to fully deflect control surfaces
> under light load throughout the range of the control movement. Have a
> look at
> : http://www.mymedtrans.com/personal.htm
>
> Jim Vincent
> N483SZ
>


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.766 / Virus Database: 513 - Release Date: 17/09/2004

[Jeff Melin]

When the AD came out, my partner and I drilled holes in the latches and =
used what we call "Fender Clips," a pin that looks something like a =
Cotter pin except tempered and with a few undulations on one side. =
These hold well and are tied to the control rod end with monofilament =
fishing line. They have worked well over the years since. I tried once =
to convert to Wedekind sleeves but was told by the well-regarded repair =
station that did my annual that year that a proper sleeve was not =
available for my Grob built Standard Cirrus.

On PCCs, I favor an assistant to provide constant pressure against the =
control surface being checked, but not to attempt to prevent its =
movement. I want to see and hear the mechanism move throughout its full =
range in order to detect a hang-up or "funny noise." I do not rely on =
persons less familiar with my aircraft than I to know what may be out of =
order. It is actually quite easy for a checker to overpower any =
movement, especially in the Spoilers.

[Jim Vincent]

>If an incorrectly rigged connection is effectively 'jammed' together by
>friction, isn't it only going to be detected during a PCC if the load
>applied to the control surface is greater than the load required to overcome
>the friction?

Very few connections rely on friction. For the H connectors, I would expect
the socket to pop off the ball at at least one of the full deflection points.
After connecting them, try lifting the socket off the ball, maybe?

Be aware that control surfaces are not designed to take high load forces
applied at the surface...doing so might just break it.

>I have a written checklist for rigging my glider which
>includes PCC and cross checking. However, I've never met anyone else who
>does

Pleased to meet you, my name is Jim Vincent. Now you have met someone;-) I
keep my CAC and post assembly checklist velcroed inside my cockpit jsut behind
the canopy. Ready for access every time I rig. I figure the more idiot proof
I make it, the less I have to worry about what I might have missed.

Jim Vincent
N483SZ

[Larry Goddard]

I can attach and pin the L'Hotellier fittings in my LS-3a in 30
seconds. Easy to check to make sure they are connected properly.

Just takes a little practice.

Larry Goddard
"Zero One"


Ray Lovinggood wrote:

> Are there types of L'Hotellier connectors that can't
> use the sleeves?
>
> A friend has an LS-4 with the sleeves (I guess they
> are Wedekind) over his L'Hotellier's while my LS-1d
> relies on safety pins in the 'wedges'.
>
> It doesn't APPEAR that the sleeves can be used on the
> type of L'Hotellier's in my glider, but I could be
> wrong (a frequent occurance).
>
> The safety pins are easy to attach, especially with
> the adequately sized access hole in the turtle deck.
> Could the safety pins come out? Possibly, but I don't
> see how. Could the connections come loose even with
> the safety pins properly in place? Possibly, but I
> don't know how.
>
> Is there any reason to retrofit the L'Hotellier's with
> sleeves, if possible, rather than continuing to use
> the safety pins?
>
> Typically, I have the safety pins tied to the control
> rods with dental floss. Sometimes, when removing a
> wing, the safety pin snags on the fuselage and breaks
> the dental floss. The pin drops into the fuselage
> where I might or might not find it right away. Then,
> I just go get a spare pin. To date, I have recovered
> all 'lost' pins in the fuselage. Just a typical landing
> or two of mine :-) shakes the pins out of their hiding
> places so I can easily grab it through the turtle deck's
> access hole.
>
> Ray Lovinggood
> Carrboro, North Carolina, USA
> DG(LS)-1d
> 'W8'
>
> At 14:12 20 September 2004, Chris Reed wrote:
> >I retrofitted Wedekind sleeves to an Astir CS (or more
> >accurately, got this
> >done as part of the annual Certificate of Airworthiness.
> >As I recall, the
> >cost was about USD15 per sleeve, with a couple of hours
> >labour (of an
> >expert) for fitting all four. There are about three
> >different types for
> >different kinds of hotelier, so quoting glider type,
> >model, year etc. is
> >essential.
> >
> >Worth every penny, because (a) connecting took seconds
> >per Hotelier, and (b)
> >I knew that the security of the connection couldn't
> >work loose in flight,
> >unlike the R clips we used previously which *might*
> >(though never did) fall
> >out of the hole in the wedge. R clips are OK for (a),
> >once you get used to
> >fitting them by feel, but often your hands are greasy,
> >or you're just
> >clumsy, or life is against you. Plus, what happens
> >if you drop an R clip
> >(even if tied to wires they can slide out) - only 2%
> >of the pilots I know
> >would have a spare!
> >
> >I own an Open Cirrus which, like the Pegase, has Hoteliers
> >behind the spar -
> >this has Wedekinds for those Hoteliers which is essential,
> >as they can only
> >be connected by feel. Our club Pegase has Wedekinds.
> >
> >I think this is a no-brainer.
> >
> >'Mike' wrote in message
> om...
> >> I was watching my friend struggle with (AD required)safty
> >>wires for
> >> Hotellier connectors on his recently purchased Pegasus.
> >> He said the
> >> AD notes alternatives to the safty wires like the
> >>Wedekind sleeves.
> >> Anyone know if these are retrofittable and where they
> >>can be obtained.
> >> I'm sure this has been hashed out on RAS before but
> >>I'm new to the
> >> group so apologize for the clutter. TIA:
> >>
> >> Mike
> >
> >
> >

[G.A. Seguin]

Larry Goddard > wrote in message >...
> I can attach and pin the L'Hotellier fittings in my LS-3a in 30
> seconds. Easy to check to make sure they are connected properly.
>
> Just takes a little practice.
>
> Larry Goddard
> "Zero One"
>
>
> Ray Lovinggood wrote:
>
> > Are there types of L'Hotellier connectors that can't
> > use the sleeves?
> >
> > A friend has an LS-4 with the sleeves (I guess they
> > are Wedekind) over his L'Hotellier's while my LS-1d
> > relies on safety pins in the 'wedges'.
> >
> > It doesn't APPEAR that the sleeves can be used on the
> > type of L'Hotellier's in my glider, but I could be
> > wrong (a frequent occurance).
> >
> > The safety pins are easy to attach, especially with
> > the adequately sized access hole in the turtle deck.
> > Could the safety pins come out? Possibly, but I don't
> > see how. Could the connections come loose even with
> > the safety pins properly in place? Possibly, but I
> > don't know how.
> >
> > Is there any reason to retrofit the L'Hotellier's with
> > sleeves, if possible, rather than continuing to use
> > the safety pins?
> >
> > Typically, I have the safety pins tied to the control
> > rods with dental floss. Sometimes, when removing a
> > wing, the safety pin snags on the fuselage and breaks
> > the dental floss. The pin drops into the fuselage
> > where I might or might not find it right away. Then,
> > I just go get a spare pin. To date, I have recovered
> > all 'lost' pins in the fuselage. Just a typical landing
> > or two of mine :-) shakes the pins out of their hiding
> > places so I can easily grab it through the turtle deck's
> > access hole.
> >
> > Ray Lovinggood
> > Carrboro, North Carolina, USA
> > DG(LS)-1d
> > 'W8'
> >
> > At 14:12 20 September 2004, Chris Reed wrote:
> > >I retrofitted Wedekind sleeves to an Astir CS (or more
> > >accurately, got this
> > >done as part of the annual Certificate of Airworthiness.
> > >As I recall, the
> > >cost was about USD15 per sleeve, with a couple of hours
> > >labour (of an
> > >expert) for fitting all four. There are about three
> > >different types for
> > >different kinds of hotelier, so quoting glider type,
> > >model, year etc. is
> > >essential.
> > >
> > >Worth every penny, because (a) connecting took seconds
> > >per Hotelier, and (b)
> > >I knew that the security of the connection couldn't
> > >work loose in flight,
> > >unlike the R clips we used previously which *might*
> > >(though never did) fall
> > >out of the hole in the wedge. R clips are OK for (a),
> > >once you get used to
> > >fitting them by feel, but often your hands are greasy,
> > >or you're just
> > >clumsy, or life is against you. Plus, what happens
> > >if you drop an R clip
> > >(even if tied to wires they can slide out) - only 2%
> > >of the pilots I know
> > >would have a spare!
> > >
> > >I own an Open Cirrus which, like the Pegase, has Hoteliers
> > >behind the spar -
> > >this has Wedekinds for those Hoteliers which is essential,
> > >as they can only
> > >be connected by feel. Our club Pegase has Wedekinds.
> > >
> > >I think this is a no-brainer.
> > >
> > >'Mike' wrote in message
> > om...
> > >> I was watching my friend struggle with (AD required)safty
> > >>wires for
> > >> Hotellier connectors on his recently purchased Pegasus.
> > >> He said the
> > >> AD notes alternatives to the safty wires like the
> > >>Wedekind sleeves.
> > >> Anyone know if these are retrofittable and where they
> > >>can be obtained.
> > >> I'm sure this has been hashed out on RAS before but
> > >>I'm new to the
> > >> group so apologize for the clutter. TIA:
> > >>
> > >> Mike
> > >
> > >
> > >



Hi,
In my DG200 I used safety pin type wich were easy to install and lock after
8-10 flight. I tied them with long fishing LEADER to prevent loosing them.
S6

[Jeff Melin]

I believe Jurgen quit selling them, I have not seen an ad in Soaring as =
he regularly had for some time. I know that Grob in Bluffton OH knows =
where to get them.

[Bob Mowry]

Another good site to check for this mod is Mr. Phoenix's:

http://www.jimphoenix.com/jimphoenix2/pages/Nimbus/Wedekind/Wedekind.html

Jim has a unique combination of mechanical and technical skills
coupled with a good sense of humor that makes his site one of my all
time favorites.

-bob

[Mark James Boyd]

I think the best way to do this isn't mirrors or safety pins
or PCCs or bits of string or feel or training or flashlights....

I prefer a big ass port (or two) that lets you look directly at
the entire connection from all sides.

If the designer made an ity-bity port, and you have to rely
on a PCC because you can't see the dang connection close up,
then that's just a crappy design. If the fuse is really
so flimsy the port has to be 5 inches wide instead of 8 or 9 inches,
and it can't be right near the connection, then the designer needs
to go to the drawing board.

The Pegasus elevator connection is out in the breeze, and real easy to
visually inspect. If anyone ever failed a PCC of that elevator
connection, I'd have to recommend they do the connection inspection
next time with eyes open, perhaps with their bifocals on, during
daylight hours.

I think the (over)emphasis on a PCC is bunk. The connection
inspection is the key. If I'm ever in a situation
where a PCC discovers something, I'll either not fly that glider
again (the design doesn't allow good enough direct connection
inspections) or I'll not fly ANY gliders (since I'm too stupid
or too hurried to look right at a connection and determine if it's
connected).

The exception to this is something like the bellcrank failure that
happened last year to a dive brake during a PCC. No connection
inspection is going to find that. But one wonders if the
tens of thousands of PCCs CAUSED the failure itself, by wearing
out the bellcrank faster...
--

------------+
Mark J. Boyd

[Stewart Kissel]

Ahhh, that fall season is upon us...as hours in the
air decrease, the semi-annual return of the PCC, PW5
and 2-33 threads reappear :) Other groups have guns,
religion and politics as their old standbys.

Although some might see Mark's post as a troll attempt...I
think he makes some interesting points. IIRC on the
HP site, an analysis was done that 1 in 1,000 hottelier
connections are done incorrectly...not sure how that
data was collected. Attitudes on PCC's seem to be
1.) I have done it safely for years, others should
be able too.
2.) I used to think (1.) until almost killed by disconnect.
3.) It's a crappy design and I ain't going near it.

I am a #3 guy myself.



At 02:42 23 September 2004, Mark James Boyd wrote:
>
>I think the best way to do this isn't mirrors or safety
>pins
>or PCCs or bits of string or feel or training or flashlights....
>
>I prefer a big ass port (or two) that lets you look
>directly at
>the entire connection from all sides.
>
>If the designer made an ity-bity port, and you have
>to rely
>on a PCC because you can't see the dang connection
>close up,
>then that's just a crappy design. If the fuse is really
>so flimsy the port has to be 5 inches wide instead
>of 8 or 9 inches,
>and it can't be right near the connection, then the
>designer needs
>to go to the drawing board.
>
>The Pegasus elevator connection is out in the breeze,
>and real easy to
>visually inspect. If anyone ever failed a PCC of that
>elevator
>connection, I'd have to recommend they do the connection
>inspection
>next time with eyes open, perhaps with their bifocals
>on, during
>daylight hours.
>
>I think the (over)emphasis on a PCC is bunk. The connection
>
>inspection is the key. If I'm ever in a situation
>
>where a PCC discovers something, I'll either not fly
>that glider
>again (the design doesn't allow good enough direct
>connection
>inspections) or I'll not fly ANY gliders (since I'm
>too stupid
>or too hurried to look right at a connection and determine
>if it's
>connected).
>
>The exception to this is something like the bellcrank
>failure that
>happened last year to a dive brake during a PCC. No
>connection
>inspection is going to find that. But one wonders
>if the
>tens of thousands of PCCs CAUSED the failure itself,
>by wearing
>out the bellcrank faster...
>--
>
>------------+
>Mark J. Boyd
>

[John Sinclair]

Good post Stew, indeed winter is not too far away.
Automatic control hook-up's is the final answer, but
we still have a bunch of sailplanes out there without
the final solution. I have twice failed to hook up
the outboard flap connections on our ASH-25 (now sold).
Both times I was talking to someone and reverted to
my Nimbus 3, habit patern where there is only 2 connections
to be made, both after the wing is completely in place.
The ASH-25 requires the flap connection to be made
while the wing is about 2 inches from mating and then
2 more connections after sliding the wing all the way
into the inboard sections. In both cases, I found my
mistake in the PCC.

If I may start the winter season with a political remark,
How about adjoining jail cells for Martha Stewart ans
Dan Rather?

At 16:42 23 September 2004, Stewart Kissel wrote:
>Ahhh, that fall season is upon us...as hours in the
>air decrease, the semi-annual return of the PCC, PW5
>and 2-33 threads reappear :) Other groups have guns,
>religion and politics as their old standbys.
>
>Although some might see Mark's post as a troll attempt...I
>think he makes some interesting points. IIRC on the
>HP site, an analysis was done that 1 in 1,000 hottelier
>connections are done incorrectly...not sure how that
>data was collected. Attitudes on PCC's seem to be
>1.) I have done it safely for years, others should
>be able too.
>2.) I used to think (1.) until almost killed by disconnect.
>3.) It's a crappy design and I ain't going near it.
>
>I am a #3 guy myself.
>
>
>
>At 02:42 23 September 2004, Mark James Boyd wrote:
>>
>>I think the best way to do this isn't mirrors or safety
>>pins
>>or PCCs or bits of string or feel or training or flashlights....
>>
>>I prefer a big ass port (or two) that lets you look
>>directly at
>>the entire connection from all sides.
>>
>>If the designer made an ity-bity port, and you have
>>to rely
>>on a PCC because you can't see the dang connection
>>close up,
>>then that's just a crappy design. If the fuse is really
>>so flimsy the port has to be 5 inches wide instead
>>of 8 or 9 inches,
>>and it can't be right near the connection, then the
>>designer needs
>>to go to the drawing board.
>>
>>The Pegasus elevator connection is out in the breeze,
>>and real easy to
>>visually inspect. If anyone ever failed a PCC of that
>>elevator
>>connection, I'd have to recommend they do the connection
>>inspection
>>next time with eyes open, perhaps with their bifocals
>>on, during
>>daylight hours.
>>
>>I think the (over)emphasis on a PCC is bunk. The connection
>>
>>inspection is the key. If I'm ever in a situation
>>
>>where a PCC discovers something, I'll either not fly
>>that glider
>>again (the design doesn't allow good enough direct
>>connection
>>inspections) or I'll not fly ANY gliders (since I'm
>>too stupid
>>or too hurried to look right at a connection and determine
>>if it's
>>connected).
>>
>>The exception to this is something like the bellcrank
>>failure that
>>happened last year to a dive brake during a PCC. No
>>connection
>>inspection is going to find that. But one wonders
>>if the
>>tens of thousands of PCCs CAUSED the failure itself,
>>by wearing
>>out the bellcrank faster...
>>--
>>
>>------------+
>>Mark J. Boyd
>>
>
>
>
>

[Eric Greenwell]

John Sinclair wrote:

>
> If I may start the winter season with a political remark,
> How about adjoining jail cells for Martha Stewart ans
> Dan Rather?

If we are going to jail people for using poorly authenticated
information, we could start at the top of the food chain, couldn't we?


--
Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

Eric Greenwell
Washington State
USA

[Mark James Boyd]

>> If I may start the winter season with a political remark,
>> How about adjoining jail cells for Martha Stewart ans
>> Dan Rather?
>
>If we are going to jail people for using poorly authenticated
>information, we could start at the top of the food chain, couldn't we?

Ohmigod...I saw "The Daily Show" with John Stewart on Comedy Central
yesterday. I had tears it was so funny.

I dunno if we could get him to do a show on Hotelliers, unless
their the Hilton sisters...


--

------------+
Mark J. Boyd

[Stewart Kissel]

How about adjoining jail cells for Martha Stewart ans
Dan Rather?

I think Jay Leno got it right .......

Dan Rather is defending the documents as 'fake but
accurate',
doesn't that sounds more like breasts in California?...'fake
but accurate' :)



At 18:00 23 September 2004, John Sinclair wrote:
>Good post Stew, indeed winter is not too far away.
>Automatic control hook-up's is the final answer, but
>we still have a bunch of sailplanes out there without
>the final solution. I have twice failed to hook up
>the outboard flap connections on our ASH-25 (now sold).
>Both times I was talking to someone and reverted to
>my Nimbus 3, habit patern where there is only 2 connections
>to be made, both after the wing is completely in place.
>The ASH-25 requires the flap connection to be made
>while the wing is about 2 inches from mating and then
>2 more connections after sliding the wing all the way
>into the inboard sections. In both cases, I found my
>mistake in the PCC.
>
>If I may start the winter season with a political remark,
>How about adjoining jail cells for Martha Stewart ans
>Dan Rather?
>
>At 16:42 23 September 2004, Stewart Kissel wrote:
>>Ahhh, that fall season is upon us...as hours in the
>>air decrease, the semi-annual return of the PCC, PW5
>>and 2-33 threads reappear :) Other groups have guns,
>>religion and politics as their old standbys.
>>
>>Although some might see Mark's post as a troll attempt...I
>>think he makes some interesting points. IIRC on the
>>HP site, an analysis was done that 1 in 1,000 hottelier
>>connections are done incorrectly...not sure how that
>>data was collected. Attitudes on PCC's seem to be
>>1.) I have done it safely for years, others should
>>be able too.
>>2.) I used to think (1.) until almost killed by disconnect.
>>3.) It's a crappy design and I ain't going near it.
>>
>>I am a #3 guy myself.
>>
>>
>>
>>At 02:42 23 September 2004, Mark James Boyd wrote:
>>>
>>>I think the best way to do this isn't mirrors or safety
>>>pins
>>>or PCCs or bits of string or feel or training or flashlights....
>>>
>>>I prefer a big ass port (or two) that lets you look
>>>directly at
>>>the entire connection from all sides.
>>>
>>>If the designer made an ity-bity port, and you have
>>>to rely
>>>on a PCC because you can't see the dang connection
>>>close up,
>>>then that's just a crappy design. If the fuse is really
>>>so flimsy the port has to be 5 inches wide instead
>>>of 8 or 9 inches,
>>>and it can't be right near the connection, then the
>>>designer needs
>>>to go to the drawing board.
>>>
>>>The Pegasus elevator connection is out in the breeze,
>>>and real easy to
>>>visually inspect. If anyone ever failed a PCC of that
>>>elevator
>>>connection, I'd have to recommend they do the connection
>>>inspection
>>>next time with eyes open, perhaps with their bifocals
>>>on, during
>>>daylight hours.
>>>
>>>I think the (over)emphasis on a PCC is bunk. The connection
>>>
>>>inspection is the key. If I'm ever in a situation
>>>
>>>where a PCC discovers something, I'll either not fly
>>>that glider
>>>again (the design doesn't allow good enough direct
>>>connection
>>>inspections) or I'll not fly ANY gliders (since I'm
>>>too stupid
>>>or too hurried to look right at a connection and determine
>>>if it's
>>>connected).
>>>
>>>The exception to this is something like the bellcrank
>>>failure that
>>>happened last year to a dive brake during a PCC. No
>>>connection
>>>inspection is going to find that. But one wonders
>>>if the
>>>tens of thousands of PCCs CAUSED the failure itself,
>>>by wearing
>>>out the bellcrank faster...
>>>--
>>>
>>>------------+
>>>Mark J. Boyd
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>

[Ray Lovinggood]

Wow, I didn't realize there was aversion by some against
L'hotellier fittings and even refusal to fly gliders
that use them.

Hmm, I guess if it's possible to put a 'dualie' landing
gear on a Libelle H201, then it's bound to be possible
to retrofit L'Hotelier fittings with automatic connections.
Of course, the cost to do so on something like my
LS-1d would be about the same as the total value of
the glider. Or a lot more.

Since I can't make the jump to a ship with automatic
connections, I'll continue to fly mine, but not before
I make a Positive Control Check after assembly.

Ray Lovinggood
Carrboro, North Carolina, USA
LS-1d, 'W8'

[Bill Daniels]

"Ray Lovinggood" > wrote in message
...
> Wow, I didn't realize there was aversion by some against
> L'hotellier fittings and even refusal to fly gliders
> that use them.
>
> Hmm, I guess if it's possible to put a 'dualie' landing
> gear on a Libelle H201, then it's bound to be possible
> to retrofit L'Hotelier fittings with automatic connections.
> Of course, the cost to do so on something like my
> LS-1d would be about the same as the total value of
> the glider. Or a lot more.
>
> Since I can't make the jump to a ship with automatic
> connections, I'll continue to fly mine, but not before
> I make a Positive Control Check after assembly.
>
> Ray Lovinggood
> Carrboro, North Carolina, USA
> LS-1d, 'W8'
>

Does anybody have a first person story of a L'Hotellier fitting coming loose
when it was CERTAIN that it was connected and safetied correctly in the
first place?

I attach and safety pin mine by feel and then check them visually and by
tugging at right angles on each one in turn. Then I also do a PCC.

Bill Daniels

[Tim Mara]

The whole issue with the safety pins was a rather 'knee jerk" reaction
rather than a cure.
I don't honestly know of any of these connections when proper connected
(that's the catch, so to speak) with or without safety pins installed...for
years gliders with these connections never used the safety pins...the
problem lies with the connectors not getting proper attached in the first
place, and that is something rather easy to do, they can 'appear" to be
connected and not fully connected...if the fittings are not worn out
(subject of another AD note to measure these balls and sockets) then they
don't become disconnected...many (most) gliders that used these fittings
also however had them in such a location they were installed mostly by brail
since you had to feel your way into a location that was many times
impossible to see.... LS even went to the smoke and mirrors (less the smoke)
method by installing tiny mirrors on the aft bulkheads so you could see the
connections..
the L'Hotellier connections were simply a not nice way of connecting
essential flight controls, several gliders have crashed when they became
disconnected (never properly connected) and people died because of
these....and, probably will in the future as well.
Even some earlier gliders used "pip" pins for control connections, these
were much better than the L'Hotellier fittings.....now, and in the future,
every manufacturer should and most do use automatic connections....
tim



> Does anybody have a first person story of a L'Hotellier fitting coming
> loose
> when it was CERTAIN that it was connected and safetied correctly in the
> first place?
>
> I attach and safety pin mine by feel and then check them visually and by
> tugging at right angles on each one in turn. Then I also do a PCC.
>
> Bill Daniels
>

[Bill Daniels]

My observation is that the only way to insure they are properly connected is
by feel.

If the cup is only partially engaged with the ball, the fitting will feel
stiff. With the cup fully over the ball and the tab fully seated, the
fitting will easily rotate on the ball with just finger pressure.

When you KNOW a fitting is properly attached, run your finger tip over the
opening of the cup to feel the position of the ball in the cup. When you
learn what a good connection feels like, it's very easy to feel when the
ball is not properly seated.

I take some comfort in the fact that my L'Hotellier fittings are much harder
to get off than on.

Oh yes, I also clean them with solvent and re-lube them regularly.

Bill Daniels


"Tim Mara" > wrote in message
...
> The whole issue with the safety pins was a rather 'knee jerk" reaction
> rather than a cure.
> I don't honestly know of any of these connections when proper connected
> (that's the catch, so to speak) with or without safety pins
installed...for
> years gliders with these connections never used the safety pins...the
> problem lies with the connectors not getting proper attached in the first
> place, and that is something rather easy to do, they can 'appear" to be
> connected and not fully connected...if the fittings are not worn out
> (subject of another AD note to measure these balls and sockets) then they
> don't become disconnected...many (most) gliders that used these fittings
> also however had them in such a location they were installed mostly by
brail
> since you had to feel your way into a location that was many times
> impossible to see.... LS even went to the smoke and mirrors (less the
smoke)
> method by installing tiny mirrors on the aft bulkheads so you could see
the
> connections..
> the L'Hotellier connections were simply a not nice way of connecting
> essential flight controls, several gliders have crashed when they became
> disconnected (never properly connected) and people died because of
> these....and, probably will in the future as well.
> Even some earlier gliders used "pip" pins for control connections, these
> were much better than the L'Hotellier fittings.....now, and in the future,
> every manufacturer should and most do use automatic connections....
> tim
>
>
>
> > Does anybody have a first person story of a L'Hotellier fitting coming
> > loose
> > when it was CERTAIN that it was connected and safetied correctly in the
> > first place?
> >
> > I attach and safety pin mine by feel and then check them visually and by
> > tugging at right angles on each one in turn. Then I also do a PCC.
> >
> > Bill Daniels
> >
>
>
>

[Don Johnstone]

Who are Martha Stewart and Dan Rather?

At 18:24 23 September 2004, Mark James Boyd wrote:
>>> If I may start the winter season with a political
>>>remark,
>>> How about adjoining jail cells for Martha Stewart
>>>ans
>>> Dan Rather?
>>
>>If we are going to jail people for using poorly authenticated
>>
>>information, we could start at the top of the food
>>chain, couldn't we?
>
>Ohmigod...I saw 'The Daily Show' with John Stewart
>on Comedy Central
>yesterday. I had tears it was so funny.
>
>I dunno if we could get him to do a show on Hotelliers,
>unless
>their the Hilton sisters...
>
>
>--
>
>------------+
>Mark J. Boyd
>

[John Sinclair]

At 21:42 23 September 2004, Don Johnstone wrote:
>Who are Martha Stewart and Dan Rather?

Martha Stewart doesn't know the truth, Dan Rather doesn't
care.
JJ

[Steve Bralla]

John Sinclair > writes:

>
>At 21:42 23 September 2004, Don Johnstone wrote:
>>Who are Martha Stewart and Dan Rather?
>
>Martha Stewart doesn't know the truth, Dan Rather doesn't
>care.
> JJ
>
Why no chant of "Four More Years!" for Dan Rather? I thought that's what you
got when you "mislead" the American public.

Steve

[John Sinclair]

Martha's not going to jail for insider trading, she's
going to the slammer for lying to a federal judge about
it. Dan is involved with forged goverment documents.
He's arrogant enough to lie to a judge about it and
that could lead to a cell beside Martha.

>If we are going to jail people for using poorly authenticated
>
>information, we could start at the top of the food
>chain, couldn't we?
>
>
>--
>Change 'netto' to 'net' to email me directly
>
>Eric Greenwell
>Washington State
>USA
>
>

[RHWOODY]

it happened with Bill "Draft Dodger"
Clinton

[John Sinclair]

Now, isn't this more fun than talking about Hotelliers
and iPACs?
JJ


>it happened with Bill 'Draft Dodger'
>Clinton
>

[Gary Boggs]

I went here thinking I'd learn something about Hotellier connections.

That's what I get for thinking.

Boggs

"John Sinclair" > wrote in message
...
> Now, isn't this more fun than talking about Hotelliers
> and iPACs?
> JJ
>
>
> >it happened with Bill 'Draft Dodger'
> >Clinton
> >
>
>
>

[Jim Vincent]

>Now, isn't this more fun than talking about Hotelliers
>and iPACs?
> JJ

Actually, they tie together perfectly. George W failed his PCC and has been
out of control ever since!

Jim Vincent
N483SZ

[Eric Greenwell]

Gary Boggs wrote:
> I went here thinking I'd learn something about Hotellier connections.
>
> That's what I get for thinking.
>

Maybe you didn't notice the "OT" I added to the subject line for "off
topic". That way you can set your news reader filters to exclude
postings that are off topic.

--
Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

Eric Greenwell
Washington State
USA

[Robert Ehrlich]

Mark James Boyd wrote:
> ...
> I think the (over)emphasis on a PCC is bunk. The connection
> inspection is the key. ...
> ...

I agree. PCC is not a part of the mandatory checks here in France,
and as far as I know we don't have more accidents due to disconnected
controls than in other parts of the world. Maybe the frequent availability
of hangar space making disassembly/reassembly rare is also a factor.