BD5B

[Answering two postings in one message]

On Fri, 14 Nov 2003 09:59:19 -0600, Big John wrote:

Ron

Tnx for the stats. Validated my gut feeling from seeing scattered
reports through the years.

I did a quick scan of the BD-5 accident reports. Due to my recent analysis
work, I'm a bit attuned...it seemed to me that the BD-5 had a higher
percentage of "Builder Error" accidents than I was used to seeing, and
lower pilot error. This may be a function of people buying kits on the
cheap and trying to finish them; it might be a function of the aircraft not
having a "standard" power package. I may take an in-depth slice at the
BD-5s and compare them to the Fly Baby, whose accident reports I already
have.

Still, though, the actual number of cases make a pretty small statistical
sample.

Of benefit to those thinking about building , if you massaged your
figures to show which birds had the best safety rate, might help some
rethink their possible choice of home built? Of course your gross
figures would include stupidly on pilots part but total percentage
number would still be a good indicator.

Had that experience at EAA last night. I presented a list of the airplanes
that had the highest rate (I used a criteria of having a minimum of 5
accidents in that year), and one of the guys had been interested in that
design. But when we looked at the individual reports, nothing really stood
out. Mostly pilot error, one pilot incapacitation (!). Nothing in common,
in any of the accidents, that one could point at as indicating there was
something wrong with the design. And it was an amphibian, which gave more
opportunity for problems (e.g., hitting a sunken log...).

In another example, there were two similar aircraft produced by opposing
companies. Similar fleet sizes on the registration database, but one type
had five accidents and the other had nine (in a single year). Almost
identical designs, the same engine(s).

So I'm not sure how useful the by-aircraft rates are. Fun to look at,
though.

On Fri, 14 Nov 2003 16:23:27 -0600, - Barnyard BOb wrote:

] Any body ever see a BD5 flying cross country?
] Anybody ever see a BD5 fly?

Actually, other than at fly-ins, I actually see very few of ANY homebuilts
other than the ones based at my home field. I don't think I've ever been
at an airport when a Lancair dropped in, nor a Wheeler, nor a Venture, nor
a Rotorway Exec, nor a Rans, nor a Pietenpol, or dozens of other common
homebuilts. Maybe I just don't get out much. :-)

But when you think about it, about one in ten small aircraft you see should
be a homebuilt. Doesn't seem that way. Probably because of all those 152s
and 172s with students flying 'round and 'round.

Ron Wanttaja

In article ,
(Corky Scott) writes:


Man those BD5's just don't seem like a good idea. Tiny, high stall
speed, tight engine compartment, and the pilot sits right on the
bottom of the fuselage.

The airplane has been discussed in this group previously and my
recollection is that it has a very high fatal accident rate. It's
first flight accident rate is also very high. Perhaps Ron Wanttaja
can step in with his always meticulous statistical analysis.

Corky Scott



AHHHH Sheet! Now you have gone and opened that stinking can of worms again.
This will bring jaun back big time once again defending that piece of crap
plane and it's crooked designer. Why not just let it die?

Bob Reed
www.kisbuild.r-a-reed-assoc.com (KIS Builders Site)
KIS Cruiser in progress...Slow but steady progress....

"Ladies and Gentlemen, take my advice,
pull down your pants and Slide on the Ice!"
(M.A.S.H. Sidney Freedman)

RobertR237 wrote:

Why not just let it die?


why don't you do the world a favour and take your own advice.

In article , Curious Question
writes:


RobertR237 wrote:

Why not just let it die?


why don't you do the world a favour and take your own advice.



I had DUMB ****! I wasn't the one who brought it up. Now try doing the same!

Bob Reed
www.kisbuild.r-a-reed-assoc.com (KIS Builders Site)
KIS Cruiser in progress...Slow but steady progress....

"Ladies and Gentlemen, take my advice,
pull down your pants and Slide on the Ice!"
(M.A.S.H. Sidney Freedman)

Bob

I got put in my place so that's it for me. Juan may have me 'plonked'
????????? so no reply to my postings G.

Big John


On 14 Nov 2003 16:41:52 GMT, osite (RobertR237)
wrote:

In article ,
(Corky Scott) writes:


Man those BD5's just don't seem like a good idea. Tiny, high stall
speed, tight engine compartment, and the pilot sits right on the
bottom of the fuselage.

The airplane has been discussed in this group previously and my
recollection is that it has a very high fatal accident rate. It's
first flight accident rate is also very high. Perhaps Ron Wanttaja
can step in with his always meticulous statistical analysis.

Corky Scott



AHHHH Sheet! Now you have gone and opened that stinking can of worms again.
This will bring jaun back big time once again defending that piece of crap
plane and it's crooked designer. Why not just let it die?

Bob Reed
www.kisbuild.r-a-reed-assoc.com (KIS Builders Site)
KIS Cruiser in progress...Slow but steady progress....

"Ladies and Gentlemen, take my advice,
pull down your pants and Slide on the Ice!"
(M.A.S.H. Sidney Freedman)

In article , Big John
writes:


Bob

I got put in my place so that's it for me. Juan may have me 'plonked'
????????? so no reply to my postings G.

Big John



Hell John, I really don't give a hoot one way or the other. I got burned once,
learned a valuable lesson and moved on. The only reason I ever get involved in
the BD5 discussion it to remind people to look at the records before getting
involved with anything regarding the BD5 or BEDE.


Bob Reed
www.kisbuild.r-a-reed-assoc.com (KIS Builders Site)
KIS Cruiser in progress...Slow but steady progress....

"Ladies and Gentlemen, take my advice,
pull down your pants and Slide on the Ice!"
(M.A.S.H. Sidney Freedman)

On 14 Nov 2003 12:57 PM, Big John posted the following:
Bob

I got put in my place so that's it for me. Juan may have me 'plonked'
????????? so no reply to my postings G.

Juan wouldn't use a killfile, since it would deny him the opportunity to
have the last word.

----------------------------------------------------
Del Rawlins-
Remove _kills_spammers_ to reply via email.
Unofficial Bearhawk FAQ website:
http://www.rawlinsbrothers.org/bhfaq/

Corky

A bit of BD5 trivia.

When Jim first built the bird and during the test phase (which
continued after he had started selling kits) they experienced a number
of engine failures with the German/Austrian (forget the name) engine.

Basic problem, as I remember, was that when throttle was put in idle
for long period in landing pattern, there was not enough oil going
through the engine to keep it from freezing up. As bird made pattern
the prop would keep engine RPM up and with only the oil from idle
throttle bad happened. In a snowmobile application (which engine came
out of) this never happened because engine was not spun up like it was
with the prop..

Was going back to Iowa to visit family and stopped by and spoke with
Jim about this. Suggested that he use an engine that had oil injection
vs the mixed fuel/oil normally used in a two cycle. Would have solved
his problem.

The only problem was that he had a contract (with a low price) with
the engine manufacturer that he couldn't get out of and they didn't
want to or couldn't make (without making major redesign $$$$$) changes
to the engine (or something like that) so history came to pass.

If the original engine had worked and Jim had delivered with all the
kits sold, would have been a lot more built (and possibly deaths as
you say, hot bird, high stall speed, even with the 'B' wing, etc.)

Thought seriously about building one (ex Fighter Pilot) but then all
the problems came up and decided against (I'm dumb but not stupid and
know when to cut my losses).


Big John


On Fri, 14 Nov 2003 13:57:03 GMT,
(Corky Scott) wrote:

On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 23:23:22 -0600, Big John
wrote:



No one has posted a follow up with the name of the BD5 pilot, and
details of the accident (1000 ft short on final). You don't see many
BD5 accidents but there are not a lot flying so statically the
accident rate is probably pretty high vs other homebuilts with a lot
completed and flying?

Man those BD5's just don't seem like a good idea. Tiny, high stall
speed, tight engine compartment, and the pilot sits right on the
bottom of the fuselage.

The airplane has been discussed in this group previously and my
recollection is that it has a very high fatal accident rate. It's
first flight accident rate is also very high. Perhaps Ron Wanttaja
can step in with his always meticulous statistical analysis.

Corky Scott