Matronics Email Lists :: View topic

Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists

Get Email Distribution Too! FAQ Search Memberlist Usergroups Register

Profile Log in to check your private messages Log in

Jos Okhuisen

Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> Europa-List

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author Message

davidjoyce(at)doctors.org
Guest

Posted: Fri Aug 29, 2008 9:35 am Post subject: Jos Okhuisen

Just back from Wels in Austria where Bruce Morris, Mark Burton and I spent a 

fair bit of time with Jos following his recent accident. He is in reasonable 

spirits and making good progress medically. He looks like a boxer who picked 

the wrong opponent, but is marvellously cheerful and positive to talk to, 

and there seems real hope that his eye will recover. His burnt areas that 

have been grafted with artificial skin are healing well.

           We saw the wreckage of the plane and it appeared that the 

propeller was in zero pitch or possibly negative. This fits with Jos's 

description of events, that he climbed normally to 800ft, changed to cruise 

mode, realised he had that set at too low rpm and decreased pitch to bring 

rpm up to 5000 but then the engine speed rose above 6000 and he lost thrust, 

and all attempts to change pitch then made no difference. The land ahead 

area was heavily built up and he did a great job to get down more or less in 

one piece. He initially aimed for a road but saw a power cable at the last 

moment and swerved to land in a tree. The plane then fell out of the tree 

and in short time caught fire, but he had not lost consciousness (he says it 

is because Laplanders have thick heads!), and was able to get out pretty 

quickly, suffering burns to just his lower legs, and trauma around his right 

eye (?due to a branch)

          His address for those who want to send best wishes is:

                Klinicum Wels, Traumatology, 1st Floor

                Grieskirchener Strasse 42

                4600 Wels,  Austria

Regards, David Joyce, G-XSDJ

cjh.richardson(at)virgin.
Guest

Posted: Sun Aug 31, 2008 5:38 am Post subject: Jos Okhuisen

David,

Do you know what type of propellor Jos had fitted to his aircraft? It might 

help those with the same propellor to be prepared for a similar situation.

Regards

John.

---

josok-e(at)ukolo.fi
Guest

Posted: Sun Aug 31, 2008 9:20 am Post subject: Jos Okhuisen

Hi John, Just a short reply. Tomorrow the internet here should be repaired then more. It was a Woodcomp RS 3000 with reverse. Regards Jos Okhuijsen

Visit -  www.EuropaOwners.org

frans(at)paardnatuurlijk.
Guest

Posted: Wed Sep 03, 2008 12:53 am Post subject: Jos Okhuisen

Did I miss something, or is there indeed a silence about this subject?



I'm about to install a Woodcomp propellor, but I'm holding this off

until I have some more insight about the reliability of this system.



Also, nobody mentioned it yet, but I'm very interested in the cause of

the post landing fire. It is a horrible prospect that this can happen,

and I want to take all precautions to minimise this risk.



One thing I wonder is how the drain valves affect this risk. They

protude from under the skin, and once you glide through a tree or over a

rough surface, they will probably break off, and the fuel is free to

leak away, possibly inside the cabin if the assembly comes loose, or

otherwise under the airplane, which is not desirable as well.



Also, not having a switch on the main fuel pump (914) and route it not

via the main switch, as the manual recommends, introduces the risk that

the fuel pump pumps the entire tank contents inside the cabin after a

crash. Of course, having a switch on it introduces another risk: an

inadvertently switch off... How do others think about this subject?



BTW, it is no longer possible for me to answer on the Europa list via

the online forum. The mandatory spell-check malfunctions (it mutters

something about a debug mode?). Is there a way to bypass this spell

check or can someone switch it off?



Frans

josok-e(at)ukolo.fi
Guest

Posted: Wed Sep 03, 2008 4:39 am Post subject: Jos Okhuisen

Hi Frans and all,

The silence is the normal waiting for the investigation to come to a conclusion. Today i had a long hearing about the course of events. While i have my theory about what happened, i will wait until the final findings are published before commenting. Nethertheless, lets put it this way, my choice will never again be for a propellor without mechanical endstops, in addition to the electrical limit switches. As a minimum i would add run to the outer limits and check outside if the switches are really working and at the right limits. As i found out the hard way, in the air it might be too late.

As for the fire risk: Difficult to do better then i did. Possibly, if i would have had one second more time before hitting the trees, i would have followed the emergengy drill better and switched off power before the crash. That maybe would have delayed the fire. Now a thick branch wiped the right side of the cockpit off, breaking the fuel return alu tube. The long range tank (full)survived the blaze i was told. Even with the wheel retracted, the fuel test points stay clear. Hmm, best way to prevent fire is not to crash, but i guess you know that. 



Regards,



Jos

Visit -  www.EuropaOwners.org

wdaniell(at)etb.net.co
Guest

Posted: Wed Sep 03, 2008 5:01 am Post subject: Jos Okhuisen

Jos



I am glad to see you on line again.



It is always easy to be wise after the event but each event by its very

nature is something new.  We have all learned an important lesson from your

mishap.



Two things strike me:

1.  you were remarkably lucky to escape without worse from landing in a tree

2.  the fact that it was not worse suggests that the Europa is as safe as it

gets.



Will



--

josok-e(at)ukolo.fi
Guest

Posted: Wed Sep 03, 2008 6:43 am Post subject: Jos Okhuisen

Hi Will and all,



Before i forget again the most important thing i would like to say: Thank you all for all the snail- email- sms's and phone calls. I knew this is a great community, still all those people living these events with me is more then i did expect. You probably will never know how very important your communications were for me at the worst moments. 



Yes, in my humble, crah tested opinion, the Europa is a safe plane, not only to fly but also to crash. Still, on more then one account, the accident was not survivable. I was extremely lucky, and the fact that being born Dutch makes me a cheese-head might have helped to maintain consiousness and get out before the fire really started bazing.



Regards,



Jos Okhuijsrn

Visit -  www.EuropaOwners.org

frans(at)paardnatuurlijk.
Guest

Posted: Wed Sep 03, 2008 7:46 am Post subject: Jos Okhuisen

josok wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		   I was extremely lucky, and the fact

 that being born Dutch makes me a cheese-head might have helped to

 maintain consiousness and get out before the fire really started

 bazing.


	


Well, that you consider being born Dutch made you survive the accident

is really encouraging for me. 



Frans

frans(at)paardnatuurlijk.
Guest

Posted: Wed Sep 03, 2008 7:46 am Post subject: Jos Okhuisen

Hi Jos and all,



 	  Quote: 	
		   Hi Frans and all, The silence is the normal waiting for the

 investigation to come to a conclusion.


	


Ok, I understand that. It is just that a few days ago you wrote that you

were going to post more detailed information the next day, but I never

saw it, so I wondered what happened. Glad that you are still ok.



 	  Quote: 	
		   Now a thick branch wiped the right side of the cockpit off, breaking

 the fuel return alu tube.


	


Ok, two toughts about that:



1) The fuel return line is obviously a risk, as it can not be closed

with the fuel valve, and once broken it allows the tank to drain

completely. I just realised that this risk can be minimised by putting a

check-valve (one way valve)  in the return line. So fuel can go TO the

tank, but never FROM the tank. Has anyone ever considered this? I think

I'm going to put this into my fuel system, unless someone can tell me

why it is not a good idea to do so.



2) I have seen that many builders do away with the rubber hoses and use

aluminium. Maybe the risk is higher with aluminium, since these tubes

breaks easily, whereas rubber hoses just give way to impacts.



Frans

ptag.dev(at)tiscali.co.uk
Guest

Posted: Wed Sep 03, 2008 10:28 am Post subject: Jos Okhuisen

Hi! Frans/all

As a novice I agree with your suggestion on the "check valve" in the

return line and your impact theory for rubber pipes but the latter item

would be marginal either way IMHO. The main thing is to apply the

maximum delay of fuel spreading to the likely fire source at the front

or under you and an element of chance would apply to either type of

pipe. This is what has prompted me/many to replace the glass filters

under the seat for Andair in the fuselage away from the pilot and /or

have a different sight gauge to one encircling the pilot.

All such things have to be weight considered otherwise an automatic

extinguisher system with heavy tankage to supply but I'm sure you don't

need me to remark on that.

Regards

Bob Harrison G-PTAG



--

grahamsingleton(at)btinte
Guest

Posted: Wed Sep 03, 2008 3:04 pm Post subject: Jos Okhuisen

Frans & all

I agree a check valve might be good. I also think in a serious crash 

either rubber or aluminum will fail.



The most likely cause of fire is electrical, as Jos tells us, first 

action is to shut off the electrics.



In my crash I think the tank split. Battery was at the front and shot 

off forwards straight away so "automatic switch off" probably occurred 

as it were.



The problem is, when the workload gets too high one forgets the plan, ie 

"we lose the plot!" I always tell mono drivers to pull stick full back 

as soon as they feel the tailwheel touch. I never did remember to do it 

myself, my brain was busy doing something else. Age? maybe but the more 

you train yourself in these vital actions the more likely you will do it 

when muck hits fan

Graham



Robert C Harrison wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		   



 Hi! Frans/all

 As a novice I agree with your suggestion on the "check valve" in the

 return line 

 Regards

 Bob Harrison G-PTAG

ami(at)mcfadyean.freeserv
Guest

Posted: Thu Sep 04, 2008 2:34 pm Post subject: Jos Okhuisen

A number of subjects there.

Firstly the non-return valve. Actually, the PFA questioned why I had NOT got 

one fitted in the case of the fuel injection system that I had fitted 

previously (which circulated fuel back to the tank at a similar rate to the 

914 system).

As a poor-man's alternative, I now have the 912 return-line restrictor 

located just behind the firewall (because there is a joint in the return 

line there and because it creates more unrestricted vapour headspace in the 

top of the return line); so, if the return line is severed at a point 

forward of the firewall, the restrictor provides at least some restriction 

to backflow from the tank; LAA know about this and approved the 

installation.



About fire suppression systems: a suggestion to the PFA some years ago to 

include a port in the instrument panel and connected to a pipe leading to 

the undercowl space (with suitable check valve) in to which a handheld fire 

extinguisher could be discharged, met with a positive response. Albeit for 

some reason unknown to me, such fire systems have been outlawed on rally 

cars.



Regarding the RV that flipped on to its back at Fishburn recently, the pilot 

commented that he would have preferred to have had a small 2lb axe to have 

been able to get out. It was the rescuers that enabled exit through the 

broken canopy. He considered that the small "lifesaver" hammers were a 

complete waste of time.



Duncan McF.

---

nwcmc(at)tiscali.co.uk
Guest

Posted: Sun Sep 07, 2008 10:38 pm Post subject: Jos Okhuisen

 	  Quote: 	
		  As a poor-man's alternative, I now have the 912 return-line 

restrictor 
	


 	  Quote: 	
		  located just behind the firewall (because there is a joint in the 

return 
	


 	  Quote: 	
		  line there and because it creates more unrestricted vapour headspace 

in the 
	


 	  Quote: 	
		  top of the return line); so, if the return line is severed at a 

point 
	


 	  Quote: 	
		  forward of the firewall, the restrictor provides at least some 

restriction 
	


 	  Quote: 	
		  to backflow from the tank; LAA know about this and approved the 

installation.


	


As the flow back to the tank is slow one idea might be to place a 

second inline restrictor by the tank (slightly larger orifice if 

considered necessary). Any fracture in the line between the firewall 

and the tank would result in a very limited flow rate of fuel. 

Nigel Charles





How safe is your email? - http://www.tiscali.co.uk/products/securemail

__________________________________________________________

josok-e(at)ukolo.fi
Guest

Posted: Mon Sep 08, 2008 1:32 am Post subject: Jos Okhuisen

Hi Nigel,



This installation was a 914, and there is NO restrictor in the return line. One pump was producing 120 l/hr Through that return pipe. It was part of the pre-flight check to check for that number to makes sure pumps and gascolator were healthy.



Regards,



Jos Okhuijsen

Visit -  www.EuropaOwners.org

Display posts from previous:

	Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> Europa-List	All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Page 1 of 1

Jump to:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum