I am a little confused. (or perhaps more than a little)

 

I did not find any installation instructions in the service or bulletins manual 
for installing the stainless panel.

 

The newer parts manual references 3 skins: one from frame A to frame C 
(alumininum, early models, I assume)

one from frame A to frame B (stainless, retrofit?) and one from frame A to 
frame C ( stainless, later models)

 

When installing the stainless on a 415C, do you only put the stainless from 
frame A to frame B, and does it overlay the existing aluminum or replace it?

 

(Frame A is the firewall, frame C is the forward window channel and frame B is 
the one in between, basically front of windshield)

 

Erco drawing 415-31245 should explain this but I can't find a copy.

 

Thanks,

Bill 
 


To: [email protected]
From: [email protected]
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2009 23:46:55 -0500
Subject: Re: [ercoupe-tech] stainless steel skin




All,

I strongly advocate in favor of retrofitting the stainless panel on each and 
every 415-C.

The originally approved ERCO Model 415 production prototype had a full and 
proper 
firewall as did the ERCO Model 310 experimental.

It used to be that people didn't buy flood insurance because it was expensive, 
and then 
wound up having to completely replace or rebuild their homes after floods.  
Think about 
how those people must have felt watching the news, knowing they did not have 
insurance, 
watching the rain come down, a wet forecast, and reports of rising flood levels 
and 
predictions that would put their home under water.  At that time they would 
have willingly 
paid ANY price to get coverage they had previously rejected purchasing.

Airplane engine fires happen relatively rarely in peacetime...during the Battle 
of Britain, 
the thought that most terrified "the few" was the possibility of going down as 
a "flamer".  
The reason a "firewall" is required is to increase one's chances of getting out 
of a plane 
before an engine fire gets to the pilot.  Being literally broiled to death in 
the air is not a 
swift and painless way to go.  Quite the opposite, starting with terrible skin 
damage.

With our fuselage tank in the cockpit with pilot and passenger, anything that 
increases the 
time it takes a fire to start boiling that fuel out of the vent is worth more 
than gold.  It doesn't 
matter if the stainless "buys" you two minutes or twenty seconds IF YOU 
SURVIVE.  If you 
don't, your heirs likely won't begrudge the $100 for the stainless.

IMHO, this is a perfect example of "penny wise and pound foolish" thinking.  I 
think as 
"insurance" the stainless panel is one of the all time great "pay once" values. 
 

Regards,

William R. Bayne
.____|-(o)-|____.
(Copyright 2009)

-- 

On Jul 30, 2009, at 15:46, Roy Stubbs wrote:


   

Steel panel is in excess of $100 – I have one – never installed it.
 
Roy
 

From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On 
Behalf Of Caliendo Dan
Sent: Thursday, July 30, 2009 3:50 PM
To: John Cooper
Cc: Techlist Ercoupe
Subject: Re: [ercoupe-tech] stainless steel skin
Importance: Low
 
 

I agree. If the fire is on the ground I suggest getting out of the plane ASAP.
If the fire is in the air I wonder how much good the steel panel is going to do 
you.
I hear the steel panel is expensive.... wonder what an engine fire extinguisher 
would cost? 
Dan C
 
 
On Jul 30, 2009, at 10:27 AM, John Cooper wrote:


 

Linda:

I think it is worth considering, but I wouldn't loose a whole lot of sleep
over it. The only time it would be an issue is in the event of a fire in the
engine compartment that cannot be controlled, by shutting the fuel off (two
places!) So, first I'd ensure the fuel shutoffs work as expected.

John Cooper
Skyport Services
www.skyportservices.net
_________________________________________________________________
Windows Live™ Hotmail®: Celebrate the moment with your favorite sports pics. 
Check it out.
http://www.windowslive.com/Online/Hotmail/Campaign/QuickAdd?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_QA_HM_sports_photos_072009&cat=sports

Reply via email to