Climate Change skeptics? [ot]

Search
Go

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
Messages 17001 - 17020 of total 28428 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
The Chief

climber
From the Land of the Mongols
Dec 12, 2013 - 10:32pm PT
e.g. Mean Flight Hours Between Failures (MFHBF) for the engine on the Huey is something like 100 hours (though for the AH-1W its more like 40 hours)... so your throwing your dice every hour you're out there...

Pulling shet outta yur ass ED.


The 100 hrs you speak of is considered cycle scheduled maintenance for the entire a/c. Not just the engines. Each interval requires different maint/inspections to be completed. Nothing to do with any "failure rate".

Every PW T-400 (in the USN, USMC and USAF inventories) must be removed from the airframe and sent to an Intermediate Maint Facility for a complete overhaul at 500 hr intervals.


UH-1N's and Cobra's all have two engines to reduce the complete failure rate of the prior H and earlier models.

In my 2900 hrs of flying, I experienced six single engine failures with one event requiring an immediate landing due to a PC1 and PC2 complete failure. This was due to a failure of a metal o-ring in FCU and PC1 pump.
The Chief

climber
From the Land of the Mongols
Dec 12, 2013 - 10:42pm PT
the engine has the smallest time between failures... so it sets the schedule.

what does set the maintenance schedule?

ED, your clueless.

USN and USMC Aviation Maint Standards set the req'd insp/maint schedules at 10, 40, 100 and 500 A/C Flight Hours.

Has nothing to do with any "engine" failure. We do post flight inspections (Turn Around or a Daily) after completion of every flight. This is a very thorough 1 hour complete visual inspection done by the crew chief. Also, the HAC writes up any "gripes" experienced during the particular hop/sortie.


I have 2968 Crew and 236 Stick.
The Chief

climber
From the Land of the Mongols
Dec 12, 2013 - 10:46pm PT
The Schedules are Set by the MANU & NAVAIR for every particular platforms systems prior to that a/c hitting the fleet... EDH
The Chief

climber
From the Land of the Mongols
Dec 12, 2013 - 10:51pm PT
The hours I posted have been the standard periodic scheduled maint time frames since the early 60's and are still in force today by all NAVAIR platforms.

The same system is utilized for surface platforms as well.


NAVSEA's 3M Program.


All this MAINT is required in order to assure 100% efficiency of all operating combat systems. If any particular piece of eq is not deemed 100% up and up, is downed and not flyable unless permission is given by NAVAIR in DC to do so.

For every one hour of flight time on any UH-1N, there's a good 10 hrs of maint.


Last I heard, for every 1 hr of flt time for a Super Hornet, there's well over 40-50 maint hours performed.


PS: Unlike Climate Science, NAVAIR Maint Systems do not pull shet outta their asses.
rick sumner

Trad climber
reno, nevada/ wasilla alaska
Dec 12, 2013 - 11:00pm PT
Excuse me for interrupting your argument gentleman, but i just tuned into Judith Curry- Climate Etc. and lo and behold they are discussing a new paper about the value of uncertainty. If interested check out the link below.

http://judithcurry.com/2013/12/12/taylor-and-ravetz-on-the-value-of-uncertainty/#-14023
Dingus Milktoast

Gym climber
U.N. Ambassador, Crackistan
Dec 12, 2013 - 11:04pm PT
RTFM Eee Dee Aitch!

God wrote that manual.

Sheesh.

Pathetic earthlings!

DMT
The Chief

climber
From the Land of the Mongols
Dec 12, 2013 - 11:07pm PT
the manufacturer of the aircraft has to establish the schedule, based on the performance of the aircraft (as part of their contract).

That is a big ass negative. The manu recommends a set schedule in conjunction with pre-delivery testing and then NAVAIR incorporates a more thorough, intense and in-depth inspection cycle after receipt.

Civilian UH-1N's (212's or 214's) have a completely more lax schedule maint requirement than any DOD a/c. They don't do 1/10th the inspections/maint the DOD does. Fact.
Dingus Milktoast

Gym climber
U.N. Ambassador, Crackistan
Dec 12, 2013 - 11:09pm PT
Oh my! a tenth, that's like what, 106% eh?

DMT
The Chief

climber
From the Land of the Mongols
Dec 12, 2013 - 11:12pm PT
Yeah dingus.

Now be good boy and sing another song for the tribe then light their camp fire for em.



so you're saying that they somehow set the schedule by predicting when the aircraft is going to fail, without the aircraft failing?

No ED. Failure is not in the cards. NAVIAR has est it's maint schedules via it's ongoing testing of different aviation platforms and all their systems at NAVAIR PAX River MD (as well as reporting systems from the fleet), and established a periodic maint schedule that is designed to prevent any failure from occurring long before prior testing indicated it would. In most cases, a good 500-1000 hours prior to particular piece of equipment's est failure avg failure rate.

I remember changing a particular set of nuts & bolts on the Mast and the TR drive shaft every 40 hours. They were perfectly good. But, per the maint req, they were R&R'd.
TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Dec 12, 2013 - 11:31pm PT
and a maintenance schedule that strives to reduce the likelihood of failure.

No, eliminate the possibility of a failure.
The Chief

climber
From the Land of the Mongols
Dec 12, 2013 - 11:34pm PT
The material failure rate is less than .10% of an avg A/C's life span, EDH

99.90% of the failures (that I experienced) are due to human mistakes and not the material itself.


I had a total of six engine/systems shut downs in flt over 2968 total hours of flt time. All six were deemed human error by manufacture installation maint personal. Not USN personal.

Now you do the math.


Bottom line, regardless the type failure incurred, they were no where near your bullshet 95% certainty.

so you're saying that they were inefficient, replacing parts (at a cost) when they didn't have to?

These particular systems were deemed critical components. Thus the shorter time frame req'd to R&R in order to prevent any potential failure at it's weakest link. i.e. them nuts and bolts.
Malemute

Ice climber
the ghost
Dec 12, 2013 - 11:37pm PT
so you're saying that they somehow set the schedule by predicting when the aircraft is going to fail, without the aircraft failing?
They must throw dice to decide when; cause that's easier than doing any math.
Bruce Kay

Gym climber
BC
Dec 12, 2013 - 11:40pm PT
I remember changing a particular set of nuts & bolts on the Mast and the TR drive shaft every 40 hours.

I thought you were only certified for bilge pump engineering? Are you guys really that third world letting guys like you near a mast head?
The Chief

climber
From the Land of the Mongols
Dec 12, 2013 - 11:41pm PT
Brewsky
I thought...

We finally see your honest excuse for being part of the AGW herd. Besides, you have absolutely no clue as to what "mast" I speak of.
Bruce Kay

Gym climber
BC
Dec 12, 2013 - 11:45pm PT
I bet you waited until they weren't looking..... then you snuck back and played with the bolts. No way in hell they'd let you near the thing
The Chief

climber
From the Land of the Mongols
Dec 12, 2013 - 11:48pm PT
Nope. Not at all Brewsky.

But sure appears you are well versed at that sly of hand trick to cheat your employer.


Nice....

But then you are indeed a master at the bullshet as well.


Do you actually have a life Brewsky?


Or are you in the same shoes as Wilbeerere and just get stoned all day long and pretend to be someone of any value on the Taco.
The Chief

climber
From the Land of the Mongols
Dec 12, 2013 - 11:53pm PT
You, and TGT I gather, actually believe somehow that you can eliminate the possibility of failure. Even at 0.001 chance of failure, per aircraft there are 875 in service (in the Army) you have one failure per what ever period your probability applies to... per flight?

The Army does not utilize a Twin Engine Package in there AH, HH or UH models ED. They never did.

Thus, apples and oranges in the case with the USN and USMC.

Can't even use the Army's platform to compare it with the USN/USMC's failure rate.

Nice try.....



BTW: ALL USN AND USMC A/C require a redundant platform for over water operations. They have done so since 1966.
The Chief

climber
From the Land of the Mongols
Dec 12, 2013 - 11:56pm PT
No I didn't ED.

Completely different piece of equipment and the Army has a completely different Maint/Inspection Schedule Protocol as does the USAF to those of the NAVAIR (USN/USMC).

Because of over water operations, NAVAIR is far more in depth and stringent. Anyone that knows anything about Naval Aviation knows that.

Again, nice try EDH.
Bruce Kay

Gym climber
BC
Dec 12, 2013 - 11:58pm PT
But sure appears you are well versed at that sly of hand trick to cheat your employer.

Regardless of how, i can spot a bullshitter when i see one. Maybe in Russia they let uncertified helicopter groupies play with the machinery but not america surely. You sign off on the log too?
The Chief

climber
From the Land of the Mongols
Dec 13, 2013 - 12:01am PT
Nope... can't miss a point if the one being made is made up.

Even at 0.001 chance of failure, per aircraft there are 875 in service (in the Army)

Again, the Army's Aviation eq, stats and operational/maint protocols are a whole different game. A whole different enchilada. Of which I can not speak of cus I never operated directly with em.


So Brewsky, what the fk is the "mast" I spoke of?
Messages 17001 - 17020 of total 28428 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
 
Our Guidebooks
Check 'em out!
SuperTopo Guidebooks


Try a free sample topo!

 
SuperTopo on the Web

Review Categories
Recent Route Beta
Recent Gear Reviews