AirTalk.org Aviation discussions newsgroups   Archives   FAQ   Search   Memberlist   Usergroups   Register   Profile   Log in to check your private messages   Log in  Adrenalin rush Goto page 1, 2  Next          AirTalk.org Forum Index -> Instrument Flight Rules View previous topic :: View next topic   Author Message Wizard of Draws Guest Posted: Sun Sep 18, 2005 2:16 am    Post subject: Adrenalin rush September 17, 2004 1:00 1.3 hrs. (.2 actual) It was an overcast morning that cleared somewhat to scattered clouds around 5 and 6 thousand. Steve M. and I had plans to get a little actual on the way to Thompson-Mcduffie (KHQU), and possibly log an approach or two. After I filed and pre-flighted, we hopped in and contacted Atlanta Approach to open our flight plan while we sat on the ground. As we sat there, Steve discovered that we had power to our #2 radio, but no display. Not a flight ending squawk, but annoying. After getting our clearance direct HQU at 3000, expect 5000 after 10 minutes, void if not off in 10, we went wheels up from 22 and departed the pattern from midfield on course 120. As soon as we reached 3000 they cleared us to 5000, where we began to run into the clouds. After I leveled off and setup for cruise, we had a few minutes to enjoy looking at the inside of the clouds. When we reached the middle of Lake Lanier, the clouds gave way and we had a pretty hazy view in front of us. Then we smelled it. A sharp electrical smell that told us something was burning and not quite right. Steve quickly turned off the misbehaving #2 radio. The smell got stronger, but there was no visible smoke. A moment later, when the realization hit home that we might have a serious problem, I keyed the mike to tell Atlanta Center that we smelled smoke, may have a developing issue with our #2 radio, and that we wanted to divert to Athens as a precaution. He answered immediately that Gainesville was our nearest airport, and asked if we were declaring an emergency, can we maintain our current altitude. I replied affirmative on the altitude but we didn't have an emergency yet, so we just wanted vectors to Gainesville. "OK, turn left heading 050, and it will be 11 miles at your 12 o'clock." Then he gave us the pertinent airport info and handed us off to Atlanta Center on 134.8, telling us that they were aware of our situation. They instructed us to descend and maintain 3700. Shortly after we arrived there, he cleared us to land on the runway of our choice. By now we were directly over the airport, so we canceled IFR, alerted GVL UNICOM of our situation and dropped into the pattern where another plane on base leg terminated his approach to get out of our way. A pretty gusty crosswind made for a roller coaster style approach, but we made it down without bending any metal. After we parked, we tried to pull the #2 radio to confirm our suspicions that it was the source of our problem, but we didn't have an Allen wrench and the shops on the field were all closed. So we called Randall and he sent Steve's son Ryan in a 172 with a set that turned out to be too short to be any good. So we climbed in anyway and didn't turn on the #2 on the way home while Ryan flew back in loose formation with us. When Steve pulled out the radio after we landed at 47A, it was very apparent from the strong smell coming out of the box that something had burnt inside. Thankfully, it didn't develop into anything more serious, whether by luck or turning it off as quickly as we did. -- Jeff 'The Wizard of Draws' Bucchino Cartoons with a Touch of Magic� http://www.wizardofdraws.com More Cartoons with a Touch of Magic� http://www.cartoonclipart.com Back to top Wizard of Draws Guest Posted: Sun Sep 18, 2005 2:22 am    Post subject: Re: Adrenalin rush On 9/17/05 10:16 PM, in article BF524628.32285%jeffbREMOVE (AT) REMOVEwizardofdraws (DOT) com, "Wizard of Draws" <jeffbREMOVE (AT) REMOVEwizardofdraws (DOT) com> wrote: Quote: September 17, 2004 1:00 1.3 hrs. (.2 actual) Oops. --> 2005 -- Jeff 'The Wizard of Draws' Bucchino Cartoons with a Touch of Magic� http://www.wizardofdraws.com More Cartoons with a Touch of Magic� http://www.cartoonclipart.com Back to top tscottme Guest Posted: Sun Sep 18, 2005 1:45 pm    Post subject: Re: Adrenalin rush "Wizard of Draws" <jeffbREMOVE (AT) REMOVEwizardofdraws (DOT) com> wrote Quote: September 17, 2004 1:00 1.3 hrs. (.2 actual) I'm glad everything worked out so well. Nothing I write is suggesting you made any sort of error. But I participated in a research study some years ago that firmly cemented in my mind that one common idea many pilots have is exactly wrong. Have no fear of declaring an emergency. Have zero hesitation to declare an emergency to ATC. You don't get mired in paperwork if your situation is less than a genuine emergency. You don't get a visit from the Feds who will interogate you for any pretext to yank your license. In short, declaring an emergency gives you and ATC more room to get a good outcome. The only likely outcome of declaring an emergency which ends in a happy outcome is that ATC may request you call them after landing so they will know things worked out OK. Your info won't be forwarded to OKC for some official investigation into your competence unless you end up bending or breaking something important. You aren't required to land at an undesirable location just because you declared an emergency. You aren't required to rat on yourself to the Feds or your insurance company. Making the declaration may keep a worried pilot from having to answer about not dotting some I or crossing some T. "If in doubt, shout it out." -- Scott Back to top Tim@Backhome.org Guest Posted: Sun Sep 18, 2005 4:51 pm    Post subject: Re: Adrenalin rush tscottme wrote: Quote: "Wizard of Draws" <jeffbREMOVE (AT) REMOVEwizardofdraws (DOT) com> wrote in message news:BF524628.32285%jeffbREMOVE (AT) REMOVEwizardofdraws (DOT) com... September 17, 2004 1:00 1.3 hrs. (.2 actual) I'm glad everything worked out so well. Nothing I write is suggesting you made any sort of error. But I participated in a research study some years ago that firmly cemented in my mind that one common idea many pilots have is exactly wrong. Have no fear of declaring an emergency. Have zero hesitation to declare an emergency to ATC. You don't get mired in paperwork if your situation is less than a genuine emergency. You don't get a visit from the Feds who will interogate you for any pretext to yank your license. In short, declaring an emergency gives you and ATC more room to get a good outcome. The only likely outcome of declaring an emergency which ends in a happy outcome is that ATC may request you call them after landing so they will know things worked out OK. Your info won't be forwarded to OKC for some official investigation into your competence unless you end up bending or breaking something important. You aren't required to land at an undesirable location just because you declared an emergency. You aren't required to rat on yourself to the Feds or your insurance company. Making the declaration may keep a worried pilot from having to answer about not dotting some I or crossing some T. "If in doubt, shout it out." You should always telephone the facility after on the ground to determine with certainty whether they want a report per 91.123d Back to top Wizard of Draws Guest Posted: Sun Sep 18, 2005 7:56 pm    Post subject: Re: Adrenalin rush On 9/18/05 9:45 AM, in article [email]CoWdne6UlJro8rDeRVn-iQ (AT) comcast (DOT) com[/email], "tscottme" <blahblah (AT) blah (DOT) net> wrote: Quote: "Wizard of Draws" <jeffbREMOVE (AT) REMOVEwizardofdraws (DOT) com> wrote in message news:BF524628.32285%jeffbREMOVE (AT) REMOVEwizardofdraws (DOT) com... September 17, 2004 1:00 1.3 hrs. (.2 actual) I'm glad everything worked out so well. Nothing I write is suggesting you made any sort of error. But I participated in a research study some years ago that firmly cemented in my mind that one common idea many pilots have is exactly wrong. Have no fear of declaring an emergency. Have zero hesitation to declare an emergency to ATC. You don't get mired in paperwork if your situation is less than a genuine emergency. You don't get a visit from the Feds who will interogate you for any pretext to yank your license. In short, declaring an emergency gives you and ATC more room to get a good outcome. The only likely outcome of declaring an emergency which ends in a happy outcome is that ATC may request you call them after landing so they will know things worked out OK. Your info won't be forwarded to OKC for some official investigation into your competence unless you end up bending or breaking something important. You aren't required to land at an undesirable location just because you declared an emergency. You aren't required to rat on yourself to the Feds or your insurance company. Making the declaration may keep a worried pilot from having to answer about not dotting some I or crossing some T. "If in doubt, shout it out." I understand. If the situation had deteriorated at all, say the appearance of smoke, I would have had no qualms about using the E word. But once we turned off the radio, the smell seemed to fade away noticeably, relieving our tension a bit in the process. I have to give credit to the controllers, they were very helpful, quick and reassuring. I noticed my tone of voice went up a notch and theirs never varied a bit. -- Jeff 'The Wizard of Draws' Bucchino Cartoons with a Touch of Magic� http://www.wizardofdraws.com More Cartoons with a Touch of Magic� http://www.cartoonclipart.com Back to top john smith Guest Posted: Sun Sep 18, 2005 10:48 pm    Post subject: Re: Adrenalin rush Quote: Then we smelled it. A sharp electrical smell that told us something was burning and not quite right. Steve quickly turned off the misbehaving #2 radio. The smell got stronger, but there was no visible smoke. A moment later, when the realization hit home that we might have a serious problem, I keyed the mike to tell Atlanta Center that we smelled smoke, may have a developing issue with our #2 radio, [snip] Another case of the electronic device in the circuit path to protect the circuit breaker from overload. Back to top Doug Carter Guest Posted: Sun Sep 18, 2005 11:44 pm    Post subject: Re: Adrenalin rush On 2005-09-18, john smith <jsmith (AT) net (DOT) net> wrote: Quote: Another case of the electronic device in the circuit path to protect the circuit breaker from overload. Circuit breakers are sized to protect the wiring, not the device. Back to top John T Guest Posted: Mon Sep 19, 2005 1:53 am    Post subject: Re: Adrenalin rush Doug Carter wrote: Quote: Another case of the electronic device in the circuit path to protect the circuit breaker from overload. Circuit breakers are sized to protect the wiring, not the device. Read it again with the humor circuit engaged. :) -- John T http://tknowlogy.com/TknoFlyer http://www.pocketgear.com/products_search.asp?developerid=4415 Reduce spam. Use Sender Policy Framework: http://spf.pobox.com ____________________ Back to top Doug Carter Guest Posted: Mon Sep 19, 2005 2:28 am    Post subject: Re: Adrenalin rush On 2005-09-19, John T <jt (AT) his (DOT) isp> wrote: Quote: Doug Carter wrote: Another case of the electronic device in the circuit path to protect the circuit breaker from overload. Circuit breakers are sized to protect the wiring, not the device. Read it again with the humor circuit engaged. Sorry, humor circuit shorted after reading other posts in this newsgroup (not yours :) Back to top Everett M. Greene Guest Posted: Mon Sep 19, 2005 4:20 pm    Post subject: Re: Adrenalin rush john smith <jsmith (AT) net (DOT) net> writes: Quote: Then we smelled it. A sharp electrical smell that told us something was burning and not quite right. Steve quickly turned off the misbehaving #2 radio. The smell got stronger, but there was no visible smoke. A moment later, when the realization hit home that we might have a serious problem, I keyed the mike to tell Atlanta Center that we smelled smoke, may have a developing issue with our #2 radio, [snip] Another case of the electronic device in the circuit path to protect the circuit breaker from overload. How true! :-) Now, if there are any EEs present, perhaps they can explain why aircraft radios tend to fail in this manner whereas nothing much of anything else in the electronic world fails in a manner to produce heat and smoke. Are avionics units designed so close to the components' limits to cause this failure mode? I can understand a transmitter going up in smoke (while transmitting), but a receiver? Back to top papenfussDIESPAM@juneauDO Guest Posted: Mon Sep 19, 2005 5:20 pm    Post subject: Re: Adrenalin rush Everett M. Greene <mojaveg (AT) mojaveg (DOT) iwvisp.com> wrote: : Now, if there are any EEs present, perhaps they can explain : why aircraft radios tend to fail in this manner whereas : nothing much of anything else in the electronic world fails : in a manner to produce heat and smoke. Are avionics units : designed so close to the components' limits to cause this : failure mode? I can understand a transmitter going up in : smoke (while transmitting), but a receiver? I'll take a stab at it... Probably a big reason why avionics fail like that because they're older than most electronics. They're used for a longer period of time so they can suffer individual component failures. "Normal" electronics tend to get toss earlier, so their failures are more likely due to construction flaws. They're also packaged very tightly, and cannot afford much overdesign that would cause additional weight. Also, the environment they operate in is extremely harsh... *huge* temperature/humidity swings, ridiculous vibration exposure, etc. That's why I was singularly unimpressed with the internal build quality of the Michel slide-in replacement radios. They're built with standard DIPs, through-hole components, ribbon cables, and general run-of-the-mill consumer components. Minimal strain relief and anti-chafing assembly. Makes for a less expensive unit, but I'm sure they're more likely to wear/chafe than a well-built unit. -Cory -- ************************************************************************* * Cory Papenfuss * * Electrical Engineering candidate Ph.D. graduate student * * Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University * ************************************************************************* Back to top Dan Luke Guest Posted: Mon Sep 19, 2005 5:28 pm    Post subject: Re: Adrenalin rush "Everett M. Greene" wrote: Quote: Now, if there are any EEs present, perhaps they can explain why aircraft radios tend to fail in this manner whereas nothing much of anything else in the electronic world fails in a manner to produce heat and smoke. Are avionics units designed so close to the components' limits to cause this failure mode? I can understand a transmitter going up in smoke (while transmitting), but a receiver? Receivers still contain amplifiers, power regulating transistors, resistors, diodes, etc. in their circuitry. Failures at the discrete component level can produce thermal events without increases in main power loads above circuit breaker limits. -- Dan C-172RG at BFM Back to top dlevy Guest Posted: Mon Sep 19, 2005 5:40 pm    Post subject: Re: Adrenalin rush I had something very similar happen very recently. On climbout, vfr (squaking 1200), I smelled something burning - a very strong smell. I turned back to the airport and just a quickly as it came the smell went away. No obvious panel problems - no breaker tripped - and the smell stopped. I turned around again and continued on. As I got within radar contact of home base, approach couldn't pick me up. The narco transponder appeared to be working fine. A resister in the transponder burned up. Adding to the adrenalin rush was the fact that there was so much traffic at the class D airport I couldn't even get a chance to let the tower know I had smoke in the cockpit. This was in Houma, LA which is the closest open airport to New Orleans. There were airplanes *everywhere*. "Wizard of Draws" <jeffbREMOVE (AT) REMOVEwizardofdraws (DOT) com> wrote Quote: September 17, 2004 1:00 1.3 hrs. (.2 actual) It was an overcast morning that cleared somewhat to scattered clouds around 5 and 6 thousand. Steve M. and I had plans to get a little actual on the way to Thompson-Mcduffie (KHQU), and possibly log an approach or two. After I filed and pre-flighted, we hopped in and contacted Atlanta Approach to open our flight plan while we sat on the ground. As we sat there, Steve discovered that we had power to our #2 radio, but no display. Not a flight ending squawk, but annoying. After getting our clearance direct HQU at 3000, expect 5000 after 10 minutes, void if not off in 10, we went wheels up from 22 and departed the pattern from midfield on course 120. As soon as we reached 3000 they cleared us to 5000, where we began to run into the clouds. After I leveled off and setup for cruise, we had a few minutes to enjoy looking at the inside of the clouds. When we reached the middle of Lake Lanier, the clouds gave way and we had a pretty hazy view in front of us. Then we smelled it. A sharp electrical smell that told us something was burning and not quite right. Steve quickly turned off the misbehaving #2 radio. The smell got stronger, but there was no visible smoke. A moment later, when the realization hit home that we might have a serious problem, I keyed the mike to tell Atlanta Center that we smelled smoke, may have a developing issue with our #2 radio, and that we wanted to divert to Athens as a precaution. He answered immediately that Gainesville was our nearest airport, and asked if we were declaring an emergency, can we maintain our current altitude. I replied affirmative on the altitude but we didn't have an emergency yet, so we just wanted vectors to Gainesville. "OK, turn left heading 050, and it will be 11 miles at your 12 o'clock." Then he gave us the pertinent airport info and handed us off to Atlanta Center on 134.8, telling us that they were aware of our situation. They instructed us to descend and maintain 3700. Shortly after we arrived there, he cleared us to land on the runway of our choice. By now we were directly over the airport, so we canceled IFR, alerted GVL UNICOM of our situation and dropped into the pattern where another plane on base leg terminated his approach to get out of our way. A pretty gusty crosswind made for a roller coaster style approach, but we made it down without bending any metal. After we parked, we tried to pull the #2 radio to confirm our suspicions that it was the source of our problem, but we didn't have an Allen wrench and the shops on the field were all closed. So we called Randall and he sent Steve's son Ryan in a 172 with a set that turned out to be too short to be any good. So we climbed in anyway and didn't turn on the #2 on the way home while Ryan flew back in loose formation with us. When Steve pulled out the radio after we landed at 47A, it was very apparent from the strong smell coming out of the box that something had burnt inside. Thankfully, it didn't develop into anything more serious, whether by luck or turning it off as quickly as we did. -- Jeff 'The Wizard of Draws' Bucchino Cartoons with a Touch of Magic� http://www.wizardofdraws.com More Cartoons with a Touch of Magic� http://www.cartoonclipart.com Back to top Peter R. Guest Posted: Mon Sep 19, 2005 5:57 pm    Post subject: Re: Adrenalin rush dlevy <comp (AT) nospam (DOT) com> wrote: Quote: Adding to the adrenalin rush was the fact that there was so much traffic at the class D airport I couldn't even get a chance to let the tower know I had smoke in the cockpit. I would imagine that a few "Maydays," regardless of the fact that when you begin you might step on someone else's broadcast, will get you a quiet frequency. -- Peter http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- Back to top Marco Leon Guest Posted: Mon Sep 19, 2005 7:43 pm    Post subject: Re: Adrenalin rush Hmmm, maybe they're on to something. When was the last time you had a "general run-of-the-mill" consumer product start smoking on you?? ;-) Seriously, another question for you EE folks: are more modern components of a better quality in that they don't need a robust surrounding support structure to prevent catastrophic failures? Marco Leon <papenfussDIESPAM (AT) juneauDOTmeDOTvt (DOT) edu> wrote Quote: Everett M. Greene <mojaveg (AT) mojaveg (DOT) iwvisp.com> wrote: : Now, if there are any EEs present, perhaps they can explain : why aircraft radios tend to fail in this manner whereas : nothing much of anything else in the electronic world fails : in a manner to produce heat and smoke. Are avionics units : designed so close to the components' limits to cause this : failure mode? I can understand a transmitter going up in : smoke (while transmitting), but a receiver? I'll take a stab at it... Probably a big reason why avionics fail like that because they're older than most electronics. They're used for a longer period of time so they can suffer individual component failures. "Normal" electronics tend to get toss earlier, so their failures are more likely due to construction flaws. They're also packaged very tightly, and cannot afford much overdesign that would cause additional weight. Also, the environment they operate in is extremely harsh... *huge* temperature/humidity swings, ridiculous vibration exposure, etc. That's why I was singularly unimpressed with the internal build quality of the Michel slide-in replacement radios. They're built with standard DIPs, through-hole components, ribbon cables, and general run-of-the-mill consumer components. Minimal strain relief and anti-chafing assembly. Makes for a less expensive unit, but I'm sure they're more likely to wear/chafe than a well-built unit. -Cory -- ************************************************************************* * Cory Papenfuss * * Electrical Engineering candidate Ph.D. graduate student * * Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University * ************************************************************************* Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services ---------------------------------------------------------- ** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY ** ---------------------------------------------------------- http://www.usenet.com Back to top Display posts from previous: All Posts1 Day7 Days2 Weeks1 Month3 Months6 Months1 Year Oldest FirstNewest First         AirTalk.org Forum Index -> Instrument Flight Rules All times are GMT Goto page 1, 2  Next Page 1 of 2   Jump to: Select a forum Aviation----------------alt.aviationAviation safety EnhancementPlanes, gliders and flying in AustraliaAviation et pilotage (Français)rec.aviationAviation (Aerobatics)Hot air, gas balloons and airshipsHang-gliding, paragliding, foot-launched flightAircraft Design & BuildingInstrument Flight RulesAviation (Classifieds)Military AircraftNaval AviationAviation (Miscellaneous Topics)Owning AirplanesAviators (General Discussions)Aviation related productsAircraft RestorationHelicopters and rotary wing aircraftsFlight SimulationSailplanesAviation (Students)Light aircraftFlying related activities in the UK Airports----------------alt.airportsEdinburgh Airport Glasgow Airport Humberside Airport Luton Airport Aberdeen Airport Glasgow Prestwick Airport  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 Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2006 phpBB Group SEO toolkit © 2004-2006 webmedic.