Customer got hit by a prop today.

Witmo said:
I've made my point time and again. It's you who is in denial. I'm being sarcastic because you refuse to accept the reality that you could have prevented someone getting hurt by stupidly simple procedures. Your defense to a charge of inadequate control while performing a dangerous operation is blatant rationalization. You're lucky the owner didn't get killed and yet you blame him totally. Yes, he made a mistake, several, the first was hiring someone who purports to be a professional but refuses to take the simplest precautions to prevent observers from getting injured during hazardous procedures he is performing. I don't like lawyers as such as the next guy but I don't doubt even a crummy one could have had a field day if the owner had sued you. Your story changed as people pointed out what you should have done to prevent the accident but it doesn't change the fact that you failed to make any attempt whatsoever to control the immediate area around the propeller which was poised to do exactly what it did when nudged by someone you allowed to be near enough to do the nudging. Deny away but the consensus is you need to grow a pair, put on some big boy pants, and take responsibility for your failure to supervise someone you allowed to observe in close proximity, a compression test.
Click to expand...

You continue that theory but never say how you can prevent people from unexpectedly doing impulsive things out of the normal routine. Your simply wrong and can't face it.
 
MAKG1 said:
CID per cylinder is the area of the piston times the stroke. Half your stroke is the lever arm.
Click to expand...
no, think about it. Cubic inch displacement does not equate to area, it equates to volume. we do not care how much volume we put in to get 80 PSI, we care about the area that it effects.
 
Last edited:
Tom-D said:
You continue that theory but never say how you can prevent people from unexpectedly doing impulsive things out of the normal routine. Your simply wrong and can't face it.
Click to expand...
There are none so blind as those who refuse to see. If you had started this thread by saying "my customer got bopped in the head despite my briefing him not to touch the prop and to stand to my side away from the prop while I accomplished the compression check," we would have empathized with you and agreed that the owner was a moron for disregarding your instructions. Instead you continue to believe that the owner should have known better and you couldn't do a damn thing to prevent him from grabbing the prop and being struck. Even if you had admitted you did nothing to interrupt the chain of events which led to an injury but had learned from this incident to ensure observers would not be allowed to be near the prop during future compression checks, we would have all complimented you on learning a valuable lesson and sharing it with us. Instead you continue to deny, deny, deny. I truly pity you but I thank you for highlighting the fact that people can prevent accidents if they have the right attitude toward safety. Unfortunately, you do not.
 
Last edited:
MAKG1 said:
CID per cylinder is the area of the piston times the stroke. Half your stroke is the lever arm.
Click to expand...

Pressure = force x area
CID = Cubic Inches of Displacement = Volume
Volume = Area x Height

I have an O-360. Each cylinder displaces 90 in^3. There are several ways to get 90 cubic inches, each will create different torque values if you use the same amount of fuel burning inside them:
  1. 1" diameter, 114 inches long
  2. 2" diameter, 28" long
  3. 3" diameter, 12-3/4" long
  4. Etc.
Torque = Force x Length, and as shown, length can vary considerably with the same displacement. I don't recall mine, and can't look it up right now.

Happy mathing?
 
Hank S said:
Pressure = force x area
CID = Cubic Inches of Displacement = Volume
Volume = Area x Height

I have an O-360. Each cylinder displaces 90 in^3. There are several ways to get 90 cubic inches, each will create different torque values if you use the same amount of fuel burning inside them:
  1. 1" diameter, 114 inches long
  2. 2" diameter, 28" long
  3. 3" diameter, 12-3/4" long
  4. Etc.
Torque = Force x Length, and as shown, length can vary considerably with the same displacement. I don't recall mine, and can't look it up right now.

Happy mathing?
Click to expand...
For a fixed pressure (which is obviously appropriate for a compression test), all those geometries generate the same torque, at 90 deg ATDC (i.e., neglecting the sine of the crank angle). Smaller area is balanced by longer lever arm. If it weren't, the displacement would be different. Are people missing that the crankpin offset is always exactly half the stroke?
 
I can't believe this hit 7 pages.

It's really like a 1 page deal.

Both parties learned a lesson, no one got seriously hurt, life will go on.

Sure, what ifs, but that's fantasy land, dude got a scrape, both learned, both somewhat at fault, both live to see another day.

Life isn't safe, it never will be, nor is it a perfect world, never will be.

For those who are the holier than thou types, please, PLENTY of things in your life could be armchair QBed well over 7 pages too.

Sadly, in this chaos class we call life, sometimes we have to oops to learn, that's what happened, everyone is OK, people learned from it.

As far as the finger pointing of Tom

4f4b7b8cce3a920b9263179cb28d7c822cdfaa49e6bcaa2fe215a34a2fc727c8.jpg
 
James331 said:
For those who are the holier than thou types, please, PLENTY of things in your life could be armchair QBed well over 7 pages too.

Sadly, in this chaos class we call life, sometimes we have to oops to learn, that's what happened, everyone is OK, people learned from it.
Click to expand...

James, I've tried to remain civil in criticizing Tom. While some have lost their cool, I don't think it's because we're "holier than thou", I think it's because Tom hasn't even been willing to even consider that he may share some blame in this.

I certainly don't think he's 100% at fault. Not at all. But as someone who has spent a fair amount of time investigating injuries there is almost always something that could have been done to prevent it.

Here's a simple example: if before doing this work Tom made a rule that under no circumstance was anyone to touch the prop while the cylinders are pressurized except for himself and it was briefed before hand then hopefully bonehead owner doesn't touch the prop. Relying on "an owner who knows the risk" isn't good risk mitigation technique evidenced by pilot's continuing to run out of fuel or flying into declining weather conditions or even this exact injury we're talking about. The "owner knew the risk" CLEARLY wasn't effective at keeping him from being hurt.
 
hockeyrcks9901 said:
James, I've tried to remain civil in criticizing Tom. While some have lost their cool, I don't think it's because we're "holier than thou", I think it's because Tom hasn't even been willing to even consider that he may share some blame in this.

I certainly don't think he's 100% at fault. Not at all. But as someone who has spent a fair amount of time investigating injuries there is almost always something that could have been done to prevent it.

Here's a simple example: if before doing this work Tom made a rule that under no circumstance was anyone to touch the prop while the cylinders are pressurized except for himself and it was briefed before hand then hopefully bonehead owner doesn't touch the prop. Relying on "an owner who knows the risk" isn't good risk mitigation technique evidenced by pilot's continuing to run out of fuel or flying into declining weather conditions or even this exact injury we're talking about. The "owner knew the risk" CLEARLY wasn't effective at keeping him from being hurt.
Click to expand...

I think it's fair to say, based on what happened, based on the fact that it bothered Tom enough to post this and go back and forth, he'll mention the prop next time and be more vigilant of where folks are during a compression check (even if he doesn't admit to having some blame here on POA ;) )

I'll also bet the owner will ALWAYS be more aware inside of a prop arc, and likley also transfer that to his pax, heck that might even save a life some day.

Lessons learned
 
James331 said:
I think it's fair to say, based on what happened, based on the fact that it bothered Tom enough to post this and go back and forth, he'll mention the prop next time and be more vigilant of where folks are during a compression check (even if he doesn't admit to having some blame here on POA ;) )

I'll also bet the owner will ALWAYS be more aware inside of a prop arc, and likley also transfer that to his pax, heck that might even save a life some day.

Lessons learned
Click to expand...
I posted this in hopes a lot of pilot/owners will learn. Well, maybe not the haters that were only here to fix blame. when you have a procedure that is safe don't deviate from it, specially so fast that no one can stop you from getting hurt.
 
Zeldman said:
OMG...... is this still going on...????
Click to expand...
Yep, I have a bet that it will run 10 pages, all I must do is to tell Wetmo he's wrong 1 more time.
 
Witmo said:
There are none so blind as those who refuse to see. If you had started this thread by saying "my customer got bopped in the head despite my briefing him not to touch the prop and to stand to my side away from the prop while I accomplished the compression check," we would have empathized with you and agreed that the owner was a moron for disregarding your instructions. Instead you continue to believe that the owner should have known better and you couldn't do a damn thing to prevent him from grabbing the prop and being struck. Even if you had admitted you did nothing to interrupt the chain of events which led to an injury but had learned from this incident to ensure observers would not be allowed to be near the prop during future compression checks, we would have all complimented you on learning a valuable lesson and sharing it with us. Instead you continue to deny, deny, deny. I truly pity you but I thank you for highlighting the fact that people can prevent accidents if they have the right attitude toward safety. Unfortunately, you do not.
Click to expand...
You simply need a reading comprehension course. where did I say I briefed him on anything.
Like always you read what you want to see then hate any one who disagrees with you.
Get a life, or learn to read.
 
Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder (OCD) is a common, chronic and long-lasting disorder in which a person has uncontrollable, reoccurring thoughts (obsessions) and behaviors (compulsions) that he or she feels the urge to repeat over and over.
 
Luigi said:
Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder (OCD) is a common, chronic and long-lasting disorder in which a person has uncontrollable, reoccurring thoughts (obsessions) and behaviors (compulsions) that he or she feels the urge to repeat over and over.
Click to expand...

IOW, they are gluttons for punishment. :yes:
 
Tom-D said:
You simply need a reading comprehension course. where did I say I briefed him on anything.
Like always you read what you want to see then hate any one who disagrees with you.
Get a life, or learn to read.
Click to expand...
I never said you briefed him. It's obvious to everyone you didn't brief the owner on anything. The sentence began "If you had started this thread by saying... (but you didn't). I thought it was obvious but I guess not. If I gave anyone the mistaken impression that Tom D did anything to mitigate the risks involved in a compression check, I apologize. Tom D made it perfectly clear (numerous times) that he did nothing, nada, not a damn thing, to prevent someone from reaching up and moving a prop during his compression check. There, are you basking in righteousness to once again proclaim there was nothing you could do to prevent an accident? Good lord, you are beyond hope. You also have a strange concept of hate. There must be legions of hateful people if the definition of hate is to disagree with Tom D. I really don't hate you, I wrote earlier that I pity you.
 
Witmo said:
I never said you briefed him. It's obvious to everyone you didn't brief the owner on anything. The sentence began "If you had started this thread by saying... (but you didn't). I thought it was obvious but I guess not. If I gave anyone the mistaken impression that Tom D did anything to mitigate the risks involved in a compression check, I apologize. Tom D made it perfectly clear (numerous times) that he did nothing, nada, not a damn thing, to prevent someone from reaching up and moving a prop during his compression check. There, are you basking in righteousness to once again proclaim there was nothing you could do to prevent an accident? Good lord, you are beyond hope. You also have a strange concept of hate. There must be legions of hateful people if the definition of hate is to disagree with Tom D. I really don't hate you, I wrote earlier that I pity you.
Click to expand...

You simply don't get it, and never will. simply because you can't realize this guy was trained. and can't tell me who deviated from the normal.
 
Tom-D said:
You simply don't get it, and never will. simply because you can't realize this guy was trained. and can't tell me who deviated from the normal.
Click to expand...

Let's keep this going....

No Tom, you don't get it. Trained or not, who signed the log books for the work performed?

You Tom, only you.


But indulge us Tom, is said customer a Master Mechanic trained in the arts of working on vehicles? Which ones? What's his credentials? He's been trained, tell us how.

Why did he need you, if as you put it... he was trained to perform this task. Did he sign the log? Oops, playing circle again. Sorry about that.
 
cliff notes version....

POAposter: Tom, your customer was wrong, but you probably could have done something to stop it. I'm sure you learned something through this.

Tom: I'm not wrong, he knew what he was doing and I'm 0% to blame.

POAposter: In the future you should talk through the process and maybe even get the customer to sign something so you have documentation in case the lawyer folks ever try to go after you, you know a little CYA, and it may help prevent another accident.

Tom: Nope, the guy said he was wrong, he knew what he was doing. There is no way anyone could have prevented this.

POAPoster: you could make sure no one is anywhere near the prop when you've got pressure on the cylinder. Make sure you are between the customer and the prop.

Tom: nope I've done it like this 100 times before and it was fine. It's impossible for me to have had any action to prevent this accident. This is all on the other guy.

Tom, I don't know if anyone has placed all the blame on you. We are just trying to say there are a few things you could have done to help prevent this accident. I don't know why you can't see this. We are just hoping everyone can learn something to help prevent future accidents. I think this thread will help remind a lot of people about prop safety and how to better avoid being near the prop arc any time there is energy that could be quickly released behind it. Even moreso this thread may help others realize the need to brief others of these dangers.

I'm done beating the horse.
 
mscard88 said:
No it doesn't. It's called responsibility. Guy could have been killed.
Click to expand...

And what if he bolted from the other side of the hangar and grabbed the prop? Is it still Tom's fault? If not how far from the prop does he need to be before his irresponsible grabbing of the prop is no longer Tom's fault?
 
If the customer had been properly forewarned of the dangers presented by being in near proximity to the prop, then Tom wouldn't be at fault. What is so hard to understand here?
 
Luigi said:
If the customer had been properly forewarned of the dangers presented by being in near proximity to the prop, then Tom wouldn't be at fault. What is so hard to understand here?
Click to expand...
Because Tom has said over and over that the guy knew already. This thread really has completely jumped the shark. Guy asked Tom to do owner assisted annual in owners hangar. Owner is aware that the prop can hurt you. Tom was showing the gauge to owner. Owner wants to rock the prop. Prop gets away from owner. Owner gets whacked. Only mistake Tom has made was posting about it. You don't agree, that's fine, but once around the block is enough. People need to go find some injustice somewhere else now.
 
Mike, it is hard to believe the customer actually understood the danger if he went ahead and moved the prop in such a fashion that he was hit. A prudent mechanic would have insisted the customer remain clear, that is what my mechanic does.
 
SmashTime said:
But indulge us Tom, is said customer a Master Mechanic trained in the arts of working on vehicles? Which ones? What's his credentials? He's been trained, tell us how.

Why did he need you, if as you put it... he was trained to perform this task. Did he sign the log? Oops, playing circle again. Sorry about that.
Click to expand...
Who's putting ink in the records is not the point. That's hardly the hazard we were talking about.
The customer works the computer industry, and built this aircraft under my tutelage and has been maintaining this 150 for a few years. He is no newbie to the hazards in doing this procedure. and normally does the compression check, cleans his plugs on his own most every oil change. For your purposes he was properly trained. his other interests are nunya.
You need to understand what he did was not normal or expected, and done so quick I could not react in time to prevent it. I do not like seeing my friends hurt, and will prevent it every time I can. but I'm not going to tell my owners to go stand in the corner while I do anything either.
My customers are interested in the maintenance and care of their equipment. They want to be involved, I'm not going to discourage that.
It is my guess by your posts you have never maintained your aircraft under the supervision of an A&P or understand the relation that develops in doing that. one must trust each other to work together. when you understand that, it becomes clear what happened.
 
Luigi said:
If the customer had been properly forewarned of the dangers presented by being in near proximity to the prop, then Tom wouldn't be at fault. What is so hard to understand here?
Click to expand...
You believe that several years of doing this by himself isn't enough? Do you require a safety meeting every time you fly? Does your wife have to remind you that driving is dangerous every time you ask for the keys ?
 
Luigi said:
Mike, it is hard to believe the customer actually understood the danger if he went ahead and moved the prop in such a fashion that he was hit. A prudent mechanic would have insisted the customer remain clear, that is what my mechanic does.
Click to expand...
Should he have to tell you? are you trained in how to complete the inspection, has he gained a trust in your abilities?

Doesn't sound like it.
 
i was not going to post my real thoughts on this thread but
now i must, as i am stupefied beyond belief . tom your business must be fubar as you spend so much time posting, how do you get your work done? also you never let go of a prop ever, when its got air behind it. what is this tdc crap all about ? how do you know it was tdc? who cares if it was tdc, it still was a loaded gun. hope your liability insurance is up to snuff. you will be sued ,and you will loose and it will only take 10 minutes for your case to be adjudicated .eta i hope the guy with the lump on his head is a member here.
 
Last edited:
Maybe Tom should send the customer some dick pics. Uhh getting my threads confused.
 
or a copy of "The Caine Mutiny"
 
hotprops said:
i was not going to post my real thoughts on this thread but
now i must, as i am stupefied beyond belief . tom your business must be fubar as you spend so much time posting, how do you get your work done? also you never let go of a prop ever, when its got air behind it. what is this tdc crap all about ? how do you know it was tdc? who cares if it was tdc, it still was a loaded gun. hope your liability insurance is up to snuff. you will be sued ,and you will loose and it will only take 10 minutes for your case to be adjudicated .eta i hope the guy with the lump on his head is a member here.
Click to expand...
I'm retired :) every day is Saturday.

he has read this website once way back, thought it had way too many experts. and now never reads it.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top