Accident Airgyro Aviation AG-915 Spartan , 27 Sep 2022

[JEFF TIPTON]

Might add this material to the inside of the composite structure where heat is a problem.

https://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/eppages/alumheatbarrierstops.php?clickkey=881249

 

[BEN S]

John, I do realize we are talking experimental aircraft here, but as it is N-Numbered, and you are dealing with a potentially serious heat transfer problem, can you just wrap and unwrap stuff? Doesn't it need to be done by and logged by an A&P? Or do you hold the Repairmen Cert for that aircraft? If it does need to be done by an A&P, what do they suggest?
I am not qualified to tell you what you should or should not do as regards the situation, but I would be EXTREMEMLY cautious going forward with enough heat building up to melt stuff more then 6 inches away.
Question, is the AG915 substantially different in under cowling design from the original Xenon? or is this due to an engine the rig was never designed for? I truly don't know, but I never heard Doug S or anyone with the Xenon complaining of heat issues melting stuff.

 

[All_In]

Might add this material to the inside of the composite structure where heat is a problem.

https://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/eppages/alumheatbarrierstops.php?clickkey=881249

Thank you Bro you're always helpfull

 

[All_In]

John, I do realize we are talking experimental aircraft here, but as it is N-Numbered, and you are dealing with a potentially serious heat transfer problem, can you just wrap and unwrap stuff? Doesn't it need to be done by and logged by an A&P? Or do you hold the Repairmen Cert for that aircraft? If it does need to be done by an A&P, what do they suggest?
I am not qualified to tell you what you should or should not do as regards the situation, but I would be EXTREMEMLY cautious going forward with enough heat building up to melt stuff more then 6 inches away.
Question, is the AG915 substantially different in under cowling design from the original Xenon? or is this due to an engine the rig was never designed for? I truly don't know, but I never heard Doug S or anyone with the Xenon complaining of heat issues melting stuff.

I don't know the xenon well enough to make a comment. It wasn't melting it just scorthed the paint. It's probably the paint is really more of a problem than anything else In my opinion.

Ron's the builder of record and makes the log book entry. Heat sheliding is not a major repair.

 

[All_In]

Thank you all so much I have now removed the wrap and Raul is sending me a picture of a heat shield that mounts on the exhaust pipe.

 

[Vance]

John, I do realize we are talking experimental aircraft here, but as it is N-Numbered, and you are dealing with a potentially serious heat transfer problem, can you just wrap and unwrap stuff? Doesn't it need to be done by and logged by an A&P? Or do you hold the Repairmen Cert for that aircraft? If it does need to be done by an A&P, what do they suggest?
I am not qualified to tell you what you should or should not do as regards the situation, but I would be EXTREMEMLY cautious going forward with enough heat building up to melt stuff more then 6 inches away.
Question, is the AG915 substantially different in under cowling design from the original Xenon? or is this due to an engine the rig was never designed for? I truly don't know, but I never heard Doug S or anyone with the Xenon complaining of heat issues melting stuff.

The EAA Government Programs office has recently received many questions about who can do maintenance and what maintenance is required on an experimental amateur-built aircraft. So I thought this would be a good time to review the regulations.

FAR Part 43.1 (b) specifically excludes experimental aircraft. It states, "This part does not apply to any aircraft for which an experimental airworthiness certificate has been issued, unless a different kind of airworthiness certificate had previously been issued for that aircraft." I stress the word aircraft so that it is not interpreted to include an engine.

What about major repairs and alterations? First, you never have to fill out a form 337 for an experimental aircraft. Repairs, major or minor, can be done by anyone ( remember Part 43.1 (b). However, alterations are different. If you alter the aircraft with a different propeller or engine, for example, then it is not the airplane for which you received an airworthiness certificate. This would also apply to changing pistons or magnetos. It is a new and untested airplane. If you change propellers, you must notify the FAA (not by a 337) of your change.

Your aircraft's operating limitations should have a statement such as the following in regard to major changes: "The FAA cognizant Flight Standards Office must be notified, and their response received in writing, prior to flying this aircraft after incorporating a major change as defined by FAR 21.93."

The way I interpret the Federal Aviation Regulations; the annual condition inspection for an experimental amateur built aircraft may be performed by someone who holds the repairman’s certificate for that experimental aircraft or someone who holds an airframe and power plant mechanic certificate.

 

[All_In]

The EAA Government Programs office has recently received many questions about who can do maintenance and what maintenance is required on an experimental amateur-built aircraft. So I thought this would be a good time to review the regulations.

FAR Part 43.1 (b) specifically excludes experimental aircraft. It states, "This part does not apply to any aircraft for which an experimental airworthiness certificate has been issued, unless a different kind of airworthiness certificate had previously been issued for that aircraft." I stress the word aircraft so that it is not interpreted to include an engine.

What about major repairs and alterations? First, you never have to fill out a form 337 for an experimental aircraft. Repairs, major or minor, can be done by anyone ( remember Part 43.1 (b). However, alterations are different. If you alter the aircraft with a different propeller or engine, for example, then it is not the airplane for which you received an airworthiness certificate. This would also apply to changing pistons or magnetos. It is a new and untested airplane. If you change propellers, you must notify the FAA (not by a 337) of your change.

Your aircraft's operating limitations should have a statement such as the following in regard to major changes: "The FAA cognizant Flight Standards Office must be notified, and their response received in writing, prior to flying this aircraft after incorporating a major change as defined by FAR 21.93."

The way I interpret the Federal Aviation Regulations; the annual condition inspection for an experimental amateur built aircraft may be performed by someone who holds the repairman’s certificate for that experimental aircraft or someone who holds an airframe and power plant mechanic certificate.

Thank you Vance Ron paid the same DAR that did AWC to fill out all the required forms so he would be legal to do the inspections

 

[BEN S]

Interesting Vance, so is this an alteration to a cooling system? Or a repair to thermal damage?
I dunno...when it comes to grey areas I always default to the person side not the gov't side....usually dealing with firearms not aircraft....
Again, I am not qualkified to make any determination or reccomendation.
It is quite worrisome all the same as this thread is about a fatal accident that possibly involves an in flight fire.

 

[Vance]

Interesting Vance, so is this an alteration to a cooling system? Or a repair to thermal damage?
I dunno...when it comes to grey areas I always default to the person side not the gov't side....usually dealing with firearms not aircraft....
Again, I am not qualkified to make any determination or reccomendation.
It is quite worrisome all the same as this thread is about a fatal accident that possibly involves an in flight fire.

I am not sure from the post that John is modifying the exhaust or putting a blanket over the turbocharger.

Based on John’s words I would call it a modification to the exhaust system.

Modifying an exhaust system on an aircraft with a enclosed cockpit can be particular hazardous.

You have discovered what I feel is one of the biggest safety issues with EAB aircraft.

I always have an A&P look at everything I do on any aircraft I train in because I am afraid of my own ignorance and feel responsible for the people I take flying.

It is rare for me to find that a client who comes to me with their aircraft has done everything in the aviation way.

I have a condition inspection done by an A&P/IA before I fly it.

Part of the training I offer is colorful stories about all the things I have found wrong with The Predator during pre-flight inspection and the potential of the things wrong to harm me.

I have often been accused of being over cautious because of my lengthy pre-flight inspections.

 

[Mayfield]

The EAA Government Programs office has recently received many questions about who can do maintenance and what maintenance is required on an experimental amateur-built aircraft. So I thought this would be a good time to review the regulations.

FAR Part 43.1 (b) specifically excludes experimental aircraft. It states, "This part does not apply to any aircraft for which an experimental airworthiness certificate has been issued, unless a different kind of airworthiness certificate had previously been issued for that aircraft." I stress the word aircraft so that it is not interpreted to include an engine.

What about major repairs and alterations? First, you never have to fill out a form 337 for an experimental aircraft. Repairs, major or minor, can be done by anyone ( remember Part 43.1 (b). However, alterations are different. If you alter the aircraft with a different propeller or engine, for example, then it is not the airplane for which you received an airworthiness certificate. This would also apply to changing pistons or magnetos. It is a new and untested airplane. If you change propellers, you must notify the FAA (not by a 337) of your change.

Your aircraft's operating limitations should have a statement such as the following in regard to major changes: "The FAA cognizant Flight Standards Office must be notified, and their response received in writing, prior to flying this aircraft after incorporating a major change as defined by FAR 21.93."

The way I interpret the Federal Aviation Regulations; the annual condition inspection for an experimental amateur built aircraft may be performed by someone who
holds the repairman’s certificate for that experimental aircraft or someone who holds an airframe and power plant mechanic certificate.

Hi Vance,
I concur in your assessment.

§ 65.104 Repairman certificate - experimental aircraft builder - Eligibility, privileges and limitations.​

(a) To be eligible for a repairman certificate (experimental aircraft builder), an individual must -

(1) Be at least 18 years of age;
(2) Be the primary builder of the aircraft to which the privileges of the certificate are applicable;
(3) Show to the satisfaction of the Administrator that the individual has the requisite skill to determine whether the aircraft is in a condition for safe operations; and
(4) Be a citizen of the United States or an individual citizen of a foreign country who has lawfully been admitted for permanent residence in the United States.

(b) The holder of a repairman certificate (experimental aircraft builder) may perform condition inspections on the aircraft constructed by the holder in accordance with the operating limitations of that aircraft.

(c) Section 65.103 does not apply to the holder of a repairman certificate (experimental aircraft builder) while performing under that certificate.

 

[DavePA11]

I am not sure from the post that John is modifying the exhaust or putting a blanket over the turbocharger.

Based on John’s words I would call it a modification to the exhaust system.

Modifying an exhaust system on an aircraft with a enclosed cockpit can be particular hazardous.

You have discovered what I feel is one of the biggest safety issues with EAB aircraft.

I always have an A&P look at everything I do on any aircraft I train in because I am afraid of my own ignorance and feel responsible for the people I take flying.

It is rare for me to find that a client who comes to me with their aircraft has done everything in the aviation way.

I have a condition inspection done by an A&P/IA before I fly it.

Part of the training I offer is colorful stories about all the things I have found wrong with The Predator during pre-flight inspection and the potential of the things wrong to harm me.

I have often been accused of being over cautious because of my lengthy pre-flight inspections.

Many A&Ps have no knowledge of gyrocopters or Rotax engines so may be of limited benefit. Working with the manufacture if available might be a better option.

 

[Steve_UK]

Some details from the NTSB Prelimary report


On September 27, 2022, about 1030 central daylight time, an Airgyro AG915 Spartan
gyrocopter, N499AG, was destroyed when it was involved in an accident near Yankton, South
Dakota. The pilot sustained fatal injuries. The gyrocopter was operated as a Title 14 Code of
Federal Regulations Part 91 personal flight.
The gyrocopter was based out of a hangar at the Chan Gurney Municipal Airport (YKN),
Yankton, South Dakota. The gyrocopter departed from runway 31 at YKN and traveled to the
northwest. Shortly after the takeoff, the gyrocopter impacted a flat grass field on private
property. The accident site, about 1,350 ft above msl, was located about 2.3 nm northwest from
the departure end of runway 31.
A postimpact fire consumed the composite airframe. The wreckage was recovered from the
accident site for further examination.
According to maintenance records, the pilot was the builder of the gyrocopter, and it was
manufactured in August 2022. As a repairman, the pilot performed maintenance work on the
gyrocopter several days prior to the accident. The maintenance records showed that at the last
work entry on September 24, 2022, the gyrocopter had accumulated 37.8 flight hours.
The gyrocopter was equipped with a Rotax Aircraft Engines 915 series engine.

 

[Steve_UK]

some more from the NTSB preliminary

Aircraft and Owner/Operator Information
Aircraft Make: Airgyro Registration: N499AG
Model/Series: AG915 Spartan Aircraft Category: Gyroplane
Amateur Built: Yes
Operator: On file Operating Certificate(s)
Held:
None
Operator Designator Code: None
Meteorological Information and Flight Plan
Conditions at Accident Site: VMC Condition of Light: Day
Observation Facility, Elevation: KYKN,1172 ft msl Observation Time: 09:56 Local
Distance from Accident Site: 5 Nautical Miles Temperature/Dew Point: 14°C /5°C
Lowest Cloud Condition: Clear Wind Speed/Gusts, Direction: / ,
Lowest Ceiling: None Visibility: 10 miles
Altimeter Setting: 30.2 inches Hg Type of Flight Plan Filed: None
Departure Point: Yankton, SD (YKN) Destination: Yankton, SD
Wreckage and Impact Information
Crew Injuries: 1 Fatal Aircraft Damage: Destroyed
Passenger Injuries: N/A Aircraft Fire: Fire at unknown time
Ground Injuries: N/A Aircraft Explosion: Explosion at unknown time
Total Injuries: 1 Fatal Latitude,
Longitude:
42.946938,-97.43629 (est)

 

[Vance]

Many A&Ps have no knowledge of gyrocopters or Rotax engines so may be of limited benefit. Working with the manufacture if available might be a better option.

In my experience a good A&P mechanic knows how to read a manual and how things should be done in the aviation way.

An A&P certificate is an indication that they have taken the time to learn the regulations and the process.

It is not a guarantee that they are good at their chosen profession.

When I fly a Rotax powered experimental amateur built gyroplane I try to use an A&P with Rotax knowledge and experience.

I had an emergency landing at a field in the high desert in a Cavalon (Kingman) and used an A&P that specializes in rebuilding round engines ( Airzona) and he had a gram scale and was able to identify and replace a sunk float.

He had me look up the manual on the internet.

It appeared to me that Rotax experience was not necessary for this A&P to do a good job.

 

[DavePA11]

Yes it greatly depends on the A&P as does working with any other person in a specific profession. I’ve worked with some A&Ps who didn’t want anything to do with gyrocopters. Glad you found some good ones to work with Vance!

 

[JEFF TIPTON]

To help to understand major alterations in general we can find guidance in FAR 43 appendix A

(a) Major alterations

(1) Airframe major alterations. Alterations of the following parts and alterations of the following types, when not listed in the aircraft specifications issued by the FAA, are airframe major alterations:

(i) Wings.

(ii) Tail surfaces.

(iii) Fuselage.

(iv) Engine mounts.

(v) Control system.

(vi) Landing gear.

(vii) Hull or floats.

(viii) Elements of an airframe including spars, ribs, fittings, shock absorbers, bracing, cowling, fairings, and balance weights.

(ix) Hydraulic and electrical actuating system of components.

(x) Rotor blades.

(xi) Changes to the empty weight or empty balance which result in an increase in the maximum certificated weight or center of gravity limits of the aircraft.

(xii) Changes to the basic design of the fuel, oil, cooling, heating, cabin pressurization, electrical, hydraulic, de-icing, or exhaust systems.

(xiii) Changes to the wing or to fixed or movable control surfaces which affect flutter and vibration characteristics.

(2) Powerplant major alterations. The following alterations of a powerplant when not listed in the engine specifications issued by the FAA, are powerplant major alterations.

(i) Conversion of an aircraft engine from one approved model to another, involving any changes in compression ratio, propeller reduction gear, impeller gear ratios or the substitution of major engine parts which requires extensive rework and testing of the engine.

(ii) Changes to the engine by replacing aircraft engine structural parts with parts not supplied by the original manufacturer or parts not specifically approved by the Administrator.

(iii) Installation of an accessory which is not approved for the engine.

(iv) Removal of accessories that are listed as required equipment on the aircraft or engine specification.

(v) Installation of structural parts other than the type of parts approved for the installation.

(vi) Conversions of any sort for the purpose of using fuel of a rating or grade other than that listed in the engine specifications.

(3) Propeller major alterations. The following alterations of a propeller when not authorized in the propeller specifications issued by the FAA are propeller major alterations:

(i) Changes in blade design.

(ii) Changes in hub design.

(iii) Changes in the governor or control design.

(iv) Installation of a propeller governor or feathering system.

(v) Installation of propeller de-icing system.

(vi) Installation of parts not approved for the propeller.

(4) Appliance major alterations. Alterations of the basic design not made in accordance with recommendations of the appliance manufacturer or in accordance with an FAA Airworthiness Directive are appliance major alterations. In addition, changes in the basic design of radio communication and navigation equipment approved under type certification or a Technical Standard Order that have an effect on frequency stability, noise level, sensitivity, selectivity, distortion, spurious radiation, AVC characteristics, or ability to meet environmental test conditions and other changes that have an effect on the performance of the equipment are also major alterations.

FAR 43 - Appendix A

FAR 43 - Appendix A

www.faa-aircraft-certification.com

 

[All_In]

Heard the rummer from Dave & Henry a week ago and had it confirmed today, by a person helping Kevin build. That is, Kevin had some of his wires make contact with the exhausted system, they burnt, and it stopped running two days prior to this forced landing.
He repaired the wires and rerouted them flying from Texas to South Dakota.
I have no clue if this had anything to do with the accident or the reported fire, only that it happened.
To determine if a shorted wire could catch the black rubberized firewall material on fire will test it tonight with a soldering gun and then a flame.

 

[All_In]

I don't like to post rummers but would like to get this one confirmed if anyone knows.

Is there any report of where they found the body?

I was told today that Kevin's body was thrown out of and found away from the aircraft.
The helper found it odd because Kevin had 4 point seat belts.
He suggests that Kevin may have undone it as if to jump away from the fire or smoke in the Cabin.

 

[Brent Drake]

I have quite a few hours in Xenon-type aircraft. Finishing up an AG915 now.
I don't see any problems with the heat. Don't put the wrap shielding over the exhaust or turbo. Most don't even have a heat shield blanket over the firewall. I'm thinking something else was an issue. I have seen a few clamps on the gas line that wasn't properly tightened.

 

[Greg Vos]

I have quite a few hours in Xenon-type aircraft. Finishing up an AG915 now.
I don't see any problems with the heat. Don't put the wrap shielding over the exhaust or turbo. Most don't even have a heat shield blanket over the firewall. I'm thinking something else was an issue. I have seen a few clamps on the gas line that wasn't properly tightened.

I am not a high time xenon / zen 1 pilot ( circa 800 hours that on type) I tinker a lot.
I have found a correctly wrapped exhaust has had no negative effects at all ( not the turbo) I have no data on engine bay heat and will only say in the hot SA conditions with a correctly placed inter cooler and oil cooler she runs cool with no overheating issues in fact CH temps in my case seldom see above 80c
Reading what the titanium wrap is supposed to do I would rather have it