Advice from the Net?..What Can You Trust?

I was chatting with an RV owner yesterday, someone who has a number of airplanes and bought a nicely-built RV-8 that he just loves to fly, but didn?t have time in his life to build. We were talking about tail wheel mods and a few other things, and I suggested that he ask his questions on the forums here at VAF to tap into the considerable knowledge base. His response was interesting - he?s been here before, but his concern about asking questions (or more generally, using information found here) could be summed up as ?who do you trust?? He pointed out that on many topics and questions, if you read an entire thread, you will see diametrically opposed advice and answers to the same question. So what does a non-builder, or new builder do? Without the experience to understand and interpret the results, they can be just as lost as they were before they wandered in the door?..

Now my own interpretation on the ?multiple answer? issue is that, in reality, there are almost always multiple acceptable solutions to any problem. Very rarely is there only one ?right? way to do something. In fact, when I am evaluating information for myself, I tend to ?select out? solutions from people who state that ?the only way to do this is?.? Because that tells me something about their own ability to evaluate solutions. (I am aware that statement might ruffle a few feathers, but think about it - no one knows everything and all possible answers - how can they be sure there isn?t another solution that works as well, or better?)

In the old days, of you wanted to build an airplane, and you didn?t have all the expertise required, you joined an EAA chapter, or found like-minded people at the airport, and learned from those resources. Today, it is much more common to rely on internet advice and connections, but as we know, the greatest ?joke? of our time is ?it must be true, I read it on the internet!? I am very careful to evaluate ideas and suggestions that I get to see if there is physical truth behind them, and to see if I hear the same information from multiple sources. ?Trust, but verify? is a good phrase that works for me. Out of habit, when someone gives me an answer, I usually ask for a reference - a document, manual, or other source other than simple word of mouth ("Is this written down anywhere?"). The truth is that these RV?s we build are relatively standard machines, using tried and true design and technical details. It?s not like they are rocket science, and there are very few truly ?original thoughts? involved in building or maintaining them. Most everything you need can be found in a book - the forums are a great place to point you to the authoritative work.

The internet is a great way to communicate new ideas and to pass on information which might be common in one region of the world but not known elsewhere. All the good scientists that I know want to check the references when they hear new stuff, and as an engineer in Flight Operations, we have an old saying: ?In God we trust - all others, bring data!? Word of mouth, passed from generation to generation is liable to corruption - the message can get garbled, and what once proved to be a great way to do something in a particular situation might very well be incorrect when applied to something else, yet without the original source of that information policing how it is used, later generations might not realize it?s limitations.

So?.how about other?s thoughts? To what test do you put the ideas you find here and on other forums? This might be a good topic of discussion here on a forum where people come for answers, and many of us come to help out those seeking those answers. I personally hope that people take what I write, look for other references, sort through my ideas to see if they are applicable to them, and only use my thoughts if they truly appear to pass the highest scrutiny?.

Paul

Interesting question Paul. For instance, how do you explain the guy this morning saying "Remove your Slick mags before they kill you" while P-Mag guys continue to fly their multiple P-Mag installations in the face of very poor service history?

I have gotten to the point of believing only about 10 per cent of what I hear here on the forum, the rest being pure entertainment.

Very interesting topic, Paul. I hardly feel qualified to even post, but I'm opinionated (somewhat within reason) so I'll comment anyway.

I think it's fairly easy to identify most of the suspect posts as being one-sided or someone replying without having sufficient knowledge about the subject matter. So I can fairly easily rule out the "junk". There really is a lot of useful information here, but you need to be careful about what you use. Even if you choose to use someone elses experience, give it some thought as to what you may be getting.

IMHO, I rule out the posters on the extremes. Those that love a product to no end and would bet their life on it (auto gas, sikaflex, PMags, etc), and those who yak incessently about how something will kill you (auto gas, sikaflex, PMags, etc). They may have some valid points, but the message gets really wrapped up in emotion that it's almost useless.

As both Ronald Reagan and Felix Dzerzhinsky (the original Chekist and founder of the Soviet Secret Police) used to say, "Trust, but verify."

TODR

Information please

Recently I had the occasion to talk to someone on the phone about exhaust systems and a related problem I was having. We got into a whole lot of conversation about many subjects and engine cooling came around to the focus of the conversation. At one point he mentioned a particular thread that was several days or maybe weeks old that had been retired. His comment was, and I'm paraphrasing, 'There's not a one of them that knows what they're talking about'. That struck me since I had already decided either that was the case with this particular thread or I needed to do a bit more of my own research. There is a huge amount of off the cuff anecdotal information found all over the web and no web site is immune not even our favorites. I've noticed also that the more technical the question the more disparate the answers become. It's a lot of fun to jaw bone over this stuff but the take away message is, via con dios and be careful of what you use. Nothing beats the good solid information that can be found at a large, or university, library.

Forums of any sort are just online bull sessions sorted by topic. Some people are more knowledgeable than others and you have to learn who they are, learn to recognize their names. Then sometimes those 'experts' start spouting off on topics on which they are not experts, so you have to recognize that, too. It's up to the reader to learn to sort the good information from the misinformation.

You have to take many factors into account.

As mentioned above the extremes you need to be wary of. Some people love a product or concept so much they are blind to it's shortcomings. Others will be adamantly opposed to something though they have no experience with that which they expound upon.

In general I pay attention to the following.

1. How many posts has the advice giver got under the belt?
2. Are they quality posts or me too posts?
3. Does the poster have first hand experience or is their opinion based on hearsay or is there some sort of bias present?
(ask the poster a direct question like "how do you know that what you say) this is a dynamic board not a read it and take it or leave it type of option.
4. Look at a posters profile, do they seem to have a background that would qualify them for what they say.

5. Have they posted on this subject before and how often?
6. How do others on the board respond to or treat the poster whos advice you are looking at?
7. If a particular thread is long enough what is the ratio of diametrically opposed answers. Is it 50/50 or 70/30.
8. Does the advice make sense, if not ask more questions?

Then of course there are questions or issues for whicch there is no definitive answer or there are ,as Paul mentioned, several correct options.

Advice on the internet should not simply be a read it and accept it or reject it proposition. As with anything else in life an important decision requires research until you are satisfied with the answer.

I find on organized web forums most who offer advice are knowlegable experienced people or if they are postulating conjecture they so state up front.

More dangerous than erroneous advice is a willingness to accept advice without researching it a bit further.

Yukon said:

Interesting question Paul. For instance, how do you explain the guy this morning saying "Remove your Slick mags before they kill you" while P-Mag guys continue to fly their multiple P-Mag installations in the face of very poor service history?

I have gotten to the point of believing only about 10 per cent of what I hear here on the forum, the rest being pure entertainment.

Click to expand...

John,

Just exactly what rationale do you use to suggest that 90% of what is posted on this forum is less than accurate?

A generous application of common sense required...

I've got the same philosophy as Paul - trust, but verify. Show me the data. I am an engineer, so I pretty much ignore the emotional stuff and home in on whatever facts are presented (if any).
When I first got on the Matronics Lists (AeroElectric and RV) in 2004, my first impression was this is more entertaining than "must watch TV" (the catch phrase that year) As my Internet browsing expanded to include VAF and some Yahoo lists, it became obvious in no time, who was trying to impart knowledge, and who was just spouting opinion. It is all food for thought, some meat & potatos, some candy.
In the end, each builder has to learn enough to be comfortable with his/her decisions on what and how to build. The more you learn, the easier it becomes, and the waterline of knowledge of those participating is raised along the way, even if all you learn is who to believe and who to ignore.

I think it comes down to thinking for yourself. I don't mind getting both ends of the spectrum when I ask a question because the responses allow me to challenge my own thinking as to how I was going to solve the problem. I've found that some folks really don't want to think, they just want an answer and they want it to be the "right" answer for them without investing any of their brain cells.

It is not just who on this (and other) forums you can trust but which web sites you can trust.

I know of one very popular RV builder's site that has a number of mistakes outlined in it. The builder never took the time to go back and note his errors/issues. Thus, a number of people have made the same mistakes as the original builder.

"Trust but verify" is one of my favorite quotes and when building, you need to do exactly that. (Even when the advice comes from me.)

<<He pointed out that on many topics and questions, if you read an entire thread, you will see diametrically opposed advice and answers to the same question. So what does a non-builder, or new builder do?>>

Excellent thread Paul.

"Trust but verify" is good, but I'd suggest simply "verify" is better.

First thing on the list, buy books and read 'em. Way too many homebuilders don't have the basics on their shelf; the A&P textbooks, AC43, Binglis, Machinery's Handbook, and more.

Make friends with some experts in various fields, and track others so you know who they are in case you need to ask a question. There are some real experts here in various areas. There are many more outside the RV world. Do your homework, ask an intelligent question, and most are more than happy to help you.

The net can be useful in checking or gathering information. The best sources are hardcore technical sites and manufacturer websites; read the white papers, TDS's, etc. The worst are usually forums. VAF is is really very good; large population, serious people. Way too many forums are idiocracies.

My personal pet peeve is the person who says "I don't want to read that" or "I can't learn that", or "I'm too busy for that". The same person usually wants someone to tell him the answer, and he wants the answer to be guaranteed accurate.

No pain, no gain. The purpose is education and recreation. Your guy skipped the education because he didn't build the airplane. He doesn't need a forum. He needs an A&P.

Interesting example

Take a look at the thread "Slick mag gone bad" posts #8 and #9 for a lesson in what Paul is talking about.

I really agree with Dan H. about having reference material handy. I am amazed how many questions on this forum, especially regulatory issues, can be answered with just a few minutes of research.

John Clark
RV8 N18U "Sunshine"
KSBA

John Clark said:

I am amazed how many questions on this forum, especially regulatory issues, can be answered with just a few minutes of research.

Click to expand...

Amen!!!!!!

N395V said:

John,

Just exactly what rationale do you use to suggest that 90% of what is posted on this forum is less than accurate?

Click to expand...

Three years of experience on this forum.

Ironflight said:

...Very rarely is there only one ?right? way to do something....
To what test do you put the ideas you find...

Click to expand...

Yeah, I deliberately snipped the OP to first, agree that there are usually several ways to do something, and secondly, to point out that isn't most of life subject to test?

It must have been easier for thousands of years. Things didn't change and knowledge was passed down mostly unquestioned. Then the Renaissance happened and knowledge started changing. People noted the conventional wisdom wasn't always correct.

I don't see much different with the Internet, forums, and building airplanes. Only the communication and subjects change, but the need for skepticism remains. Clever people will get ahead by comparing ideas and their own experiences, making a decision, and taking action, always comparing reality with their expectations. When there's a noticeable gap between the two they question their original decision and even their decision-making process.

Un-clever people just bull on ahead, never doubting their original decisions.

Agree with Dan's excellent post above. One should be cautious looking for "answers" as opposed to ideas.

In addition, this rule has served me well:
The level of bombast in a post is often inversely proportional to it's accuracy!

Another idea

Maybe we could change "GMCJETPILOT" to SNOPES.VAF

I guess this qualifies as a "me too" post. I always search my A&P textbooks for answers and usually find what I am looking for. Also, my EAA chapter has a few well respected members with good advice.

Here as a recent information quest story.
I am building a set of wooden biplane wings for my next project, a Hatz CB-1. But wait, what do I know about woodworking in aircraft? I have AC43.13 with lots of info on repairs to wood, but what about the order at which parts need to come together to build a set of squared and true all-wooden wings?
Well, by visiting Dick Navratil at SNF who runs the aircraft woodworking shop and was recently on the cover of sport aviation. He had a lot of good info and has mucho credibility in that field.
Also, my EAA members steered me towards Jim Miglino who is one of the older members of our chapter and has built two Hatz biplanes. Jim checked out what I did so far and lent me an out-of-print book called "Aircraft Woodworking" which essentially has the step by step process that I was looking for.

What's the point? Seek out experts and use established and accepted tech data. Experts are usually the ones whom others look up to, or have made a name for themselves by being recognized as outstanding in their craft.

The internet is a helpful tool (especially for me recently in my APRS research) but largely anonymous. Face-to-face or face-in-a-book is my method.

Here is a picture of Jim Miglino (AKA jedi master of wooden aircraft construction) checking out my feeble attempt at a wing.

Great post Paul...

In fact, your post has prompted me to answer a question you submitted to the group several months ago regarding the proper technique for flaring ss tubing for use somewhere on your engine. As I recall, the group offered little advice and/or answers to your question. Well, I don?t have a beautiful RV-8, but I?m thinking about ordering a tail kit. After lengthy consideration of just how different can a real airplane engine be from the model engines I?ve worked with for years, I have determined that there should be very little difference. So, in answer to your question and based on my many years of experience, I believe that if you first use a 45 degree flaring tool followed by a few light taps from a small hammer for final fit, you will achieve perfect results. I hope this helps and I apologize that it took so long to get you the answer. If for some reason you don?t achieve the desired results, send me a PM and I?ll try and walk you through the procedure. I apologize to all who I may have offended here... I generally have better control of my sometimes abstract humor.

Regards to all
R. E. ?Ernie? Butcher

"The level of bombast in a post is often inversely proportional to it's accuracy!"

I follow that philosophy, in addition to my finely-tuned intra-cranial "BS sensor". I'm an engineer by training, and after 35 years of working career as an engineering administrator, I can thankfully sniff BS a mile away. It takes only a quick read of 10 or so responses to a post for me to comfortably sort credible information from the incredible. I find there is plenty of both here in VAF, but am truly appreciative of the credible ... it has saved me uncountable time and trouble.
If 35 years of working didn't make me a gazillionaire, at least it gave me a very necessary skill for today's times.

VAF is a community

Many of us spend way too much time on this (and other) forums. Over time, you feel like you get to know the regular posters. I realize that this is a misconception. That said, see if you can recognize these prolific posters (No, I've never met any of them):

1) Long history with RV's, and other experimentals. Built, and has flown his RV now for over a decade. Inspected (he is a DAR) many of the RV's built by posters on this list. When he posts, I read very closely. He will also sometimes downplay some "new fangled" solutions by posting something to the effect that he doesn't have it on his plane and hasn't missed it in X years, missing the point that maybe someone is looking for "the better" solution.

2) Posts voluminous entries, and is very active on the forum. Habitually looks for references and data to support his posts, and is not afraid of sharing sources and getting into the nitty gritty of why his opinion is what it is. Has his "pet" issues. Occasionally gets too opinionated on an issue, but if you can swim through it, has good content that should be noted.

3) Habitual builder, and not just RV's. Has lots of knowledge on building techniques not common to RV's (i.e. glass) from that background. Has a scientific mind, with the abilty to get into amazingly detailed scientific discussions, including complex (to me, anyways) formulas and concepts. That said, he is clearly also a craftsman. I wish I could follow the science of his posts, but settle for trying to take hints from the craftsmanship.

3) This guy is an alt engine guy. He defends the sometime contentious position for auto engines, but does so from a point of knowledge, experience and the vision of what could be, rather than the blind opinion that "It's newer technology, so it must be better." If I were planning on an auto conversion, I'd do a search on all his posts and study... but I'm not.

4) A student of speed, because it is what he has chosen to focus his efforts on with his RV. Not for glory... not for commercial reasons... just because it is a challenge he finds compelling. Openly shares his experiences, and is wholely benign. Not intersted in convincing anyone, just sharing his experiences. I feel I can take what he says at face value.

5) Prolific poster. Seems to have the ability to shift from technical and scientific details to esoteric and philosophical "pleasures of building and flying an RV" topics. Has an uncanny knack to pull a post out of nowhere that everyone finds compelling and has to reply to. Very free with advice, but not particularly opinionated or "my way is the best way" with that advice. I may not get the direct and clear direction from him I'm seeking, but feel I'm unlikely to be led astray.

First, if you recognize yourself in the above, and if you don't like something in my characterisation, I apologize, as no offense was intended. Really, the opposite is true... I watch your posts out of respect. If you don't recognize yourself, well, I ran out of typing energy. There are lots of folks on here with great posts. Sorry.

The point, however, is that if you spend time here, I believe you get to learn who's opinion is worth considering on different topics. VAF is a community. Online, sure, but no different from other communities. There is good, there is bad, there are personalities and opinions, there are debates and there are infantile squabbles. Dropping in for one question may get you responses, but only by "living" in the community will you get "answers."

[Hopping off soapbox]

So, was I too obvious, or too obscure?

Just obvious enough to entertain. Loved it.

Bruce....ain't nothin' feeble about that wing. It's beautiful!

Defence of choice

One of the problems with technical email forums is that many people are prone to succumb to what I would describe as "defence of choice".

The recent P-Mag saga was a typical example. Builders who had experienced multiple problems with their P-Mags and who had been forced to return their equipment to the manufacturer on numerous occasions were recommending the product to others.
People are generally reluctant to admit they made a bad choice and in sifting through this forum for information I am constantly made aware of that fact.

I always remember a friend of mine who had one of the early Saab turbos (the car). He had it for a couple of years and whenever I asked him how it was going he said "magic machine" or words to that effect. Then he suddenly sold it. And when I asked him why, he said: "because I've never had so many problems with a new car...things were constantly breaking down".

Cheers Bob

What a great thread! It's sort of a sanity (or gut) check, and the fact you brought it up Paul (and the great responses) just shows the quality of this forum!

As a new guy to the RV world (bought my first airplane, an RV-6, last summer at 50, after 31 years of flying...still wet behind the ears relative to many here ) It's the fulfillment of a lifetime dream, dating back to the days of pulling inspection panels for annuals or rib-stitching Cub wings to get whatever flight time I could trade for! It has also been a wake-up call of monumental proportions. So much to learn (and re-learn) if I'm gonna do this right, and safely share aviation with my family and friends...a sobering responsibility!

The range of posters is so wide here, from student pilot dreaming about his or her first plane, to guys like me, to new builders, to those of you that have toiled the endless hours to build your dream machine. I've been impressed with the VAF forum community's grasp of that, and the responsible approach taken by the vast, vast majority. This forum has been a God-send, and has been a great component of my multi-faceted approach to learning what I need to know to fly and maintain my aircraft the right way. Of course, gotta read, ask, learn, and pan for the gold to get the straight poop...Paul's sure right about that!

On the (other) job, when Captains mentor FOs, we couch things depending on the situation. If it's about Policy (it MUST be done this way...regulations, etc.) it's discussed as such. If it's about Company Recommended Procedures (better have a good reason, i.e., Safety of Flight) for deviating from these, it's also discussed as such. If its about Technique (the flying technique for a specific profile that works best for the mentor), its important to offer it as such and to provide that caveat. From all of this, the new guy can learn and develop his or her own repertoire of Techniques, while adhering to Policy and Recommendations, and thus become the more complete airman.

Seems that much of what is discussed here could fall into similar categories, and I think much responsibility is shown here in the dissemination of information. Sometimes the wheat/chaff separation must be made, but overall quality is very high, and the moderators sure do a great job keeping it that way!

I certainly have found a huge amount of helpful information in my short run here, and try to be straight in my posts and caveat my stuff with "FNG". DARs, Moderators, and those that emerge via posts as highly experienced builders, flyers and mentors really get my attention. Others have much to offer too, whether it be experience (good, bad and ugly) or links to info that is often right "on-target, on time"!

I hope I can someday contribute a fraction of what others do on this forum. Till then, just happy to be a part of the team, and my thanks to all of the great folks out there! Hope to see you at OSH, the Reno Air Races (home turf) or out and about!

Cheers,

Bob Mills
"Rocket" RV-6
N600SS
4SD

The real politix of purchasing experimental products.

I have come to the conclusion that there are also "political" reasons why builders on VansAirforce can tend to be less than frank about the shortcomings of products they have purchased. Once again the P-Mag saga was revealing.

In the first couple of years of the P-Mag being on the market there were numerous requests by prospective purchasers for information on any problems that had arisen with the product. There was virtual silence, despite the fact that, as we now know, numerous P-Mag users were experiencing problems. That silence could easily have been misconstrued by prospective purchasers as evidence that all was well.

However that all changed when an RV was forced to make a landing on a road after the engine with dual P-Mags lost all power due to a timing malfunction. The result was that a trickle of P-Mag users started coming forward with tales of woe...and the trickle prompty became a flood as others joined in.

Why then, are builders often reluctant to admit that they are having problems with a product? Defence of choice aside, I believe it can have a lot to do with whether the builder perceives he is a captive of the technology he has purchased. For instance Lyclone purchasers may feel they have numerous support options open to them and may therefore be inclined to critisise the engine manufacturer as they see fit. Purchasers of an Eggenfelner engine may not feel the same.

It is logical that a purchaser might not feel inclined to publicly bag a manufacturer who he is entirely dependent on for parts and service for fear that the manufacturer will punish him with poor support.

In addition, and perhaps more importantly, the purchaser might fear that he might be adding to critisism that could send the manufacturer into insolvency....and thus leave the purchaser with a worthless orphaned product.

This is indeed a very interesting thread. And it highlights that in the expanding world of new high tech experimental aviation products pouring onto the market things are not always as they appear to be and that feedback (or lack thereof) from other posters is not always a good guide.

[Hopping off soapbox]

So, was I too obvious, or too obscure?
__________________
Jase Vanover

Click to expand...

Guess this also qualifies as a me too also but that was a great post Jase you pretty well hit the nail on the head.

<<It is logical that a purchaser might not feel inclined to publicly bag a manufacturer who he is entirely dependent on for parts and service for fear that the manufacturer will punish him with poor support.>>

Bob, you're on the money here. Can't begin to count the number of times I've seen that phenomenon. The opportunity for field experience reports about vendors and products is one of the net's best features, one that has really helped homebuilders since the net exploded into our homes 10-15 years ago. Sadly, as you note, things don't always work as they should.

DanH said:

<<It is logical that a purchaser might not feel inclined to publicly bag a manufacturer who he is entirely dependent on for parts and service for fear that the manufacturer will punish him with poor support.>>

Bob, you're on the money here. Can't begin to count the number of times I've seen that phenomenon. The opportunity for field experience reports about vendors and products is one of the net's best features, one that has really helped homebuilders since the net exploded into our homes 10-15 years ago. Sadly, as you note, things don't always work as they should.

Click to expand...

"..the best laid plans of mice and men....."

Part of the issue with some of us is we get an idea or notion in our heads to do something and in the process do not consider all the evidence concerning the matter. In other words, we want something to be such and such and come to believe it will be so, not matter what.

To be objective when the "bug" hits us is difficult. Sort of like getting married the first time.

Maybe with a mind trained to be analytical from the get go it is less risky, but many of us are free will thinkers and a bit vulnerable as a result.

In any event, much of the information coming across this forum is useful if only we would digest it accurately and not take only what we want to hear. If there is a conflict, certainly it needs to be clarified.

Capt Avgas, you are right about the P-mag issue. I saw the timing problems on an RV locally and mentioned it during some thread. This was prior to the RV making an off airport landing. Yet some people refused to believe that there was a problem.

While the P-mag concept seems to be very good, early adopters are essentially beta testers.

Personally, I would not use TWO of them. One and a regular mag perhaps.

I use one mag and one Lightspeed. Dissimilar failure modes hopefully.

So as not to blast P-Mag, I would not be surprised that it becomes a significant ignition system on experimentals in the coming years. I have also heard that their customer support is excellent.

It's all about risk management and comfort level...

Yukon said:

Interesting question Paul. For instance, how do you explain the guy this morning saying "Remove your Slick mags before they kill you" while P-Mag guys continue to fly their multiple P-Mag installations in the face of very poor service history?

I have gotten to the point of believing only about 10 per cent of what I hear here on the forum, the rest being pure entertainment.

Click to expand...

Firstly, I am one of those guys who has had a Slick Mag failure in flight, an avionics master switch failure that darkened a panel at night (neither of these happened on my RV) , and...most recently, a failure of one of only three circuit breakers in my panel on my RV, stranding me at a remote airport. Call it bad luck or the exception to the rule, it is what it is.

Rather than poke fun at others opinions/products/values or decision making rationale, I think this forum forces us into the valuable and never ending thought process of validating options in accordance with risk by providing the venue to express our own experiences. There are P-Mag haters, mag haters, carb haters, fuel injection haters, formation flying haters, priming wars and all other variants of disagreements going on, and because each of us has a different opinion (hopefully based on personal experience), it will always be that way. To derive the most value here, you have to be tolerant of hearing different opinions expressed, but that's the way life is. The big value of the forum is that its a real community of individuals interested in building and flying RV's who want to share their passion...that is the value I derive by being a member of this group. Besides the technical aspects of the forum, we're family.

You Still Have to Make Your Own Decision

In the end, no matter the advice, you still have to make your own decision.

You read people's rational for what they suggest, you do your own research, and then you make your own decision.

The person I rely on the most with my project recommended a carb instead of fuel injection. I went with the fuel injection. I also have dual P-mags. (Ooooh...)

Hans

Yukon said:

Bob,

Since we are all family, could you explain your thought process in running two P-Mags AND a carbon fiber plenum on your aircraft? Seems there has been lots of good reasons posted here on the forum against that thinking.

Click to expand...

I think we're getting a bit off-topic here. It's funny how the topic of "trustworthy information" starts a flame war about P-Mags and such.

A couple of these posters do an excellent job of demonstrating how their opinion is so heavily biased that they should (?) be filtered out (I guess that kind of steers the P-Mag tangent back toward the main point of the thread).

A couple of thoughts

I haven't really posted to much lately but thought I'd throw a few thoughts in on this subject.

The most recent issue first that requires some clearing up, Pmags. The RVer that had an off field, highway landing could have avoided this. He was new to RV's and a relatively low time pilot. He did not attempt to switch mags. Had he done so the engine would have ran fine to get him home. Instead he shut the engine down when the temps spiked.

I was an early adopter of the PMags. I had issues and never hid them and posted them several times. Despite that I continued with the product with excellent support and now have been trouble free for 150+hours. Notice there have been no recent activity reporting problems. Hopefully they have all the issues worked out. I referred people but with full disclosure.

The alternate engine people, despite an overwhelming percentage of per capita problems are the biggest defenders. I was once there but through intervention was saved!!!!

Regarding posters here, the thought of analyzing the poster is a good one. To me the key issue is, is this person known? As an example, Mel, Paul, Dan H., Doug (and many others) and I'll throw myself into this, all have a history of helping people and are known to others personally. I'm sure all of those mentioned have had many people visit their projects, flying in their planes and offer help. I've had 64 people in my plane of which 5 or 6 are now building. It is a great feeling to help others along.

The one individual mentioned by someone else for long posts, lots of links and technical data is often seen as knowledgeable. However, I've yet to meet anyone, anywhere who has actually met this person, in person. Phone calls yes, but not in person. For this reason, anything posted by this individual is immediately suspect and requires analysis for validity.

I remember something that many have heard, "Experts are anyone more than 50 miles from home." With the Internet, everyone is 50 miles from home.

In closing, I don't think I would have finished my plane without the help of the many dedicated people on the lists and forums. Information was evaluated in all cases where I was not personally familiar with the source.

I gain a certain measure of knowledge and some satisfaction from this forum. There are great ideas, good ideas, middling ideas, marginal ideas and truly bad ideas constantly floated about. I've often acted upon the opinion and advice of others if my building goals and "gut" instinct agree. Only rarely, have I regretted acting upon advice I first received here. On the other hand, had I listened to the words of one experienced builder, the ideas I implemented when building a canopy would have in his opinion rendered it with a balky operation and that simply did not happen. Another time I got caught up in a dispute about the inner workings of an artificial horizon. In the end, my first-hand experience with a defective AH showed me via several e-mails and telephone conversations that even the folks manufacturing it had differing opinions on the matter! Actually, both examples I just cited were seminal for me. In the end, I learned that sifting through conflicting information is always part of the process. Still, I do consider any topic of discussion posted here for what it is and when it is relevant to the conversation, if the poster has actually completed and flown his RV. Time in operational service and accumulated flight hours can do things to an airframe no "opinion" by someone half way through a fuselage kit can truly understand. Some frequent posters seem to spend a lot of time on-line and apparently have the knowledge base to comment on virtually any topic, yet the one place I don't see their name is the donation page. The fact is although some choose not to support this unique resource with a small annual donation, a simple profile of themselves, or even an avatar of their face, those things are not a "deal-killer" for me, but they are touchstones from which I form an opinion. Unless you happen to know the person personally or by his or her established reputation, what else do you really have to go on? As always, it is constantly and irrevocably up to the forum member to determine the veracity of information that is essentially anonymous in nature and openly shared with anyone and everyone on this fascinating stretch of the wide open information highway.

FWIW, I don't think how many times a person has posted means a thing in regards to how knowledgeable he / she is. It's the quality of the information that counts. Somehow you need to figure out on your won if the person knows what they are talking about. And sometimes even experts can be wrong.

Partial agreement

RScott said:

FWIW, I don't think how many times a person has posted means a thing in regards to how knowledgeable he / she is. It's the quality of the information that counts. Somehow you need to figure out on your won if the person knows what they are talking about. And sometimes even experts can be wrong.

Click to expand...

I would agree that post count is not an indicator in and of itself with respect to the quality of the information provided, however if you read some history of those many posts, it can help you form an opinion on the information that that person normally provides. If I see them consistently post good credible information on subjects that I know something about, then I'm more likely to consider their post on something unknown to me as a valid data point. If it's their first post, I have nothing to base my judgement on and will discount it accordingly.

Despite everything, builders who WANT to believe it works find comfort in the fact that there are a growing number of other builders (who also WANT to believe it works) opting for the Sikaflex route.

And what makes the whole phenomenon particularly frightening is that, in the absence of any engineering documentation (because no-one with with any real-world experience in polymeric glazing systems will put his name to it) virtually every Sikaflex canopy is fabricated slightly differently.

Click to expand...

Once upon a time there were a couple of guys named Wilber and Orville. They weren't engineers but they believed powered flight by humans was possible as did a few others. The engineers and scientific types of the time advised against trying. But they and others persisted and the first several airplanes were all fabricated differently. The rest is history. Just because there is no evidence to prove something doesn't mean it will not work and just because recognized experts advise caution doesn't mean it shouldn't be done.

Probably the best reference work on the matter of believing is this song from one of the movies: "Wishing, can make it so, just keep on wishing, and cares will go. Dreamers tell us dreams come true, make no mistake. And wishes are the dreams we dream, when we're awake. The curtain of night will fall, if you're not certain within your heart. So if you wish long enough, wish strong enough, you will come to know, wishing, can make it so!"

Note from moderator
Stikaflex debate moved to its own thread.
You may resume normal programming disussions about "Advice from the Net…..What Can You Trust? "

I always caution when I see any 'talk' in absolutes or extremes, or talk about "experience" but not walked the "expierence".

I like the Trust, but Verify...I think it is a good Motto for our little patch on the internet, but not something for the whole net!!!

I would hope I can trust another person here, I believe like minded people are generaly good at heart. But would not blindly put my but or lot of money on the line...I would like to verify.