Return-Path: Received: from pop3.olsusa.com ([63.150.212.2] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.5.6) with ESMTP id 1126613 for rob@logan.com; Tue, 05 Mar 2002 07:19:23 -0500 Received: from imo-m01.mx.aol.com ([64.12.136.4]) by pop3.olsusa.com (Post.Office MTA v3.5.3 release 223 ID# 0-71866U8000L800S0V35) with ESMTP id com for ; Tue, 5 Mar 2002 02:08:59 -0500 Received: from AVIDWIZ@aol.com by imo-m01.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v32.5.) id k.4e.78a5992 (16785) for ; Tue, 5 Mar 2002 02:11:42 -0500 (EST) From: AVIDWIZ@aol.com Message-ID: <4e.78a5992.29b5c9ae@aol.com> Date: Tue, 5 Mar 2002 02:11:42 EST Subject: Walts Lancair two axis trim indicator Panel problem To: lancair.list@olsusa.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailing-List: lancair.list@olsusa.com Reply-To: lancair.list@olsusa.com <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<--->>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> << Lancair Builders' Mail List >> <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<--->>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> In a message dated 3/4/02 10:41:44 PM, lancair.list@olsusa.com writes: << Lancair two axis trim indicator >> Dear Walter, I gather from your post that you spent $98,000 with Lancair's Avionics supplier for a panel that has a substantial fault which could result in the loss of night vision and/or the inability of the pilot to properly interpret the signals from the trim indicator. Both of these situations could lead to an in flight emergency resulting in loss of property, injuries or loss of life. Wow...I can only imagine how you must feel having spent the cost of an average single family dwelling on a panel which is not functional. One suggestion to get the problem solved before this results would be to send a certified letter to Lance, Lancair, the local FSDO, The NTSB Office in your area, the Secretary of Transportation in Wash DC and FAA Headquarters in OKC stating the faults you have discovered in their design and/or workmanship and citing your safety in flight concerns. This would ensure at minimum an enquiry by the FAA which would no doubt prove your assumptions to be correct. Remember woe unto the FAA Inspector who fails to follow up a safety in flight complaint which later results in an accident! Remember Walt, the mere fact our planes are classified as "experimental" does NOT give every yahoo open season to "experiment" on us. Holding our suppliers to the same standards as one would expert from a "certified" installation is only fair and more importantly the safe thing to do. I would imagine a company as reputable as Lancair would jump at the opportunity to increase the margin of safety in their product line so you should expect a warm and helpful response from them. If they have a supplier which is not living upt o their high standards they should know about it and a formal certified letter will probably get the attention of those who are in position to help. After all when one of our planes does crash it still says XYZ "Lancair" on the NTSB Report. I am sure that once you have formally pointed out the potential defect, they will take steps to remedy the problem. Similarly, since the FAA has substantial experience in determining what is deemed safe, they too will no doubt have some suggestions. Good luck and please keep those of us on the list apprised of how things develop. Regards, Dave >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> LML website: http://members.olsusa.com/mkaye/maillist.html LML Builders' Bookstore: http://www.buildersbooks.com/lancair Please remember that purchases from the Builders' Bookstore assist with the management of the LML. Please send your photos and drawings to marvkaye@olsusa.com. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>