X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml Date: Sun, 21 May 2006 13:35:54 -0400 Message-ID: X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com X-SpamCatcher-Score: 2 [X] X-PolluStop-Diagnostic: ########## X-Orig-Return-Path: stuart.c.adams@gmail.com X-PolluStop-Score: 1.00 X-PolluStop: Scanned with Niversoft PolluStop v2.3.1d X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from nz-out-0102.google.com ([64.233.162.207] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.0.9) with ESMTP id 1121107 for marv@lancaironline.net; Sat, 20 May 2006 08:54:13 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=64.233.162.207; envelope-from=stuart.c.adams@gmail.com Received: by nz-out-0102.google.com with SMTP id x3so892086nzd for ; Sat, 20 May 2006 05:53:28 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:from:to:subject:date:message-id:mime-version:content-type:x-priority:x-msmail-priority:x-mailer:importance:x-mimeole; b=NRP0GA8xUkvVV5QP6co6FgzTsONIH1oyBhOEMUByaGXB9tJOwUhiWGLF/lKU49x840NmQJm3GXUhKy/jCKwUPCp+dISf6mOCCSEdzvNc/RT/qamyqH+2ESAqurys9QA6fg4NvHm+ES4pZlxqFs51x6rI3Ya04FYVj9Yfg/jEmTk= Received: by 10.36.227.73 with SMTP id z73mr3388960nzg; Sat, 20 May 2006 05:53:27 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from SHUTTLEAMD ( [67.167.213.72]) by mx.gmail.com with ESMTP id j4sm1827282nzd.2006.05.20.05.53.27; Sat, 20 May 2006 05:53:27 -0700 (PDT) From: "Stuart Adams" X-Original-To: Subject: IVP Crash X-Original-Date: Sat, 20 May 2006 07:53:40 -0500 X-Original-Message-ID: <001401c67c0c$6ba735d0$6401a8c0@SHUTTLEAMD> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0015_01C67BE2.82D12DD0" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.6626 Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0015_01C67BE2.82D12DD0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I am currently flying a Legacy and have not experienced any of the = issues that have been discussed so far in this thread. I had great transition training from Charlie Kohler which I think is a huge plus but the plane itself is a joy to fly. It makes sense that the small surface area of = the wing which helps derive the speed at altitude also demands more speed in = the pattern. Unfortunately, stall/spin accidents happen quite often and to almost every type in GA. If RA thinks Lancairs are =93twitchy=94 maybe = he should hand fly an approach in a Cirrus SR22 (of which I have 300+ = hours) =96 my point is that with less than 1 hour in type RA is wrong to be = blasting these planes =96 he has no credible basis. I find the CAF=C9 flight = tests to be quite unbiased and saw nothing in them that would lead one to the accusations so proposed.=20 =20 Happy flying, =20 Stuart ------=_NextPart_000_0015_01C67BE2.82D12DD0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I am currently flying a Legacy and have not = experienced any of the issues that have been discussed so far in this thread.  I = had great transition training from Charlie Kohler which I think is a huge plus but = the plane itself is a joy to fly.  It makes sense that the small = surface area of the wing which helps derive the speed at altitude also demands more = speed in the pattern.   Unfortunately, stall/spin accidents happen = quite often and to almost every type in GA.  If RA thinks Lancairs are = “twitchy” maybe he should hand fly an approach in a Cirrus SR22 (of which I have = 300+ hours) – my point is that with less than 1 hour in type RA is = wrong to be blasting these planes – he has no credible basis.  I find the = CAF=C9 flight tests to be quite unbiased and saw nothing in them that would = lead one to the accusations so proposed.

 

Happy flying,

 

Stuart

------=_NextPart_000_0015_01C67BE2.82D12DD0--