|
|
Al Gietzen wrote:
Am I way off the mark here? Could/would this work? Are there others out there who would participate as “examiners”? Would you welcome such “look-over” on your project? Do you think it would do any good? I’d like some feedback on this, and then see whether it makes sense to pursue it any further.
I’d be willing to coordinate with Paul Lamar to see if there are folks on his list (that aren’t also here) who would participate.
Al
I'd jump onboard in a heartbeat, Al. If for no other reason than to get good ideas for my own installation.
I don't have a lot of hands-on knowledge, just a lot of theory, and most of it picked up here. But I don't think that should be a hindrance. I've had and will continue to have people I think are intelligent but know very little about aviation to examine my airplane. I want to hear the, 'Why did you do it like that?" questions. If it can't be explained to a neophyte in 10 sentences or less, then *I* don't understand why I did it and I either need to fix it or study some more. (Please don't think I'm not knocking the experts. The "your engine will sieze up in 200 hrs because..." type statements are also handy 8*)
I also think the group of inspectors is important. There is an emotional tie to a mechanical device once you spent a few hundred hours working on it. One person telling you that your baby isn't perfect is "confrontational". A group of people saying the same thing is "enlightening".
Ernest (going to pick up my second rotary after work)
--
,|"|"|, |
----===<{{(oQo)}}>===---- Dyke Delta |
o| d |o www.ernest.isa-geek.org |
|
|