Return-Path: <lancair.list-request@olsusa.com>
Received: from imo27.mx.aol.com ([152.163.225.71]) by truman.olsusa.com
          (Post.Office MTA v3.5.1 release 219 ID# 0-52269U2500L250S0V35)
          with ESMTP id com for <lancair.list@olsusa.com>;
          Sat, 1 Jan 2000 10:51:30 -0500
Received: from RWolf99@aol.com
	by imo27.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v24.6.) id k.0.b875007a (3706)
	 for <lancair.list@olsusa.com>; Sat, 1 Jan 2000 10:56:13 -0500 (EST)
From: RWolf99@aol.com
Message-ID: <0.b875007a.259f7d9d@aol.com>
Date: Sat, 1 Jan 2000 10:56:13 EST
Subject: Dual Radios
To: lancair.list@olsusa.com
X-Mailing-List: lancair.list@olsusa.com
Mime-Version: 1.0

          <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<--->>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
          <<  Lancair Builders' Mail List  >>
          <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<--->>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>

Jim Frantz gently reminds us that the need for the second NAV/COM we're all 
used to stems from the unreliability of the radios we grew up with, and the 
reliability of today's radios makes their duplication unnecessary.  However, 
I think he went overboard in a couple of his comments.  

For the record, I have an IFR Cessna 150 with one com, two navs and a DME, 
and some of this equipment will be transferred to the Lancair when the time 
comes.  I plan on two COM radios, at least one NAV, plus either a DME or GPS. 
 (Of course, if Santa dropped off a Garmin 530 I wouldn't need anything else 
but the second COM...)  

Specific rebuttals follow:

<<The proper procedure for retreiving ATIS is to get a clearance from the 
controller to go off freq.>>
 
Maybe, but switching from ATC to ATIS is a pain in the butt, especially when 
it's a busy day down here in Southern California (probably works well in 
Minnesota, though, and other less congested areas).  Occasionally I fly an 
aircraft with two COM  radios and I prefer getting ATIS without dropping off 
the main line.  No problem missing clearances since I don't listen to ATIS 
when copying clearances.  Besides, it's amazing how hearing your call sign 
focuses your attention on the air traffic controller speaking to you on COM 
1.  No problem tuning out ATIS then since their story repeats.  Sure wish I 
had a second COM in my 150, and you bet there will be one in the Lancair.

<<The 2nd COM is kind of like having a second wife, it's useless, expensive 
and complicates life.  Same goes with the 2nd NAV.>>

I actually get along better with my second wife than I did with my first.  I 
presume that Jim was talking about having two at the same time.... <G>

I would hate to live with only one NAV if I didn't also have a DME or a GPS.  
I had the misfortune of flying a rental 172 with a single coffee-grinder NAV 
and it was a much higher workload than I liked.  A flip-flop frequency 
selector would have helped, but the DME (or GPS) is a much a better solution. 
 I agree that a second VOR is not required, but in its absence a second 
positioning device is needed.  I would opt for a DME before a second VOR.

That's my 2 cents.

-Rob Wolf
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
LML website:   http://www.olsusa.com/Users/Mkaye/maillist.html
Builders' Bookstore:   http://www.buildersbooks.com/lancair

Please send your photos and drawings to marvkaye@olsusa.com.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>