|
|
Bryan,
Good questions. Let me see if I can answer some of them ...
What does this mean for Lancair's future? Obviously not good. Anything that adds cost to a product means it is less affordable and that translates generally to fewer sales. A better question would be "What does this mean for Lancair customers, builders & fliers?" Well obviously, if Lancair is out of business-- not good because who would sell you Lancair specific parts? If you are a Lancair owner assist build shop or small business part supplier, not good either.
What's wrong with mandatory training? Again, if it does not affect you directly, nothing. But then if you are the person stuck with the $3000 training invoice you might be a little more interested in the outcome of this regulatory effort. What if the FAA makes this mandatory training an annual requirement? Oh, $1000 -$3000 a year added to your cost of flying.
As Ron Miller posed in his post today, "why should I care about other pilot's flying habits and not just worry about my own?" Besides the human side of these tragedies, there is an economic side, too. Now you can see what we all should be concerned about. Is the sky falling? Not yet, but we are heading in that direction and we need to turn it around. That effort starts with changing pilots attitudes about safety, risk, flying, etc. There is a whole lot of "stupid" going on in this Lancair flying community and the GA community at large and it is not just confined to the few pilots who flew through thunderstorms.
Jeff
If the IV is or becomes un-insurable what does that mean for Lancair's future? I would think insurance companies would just start adding other Lancair models to the list of un-insurables too.
Whats wrong with mandatory initial training?
Bryan
-----Original Message-----
From: Bryan Wullner <vonjet@gmail.com>
To: lml@lancaironline.net
Sent: Sun, 31 Aug 2008 6:49 am
Subject: [LML] Re: Legacy video
If the IV is or becomes un-insurable what does that mean for Lancair's future? I would think insurance companies would just start adding other Lancair models to the list of un-insurables too.
Whats wrong with mandatory initial training?
Bryan
On Fri, Aug 29, 2008 at 4:11 PM, <vtailjeff@aol.com> wrote:
John, Bryan & other like minded individuals,
In case you have been living on another planet these last few months you may not be aware of the crisis our deceased Lancair brethren have created.
1. If you own a Lancair IV series aircraft you have been informed by AIG that they will not renew your insurance policy due to the Lancair losses this past year (and not all Lancair losses are IV's). Although I was paying over $7000/ year for hull and liability-- I may not be able to get it at all. Thank you very much.
2. The FAA is seriously considering making mandatory initial training by an approved CFI prior to acting as PIC. Thank you very, very much.
These aircraft are not toys. Please fly responsibly. We do not need any more accidents. If you post your stuff on youtube.com--do not be shocked that someone thinks negatively of you actions.
Best Regards,
Jeff
Posted for "Jon Socolof" < jsocolof@ershire.com>:
Hi,
I've never posted on the LML before but I'd like to respond to those unhappy
with the Legacy videos.
I posted a video of my Legacy http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=htM9K3BwXbU and
what you see is a "low approach" directly over the runway a maneuver that is
perfectly legal and safe. Everybody I have met that has seen the video has
enjoyed it. I'm sorry that some feel it demonstrates reckless behavior, I
simply disagree. I built my airplane to enjoy and I'm proud of the video we
shot. For those that may be unhappy with my video I'd rather you just
appreciate it for what it is and go on your way without comment.
Jon Socolof
Legacy 212XP
|
|