X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2008 23:09:40 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from elasmtp-scoter.atl.sa.earthlink.net ([209.86.89.67] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.2.6) with ESMTP id 3103490 for lml@lancaironline.net; Mon, 01 Sep 2008 12:55:08 -0400 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=209.86.89.67; envelope-from=leighton@teleport.com DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=dk20050327; d=teleport.com; b=GhZYCaBzJ+luOWnom5cITS4on/dsV7iJ7wqGXAkmmkEZR2KYhBIQuFwBel0VysxP; h=Received:Message-ID:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-Priority:X-MSMail-Priority:X-Mailer:X-MimeOLE:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Received: from [71.193.177.17] (helo=user) by elasmtp-scoter.atl.sa.earthlink.net with esmtpa (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1KaCfe-0002sr-UH for lml@lancaironline.net; Mon, 01 Sep 2008 12:54:31 -0400 X-Original-Message-ID: <11078D4C724241F18CD2DCE7360EBF27@user> From: "Leighton" X-Original-To: "Lancair Mail list" Subject: Lancair accidents X-Original-Date: Mon, 1 Sep 2008 09:54:33 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0003_01C90C18.BC600E90" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5512 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5579 X-ELNK-Trace: ea0fe3d44b30ba0fc355332e9c4b49d599594df05feb3df1f6c5986263eb4c41ec1e7d924b47e0d4350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 71.193.177.17 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0003_01C90C18.BC600E90 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I've been following this thread with interest and, while I certainly = don't have any thoughts that the professional pilots among us haven't = brought up, I have a couple thoughts/questions. First, I don't know if = it's proportional but it must be taken into account that there are a lot = more Lancairs getting into the air every year. We seem to have some = accomplished statisticians in the group and perhaps they can find out = how much the flying fleet is increasing year by year. Also, I'd be = interested in knowing whether the accident rate is higher for original = owners of the planes or is it biased to secondary owners. Another thing = that is changing a lot over the years is that more and more Lancairs are = being sold and I wonder if someone who'd rather buy than spend the time = building has a different mind set about flying than someone who is = involved enough to go through the challenge of building. Checking the = registration on Lancairs involved in accidents will show who the = original builder was. Perhaps second owners are less likely to get = appropriate training because they haven't been following all the = conversations we see on the LML and may regard a Lancair as just another = airplane. Just a thought. Another factor may be that in many cases = builders tend to not do much flying during the building process and may = not be as sharp during the initial flight testing as they should be. =20 As I said, I have more questions than answers. Perhaps others have some = numbers to apply to these situations. Might be interesting and = enlightening. Leighton Mangels ------=_NextPart_000_0003_01C90C18.BC600E90 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I've been following this thread with interest and, = while I=20 certainly don't have any thoughts that the professional pilots among us = haven't=20 brought up, I have a couple thoughts/questions. First, I don't = know if=20 it's proportional but it must be taken into account that there are a lot = more=20 Lancairs getting into the air every year. We seem to have some=20 accomplished statisticians in the group and perhaps they can find out = how much=20 the flying fleet is increasing year by year. Also, I'd be = interested in=20 knowing whether the accident rate is higher for original owners of the = planes or=20 is it biased to secondary owners. Another thing that is changing a = lot=20 over the years is that more and more Lancairs are being sold and I = wonder if=20 someone who'd rather buy than spend the time building has a different = mind set=20 about flying than someone who is involved enough to go through the = challenge of=20 building. Checking the registration on Lancairs involved in = accidents will=20 show who the original builder was. Perhaps second owners are less = likely=20 to get appropriate training because they haven't been following all the=20 conversations we see on the LML and may regard a Lancair as just another = airplane. Just a thought. Another factor may be that in many = cases=20 builders tend to not do much flying during the building process and may = not be=20 as sharp during the initial flight testing as they should be. =

As I said, I have more questions than answers. = Perhaps=20 others have some numbers to apply to these situations. Might be=20 interesting and enlightening.

Leighton Mangels

------=_NextPart_000_0003_01C90C18.BC600E90--