X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2009 23:10:26 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from [216.40.44.189] (HELO smtprelay.hostedemail.com) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.2.13) with ESMTP id 3595155 for lml@lancaironline.net; Fri, 24 Apr 2009 06:44:58 -0400 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=216.40.44.189; envelope-from=micah@froese.com Received: from filter.hostedemail.com (ff-bigip1 [10.5.19.254]) by smtprelay03.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 140411428149 for ; Fri, 24 Apr 2009 10:44:23 +0000 (UTC) X-Spam-Summary: 10,1,0,ee944c48907dd835,e470f2b36969ee97,micah@froese.com,lml@lancaironline.net,RULES_HIT:355:375:379:476:854:945:962:972:973:983:988:989:1187:1189:1208:1224:1260:1261:1311:1313:1314:1345:1431:1433:1434:1437:1515:1516:1517:1534:1542:1571:1572:1588:1589:1593:1594:1685:1711:1730:1747:1766:1792:2194:2198:2199:2200:2378:2393:2553:2559:2562:2691:2693:2828:2902:3027:3280:3352:3636:3865:3866:3867:3868:3869:3870:3871:3872:3873:3874:3876:3877:4029:4250:4605:5007:6114:6117:6119:7081:7576:7652:7903:7974:8501:8527:9177:9545,0,RBL:none,CacheIP:none,Bayesian:0.5,0.5,0.5,Netcheck:none,DomainCache:0,MSF:not bulk,SPF:,MSBL:none,DNSBL:none Received: from [192.168.1.101] (h218.96.21.98.dynamic.ip.windstream.net [98.21.96.218]) (Authenticated sender: micah@froese.com) by omf04.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP for ; Fri, 24 Apr 2009 10:44:22 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-Message-ID: <49F19806.2010001@froese.com> X-Original-Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2009 06:44:22 -0400 From: Micah Froese User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (Windows/20090302) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Original-To: Lancair Mailing List Subject: Subject:,RE: [LML] Re: Insurance Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-session-marker: 6D696361684066726F6573652E636F6D Bill,

I believe this to be a different song, in a different key. Now instead of having one entity controlling insurance, we have competition, always a good thing.

I don't believe the whole issue is "nuts". One out of four Lancair IV's have been destroyed, something needs to happen. Suggest you talk to some of the people who have had Charlie check their plane out for them. Look at Charlie's experience in IV's and his safety record. Look at the safety record of students he has signed off. Compare that to others and then ask yourself, "is Charlie better at that effort?"

Micah Froese

Subject:

RE: [LML] Re: Insurance

From:

"Bill Bradburry" <bbradburry@bellsouth.net>

Date:

Thu, 23 Apr 2009 20:42:41 -0400

To:

lml@lancaironline.net

Same song second verse.  

Now instead of Lancair controlling who can do the training, we will have
Charlie Kohler doing it.  That means that the flight instructors he picks
and gets "regionally set" can charge exorbitant fees just like the situation
now.
The FAA approves flight instructors.  What is wrong with that? Part of the
training the FAA has for flight instructor qualification is developing a
training syllabus.  Is Charlie that much better at that effort?
This whole issue is nuts.  

Bill