X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com
Return-Path: <marv@lancaironline.net>
Sender: <marv@lancaironline.net>
To:  lml@lancaironline.net
Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2011 16:51:02 -0400
Message-ID: <redirect-5052016@logan.com>
X-Original-Return-Path: <ronlaughlin@gmail.com>
Received: from mail-fx0-f42.google.com ([209.85.161.42] verified)
  by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.4.0)
  with ESMTPS id 5051960 for lml@lancaironline.net; Thu, 14 Jul 2011 15:53:32 -0400
Received-SPF: pass
 receiver=logan.com; client-ip=209.85.161.42; envelope-from=ronlaughlin@gmail.com
Received: by fxe23 with SMTP id 23so1229013fxe.1
        for <lml@lancaironline.net>; Thu, 14 Jul 2011 12:52:46 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.223.78.205 with SMTP id m13mr554127fak.49.1310673166157; Thu,
 14 Jul 2011 12:52:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.223.1.132 with HTTP; Thu, 14 Jul 2011 12:52:46 -0700 (PDT)
Reply-To: ronlaughlin@hotmail.com
In-Reply-To: <list-5051930@logan.com>
References: <list-5051930@logan.com>
X-Original-Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2011 14:52:46 -0500
X-Original-Message-ID: <CACG4thLOdLuthoNJbNKd5djB+waySRjyXfLgvaJNPCZhUpdJ6g@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [LML] Re: Certified vs Experimental Flight Hours
From: Ron Laughlin <ronlaughlin@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: Lancair Mailing List <lml@lancaironline.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hmmm, You might want to check FlightAware's website from time to time
and see how many experimentals are in the system at any given time. I
find only 2 Glassairs and one Lancair at the moment. There are a bunch
of certifieds (62 Cirrus's and 51 SkyHawks, etc.).

<http://flightaware.com/live/aircrafttype/>

Ron



On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 2:30 PM, Ted Noel <tednoel@cfl.rr.com> wrote:
> Interesting observation, but not adjusted for age. Experimentals are
> generally newer than production A/C, and those thousands of hours represe=
nt
> how many last year???? It's possible for both observations to be true.
>
> Ted Noel
> N540TF
>
> On 7/13/2011 8:19 AM, rwolf99@aol.com wrote:
>
> Randy writes:
>
> <<I believe there are more flight hours per plane for experimentals that
> certifieds...>>
>
> I don't see how that could be.=A0 One year at Oshkosh there was a special
> display area for homebuilts with over 1000 hours.=A0 There were just a
> handful.=A0 Bill Hannahan's Lancair was one of them.=A0=A0On the other si=
de of the
> runway were thousands of spam-cans, all certified.=A0 I'll bet that none =
had
> less than 1000 hours, and most had more than 2000 hours.
>
> Further, every experimental for sale in Trade-a-Plane or ASO.com seems to
> have between 100 and maybe 500 hours.=A0 Virtually all spam cans have
> thousands.
>
> As to the real question -- do homebuilt owners fly their airplanes more
> hours per year=A0than spam can owners -- I have no idea.
>
> - Rob Wolf
>
> p.s.=A0 I do not use the term "spam can" as pejorative.=A0 I used to own =
one and
> had a lot of fun with it.
>
>
> ________________________________
>
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 10.0.1390 / Virus Database: 1516/3764 - Release Date: 07/14/11