-----Original Message-----
From: Ron Laughlin <ronlaughlin@gmail.com>
To: lml@lancaironline.net
Sent: Thu, Jul 14, 2011 3:51 pm
Subject: [LML] Re: Certified vs Experimental Flight Hours
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 represent
> 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. One year at Oshkosh there was a special
> display area for homebuilts with over 1000 hours. There were just a
> handful. Bill Hannahan's Lancair was one of them. On the other side of the
> runway were thousands of spam-cans, all certified. 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. Virtually all spam cans have
> thousands.
>
> As to the real question -- do homebuilt owners fly their airplanes more
> hours per year than spam can owners -- I have no idea.
>
> - Rob Wolf
>
> p.s. I do not use the term "spam can" as pejorative. 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
--
For archives and unsub http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/lml/List.html