X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2011 16:11:59 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from elasmtp-kukur.atl.sa.earthlink.net ([209.86.89.65] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.4.0) with ESMTP id 5055784 for lml@lancaironline.net; Mon, 18 Jul 2011 15:11:35 -0400 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=209.86.89.65; envelope-from=colyncase@earthlink.net DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=Zx/6Am8WwN9sfIvTe2ObmwdrYesaguio9RzDVY7pDA67ogZtBOf6lYJ/ZxItL9Zt; h=Received:From:Mime-Version:Content-Type:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:To:References:Message-Id:X-Mailer:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Received: from [64.223.165.19] (helo=[192.168.1.24]) by elasmtp-kukur.atl.sa.earthlink.net with esmtpa (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1QitDX-0004i7-3K for lml@lancaironline.net; Mon, 18 Jul 2011 15:10:59 -0400 From: Colyn Case Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1082) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-82--150906538 Subject: Re: [LML] Certified vs Experimental Flight Hours X-Original-Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2011 15:10:58 -0400 In-Reply-To: X-Original-To: "Lancair Mailing List" References: X-Original-Message-Id: <97BD5DC2-9297-498B-8DF2-AB4161A0F346@earthlink.net> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1082) X-ELNK-Trace: 63d5d3452847f8b1d6dd28457998182d7e972de0d01da940156e4bb18ffc2588770af8d612c05d6f350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 64.223.165.19 --Apple-Mail-82--150906538 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 not always clear. The controllers have to be there to protect the = airlines. I'm not sure what the marginal cost of supporting us is. = ...and I'm not sure that talking to us isn't good for protecting the = airlines. On Jul 18, 2011, at 12:26 PM, Bill Hannahan wrote: > Free? It costs the taxpayers about $25 bucks every time you key the = mike. >=20 > Regards, > Bill Hannahan >=20 > wfhannahan@yahoo.com >=20 >=20 > --- On Sun, 7/17/11, N66mg@aol.com wrote: >=20 > From: N66mg@aol.com > Subject: [LML] Re: Certified vs Experimental Flight Hours > To: lml@lancaironline.net > Date: Sunday, July 17, 2011, 8:11 AM >=20 > It's hard to believe that most pilots don't use it at all, flight = following...I can't figure that one out...It's free and keeps you up to = date and watches out for you...In southern California it would be nuts = not to use it with all the traffic here > Michael > n66mg > n7sz 94% > =20 > In a message dated 7/14/2011 9:47:39 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, = bbradburry@bellsouth.net writes: > Ron, >=20 > That gives an interesting picture, but you should remember that you = must > either file IFR or request flight following to show up on flight = aware. I > don=92t think many experimental pilots do that. I would probably = estimate > that at any given time that 90%+ of the experimental planes aloft will = not > show up. >=20 >=20 > Bill B >=20 >=20 > -----Original Message----- > From: Lancair Mailing List [mailto:lml@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of = Ron > Laughlin > Sent: Thursday, July 14, 2011 4:51 PM > To: lml@lancaironline.net > Subject: [LML] Re: Certified vs Experimental Flight Hours >=20 > 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.). >=20 > >=20 > Ron >=20 >=20 >=20 > On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 2:30 PM, Ted Noel 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: > > > > <> 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 >=20 > -- > For archives and unsub = http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/lml/List.html >=20 >=20 > -- > For archives and unsub = http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/lml/List.html --Apple-Mail-82--150906538 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252 not = always clear.     The controllers have to be there to protect = the airlines.  I'm not sure what the marginal cost of supporting us = is.  ...and I'm not sure that talking to us isn't  good for = protecting the airlines.

On Jul 18, 2011, at 12:26 PM, = Bill Hannahan wrote:

Free? It costs the taxpayers = about $25 bucks every time you key the mike.

Regards,
=
Bill Hannahan

--- On Sun, 7/17/11, N66mg@aol.com <N66mg@aol.com> = wrote:

From: N66mg@aol.com <N66mg@aol.com>
Subject: [LML] = Re: Certified vs Experimental Flight Hours
To: lml@lancaironline.net
Date: = Sunday, July 17, 2011, 8:11 AM

=20
It's hard = to believe that=20 most pilots don't use it at all, flight following...I can't figure that = one=20 out...It's free and keeps you up to date and watches out for you...In = southern=20 California it would be nuts not to use it with all the traffic = here
Michael
n66mg
n7sz = 94%
 
In a message dated 7/14/2011 9:47:39 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,=20 bbradburry@bellsouth.net = writes:
Ron,

That gives an = interesting picture, but you should=20 remember that you must
either file IFR or request flight following = to show=20 up on flight aware.  I
don=92t think many experimental pilots = do=20 that.  I would probably estimate
that at any given time that = 90%+ of=20 the experimental planes aloft will not
show up.


Bill=20 B


-----Original Message-----
From: Lancair Mailing List=20= [mailto:lml@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of Ron
Laughlin
Sent: = Thursday,=20 July 14, 2011 4:51 PM
To: lml@lancaironline.net
Subject= : [LML] Re:=20 Certified vs Experimental Flight Hours

Hmmm, You might want to = check=20 FlightAware's website from time to time
and see how many = experimentals are=20 in the system at any given time. I
find only 2 Glassairs and one = Lancair at=20 the moment. There are a bunch
of certifieds (62 Cirrus's and 51 = SkyHawks,=20 etc.).

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

Ron



On=20 Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 2:30 PM, Ted Noel <tednoel@cfl.rr.com>=20 wrote:
> Interesting observation, but not adjusted for age.=20 Experimentals are
> generally newer than production A/C, and = those=20 thousands of hours
represent
> how many last year???? It's = possible=20 for both observations to be true.
>
> Ted Noel
>=20 N540TF
>
> On 7/13/2011 8:19 AM, rwolf99@aol.com=20 wrote:
>
> Randy writes:
>
> <>=20 certifieds...>>
>
> I don't see how that could = be.  One=20 year at Oshkosh there was a special
> display area for = homebuilts with=20 over 1000 hours.  There were just a
> handful.  Bill=20= Hannahan's Lancair was one of them.  On the other side=20 of
the
> runway were thousands of spam-cans, all = certified. =20 I'll bet that none had
> less than 1000 hours, and most had more = than=20 2000 hours.
>
> Further, every experimental for sale in=20 Trade-a-Plane or ASO.com seems = to
> have between 100 and maybe 500=20 hours.  Virtually all spam cans have
> = thousands.
>
>=20 As to the real question -- do homebuilt owners fly their airplanes=20 more
> hours per year than spam can owners -- I have no=20 idea.
>
> - Rob Wolf
>
> p.s.  I do not = use the=20 term "spam can" as pejorative.  I used to own one
and
> = had a=20 lot of fun with it.
>
>
>=20 ________________________________
>
> No virus found in = this=20 message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 10.0.1390 /=20= Virus Database: 1516/3764 - Release Date: 07/14/11

--
For = archives=20 and unsub=20 http://mail.= lancaironline.net:81/lists/lml/List.html


--
For=20 archives and unsub=20 http://mail.= lancaironline.net:81/lists/lml/List.html
=
= --Apple-Mail-82--150906538--