Jerry H wrote:
Sounds stifling to me.  At this point, the rotary installation is still evolving rapidly and new ideas appear all the time.  Trying to comply with "old" ADs is a different mind set entirely.  I think every builder should be encouraged to follow Georges' recommendations, especially about ground testing but beyond that is is up to the builder.  I realize I am the only voice that is not enthusiastic about the formation of the safety police.   Jerry

------------------------------------------
Buly once wrote why don't we just do it like Tracy and we can all go
flying. I'm with George, ever see a rotary guy that was not independent
as the day is long. We all have our pet ideas that we are going to try no
matter what else is working. Now when it comes to safety issues, I'm a
little more ready to listen : but will still make up my mine after
considering the issue. I'm not for a safety police that has authority to
tell the insurance company I'm wrong. (not that I ever considered buying
hull insurance on my rotary anyway), but would like to keep my liability
for whatever it is worth.

I'm with Rusty and reserving further comments until I see what develops.
I'm more than happy to fly somewhere and look at a fellow builders
airplane before flight to look for safety issues. Apparently a number of
experienced folks had looked at Paul's SQ2000 and would have pointed out
any glaring issue. I like the idea of a list like Ed suggested that
everyone can say what has worked and what has not so that a beginner can
start forming up his thoughts with the previous experience of others.

Will make a picture of a pile of didn't work items to bring to Slobvovia.

Bernie, Hope to see a bunch of you there!