X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from mail.theofficenet.com ([65.166.240.5] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.3.2) with SMTP id 960452 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Mon, 23 May 2005 10:31:56 -0400 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=65.166.240.5; envelope-from=jackoford@theofficenet.com Received: (qmail 27542 invoked from network); 23 May 2005 14:29:28 -0000 Received: from dpc691941229.direcpc.com (HELO toshibauser) (69.19.41.229) by mail.theofficenet.com with SMTP; 23 May 2005 14:29:28 -0000 Message-ID: <005501c55fa4$139d5340$0700a8c0@toshibauser> From: "Jack Ford" To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" References: Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: Technical Advisor Date: Mon, 23 May 2005 07:31:10 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0052_01C55F69.63DA8FC0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0052_01C55F69.63DA8FC0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable If it becomes "Safety Police", I'm with you, Jerry. My concept was a group of folks who know advising, first hand, other = folks who know. The operative word is "advising". Return to the concept of "peer review". I think that credibility will come with a record of success, not = affiliation with Big Brother. My two bits. Jack Ford ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Jerry Hey=20 To: Rotary motors in aircraft=20 Sent: Monday, May 23, 2005 5:33 AM Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Technical Advisor On Monday, May 23, 2005, at 06:55 AM, Ehkerr@aol.com wrote: In a message dated 5/23/2005 6:35:09 AM Central Daylight Time, = rx7ez@yahoo.com writes: Dear friends, Your plan to offer technical advise to builders is certainly a noble one. However, I have had little success with that idea. I think that the people who build there own airplanes are a very independant lot, and those who develop an auto engine conversion are even more so, myself included. =20 George Graham An association of qualified counselors would warrant the = consideration of insurers and could lessen the negative effects of = rotary incidents because, to earn the best insurance rates, builders = will ask for the Safety Inspection Signoff of this association. Such = endorsement would require that the ADs cited be complied with before = approval. Insurance, and consequent improved safety, are two motivating = principles behind the movement for forming an association. EHkerr 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=20 ------=_NextPart_000_0052_01C55F69.63DA8FC0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
If it becomes "Safety Police", I'm with = you,=20 Jerry.
 
My concept was a group of folks who = know advising,=20 first hand, other folks who know. The operative word is=20 "advising".
 
Return to the concept of "peer=20 review".
 
I think that credibility will come with = a record of=20 success, not affiliation with Big Brother.
 
My two bits.
 
Jack Ford
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Jerry=20 Hey
Sent: Monday, May 23, 2005 5:33 = AM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: = Technical=20 Advisor


On Monday, May 23, 2005, at 06:55 AM, Ehkerr@aol.com wrote:

In a message dated 5/23/2005 6:35:09 AM Central Daylight = Time,=20 rx7ez@yahoo.com = writes:

Dear = friends,


 =20   Your plan to offer technical advise to builders is = certainly
a=20 noble one.  However, I have had little success with that = idea.
I=20 think that the people who build there own airplanes are a=20 very
independant lot, and those who develop an auto engine=20 conversion

are even more so, myself=20 included.

   
George = Graham

An=20 association of qualified counselors would warrant the = consideration of=20 insurers and could lessen the negative effects of rotary incidents = because,=20 to earn the best insurance rates, builders will ask for the Safety=20 Inspection Signoff of this association. Such endorsement would = require that=20 the ADs cited be complied with before approval. Insurance, and = consequent=20 improved safety, are two motivating principles behind the = movement for=20 forming an association.
EHkerr

Sounds = stifling to me.=20 At this point, the rotary installation is still evolving rapidly and = new ideas=20 appear all the time. Trying to comply with "old" ADs is a different = mind set=20 entirely. I think every builder should be encouraged to follow = Georges'=20 recommendations, especially about ground testing but beyond that is is = up to=20 the builder. I realize I am the only voice that is not enthusiastic = about the=20 formation of the safety police. Jerry
------=_NextPart_000_0052_01C55F69.63DA8FC0--