We are clearly too scattered to be effective . . .

 

 Ancillary systems that work or do not work have a lot in common

regardless of what kind of block they support.

 

Jim raises some valid points here.  My concern would be that as rotary installers we are scattered geographically; but including any alternate engine makes us scattered philosophically.  We would inevitably become embroiled in the rotor vs pistons and valves argument.  Perhaps first we need to focus on the rotary installation.

 

After all; isn’t everyone eventually going to see the truth of our path? Ju-u-st kidding.

 

EHKerr said:  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.  

 

For Velocity builders an effort was led by the factory to communicate with insurance providers regarding recognition of an inspection program.  We have a list of 11 factory authorized “Insurance Inspectors” The underwriters have agreed to consider the inspection as a positive factor in providing coverage. (I don’t really know what that means).  Our organization could do something similar.  These Velocity inspectors will come and inspect the airplane, but it is not free.  I don’t know how much it costs. 

 

I realize I am the only voice that is not enthusiastic about the formation of the safety police. Jerry

 

You’re not the only one.  I don’t want any “safety police” either.  What I want is another set of eyeballs; another point of view; a pointing out of something I may have overlooked; an intelligent questioning of something about my approach that may not look right to someone else; perhaps some helpful sugestions.  What I do about it up to me.  Police “enforce”.  That is not what this is about.

 

In any case, this is strictly voluntary.  This review only comes if you ask for it.

 

FWIW.

 

Al