Return-Path: Sender: "Marvin Kaye" To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Tue, 01 Feb 2005 01:48:54 -0500 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from mx2.lsn.net ([66.90.130.74] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.2.8) with ESMTP-TLS id 653219 for lml@lancaironline.net; Mon, 31 Jan 2005 21:54:24 -0500 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=66.90.130.74; envelope-from=airbear@grandecom.net Received: from DCNV6721 (24-155-53-250.dyn.grandenetworks.net [24.155.53.250]) by mx2.lsn.net (8.13.0.Beta3/8.12.8) with ESMTP id j112rHBo023081 for ; Mon, 31 Jan 2005 20:53:53 -0600 From: "Jerry Lunceford" X-Original-To: Subject: TSO or not TSO... X-Original-Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2005 20:53:09 -0600 X-Original-Message-ID: <000001c50809$3ec7b350$fa359b18@DCNV6721> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.3416 Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441 I'm ready buy instruments and I've notice that non TSO'd instruments are half the cost. So what's the difference? Are they less accurate? Is the Experiential category required to have TSO'd instruments? I plan to fly IFR and want dependable instruments, but if this is a just bureaucracy tax, why should I? Thanks, Jerry W. Lunceford Corpus Christi, TX 361 815-9641 cell 361 993-5127 HM