X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Sat, 24 Sep 2005 22:54:41 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from esmtp.cave.com ([66.35.72.5] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.0c2) with ESMTP id 731630 for lml@lancaironline.net; Sat, 24 Sep 2005 00:03:43 -0400 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=66.35.72.5; envelope-from=lancair@ustek.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] ([24.31.184.76]) by esmtp.cave.com (VisNetic.MailServer.v7.2.4.1) with ASMTP id CQN38002 for ; Sat, 24 Sep 2005 00:02:58 -0400 X-Original-Message-ID: <4334CFFD.2000306@ustek.com> X-Original-Date: Sat, 24 Sep 2005 00:03:09 -0400 From: N301ES Reply-To: lancair@ustek.com Organization: Lancair ES-P (xl) Builder User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.2) Gecko/20040804 Netscape/7.2 (ax) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Original-To: Lancair Mailing List Subject: Re: [LML] Re: Lancair approved inspectors? References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------080207060105030103010804" This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------080207060105030103010804 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------000407030003090108020003" --------------000407030003090108020003 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Story I got is that AIG was waffling about insuring the virtually uninsurable IV-PT, although all the recips were no problem. Someone at Lancair wanted to assure AIG that these rockets are well built and flown by trained pilots and so suggested the additional layers of inspection and training (perhaps a smart idea so far). Then it gets murky. Either AIG then said that this is such a clever idea that it should be applied to all those "dangerous" Lancairs, or Lancair said that this could turn into a revenue stream for training, initial inspection, yearly conditionals, etc. In the end the result was the same: last month AIG said that these restrictions are being written into new policies. I know about Pete Zaccagnino, Mel, etc. and have already signed up for their initial training course (ground school next month is in Napa - nice choice!) But besides this talented crew - who else is a factory approved instructor? And as for inspectors, who ya gonna call? I will ask the factory, but what about the guys building in Florida or Connecticut or Illinois? Pay to fly an inspector in? And how long to schedule? What will it cost? How many inspectors are approved now? I've heard that so far only AIG is on this bandwagon. They gave me a budgetary quote 4 months ago without these restrictions. I'll be interested to see the actual numbers and verbiage when I get the final quote in November. And if AIG demands it now, how long before the others fall in line? BTW - Lancair contacted me today and said that the Katrina aftermath has broken some lines of communication within Lancair and with AIG. Perhaps in December as the hurricane season winds down we'll learn more. Robert M. Simon, ES-P N301ES GilliamDL@aol.com wrote: > Is AIG the only company requiring this? > > These inspections are now mandatory? By Lancair? > > Dave Gilliam --------------000407030003090108020003 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Story I got is that AIG was waffling about insuring the virtually uninsurable IV-PT, although all the recips were no problem. Someone at Lancair wanted to assure AIG that these rockets are well built and flown by trained pilots and so suggested the additional layers of inspection and training (perhaps a smart idea so far). Then it gets murky. Either AIG then said that this is such a clever idea that it should be applied to all those "dangerous" Lancairs, or Lancair said that this could turn into a revenue stream for training, initial inspection, yearly conditionals, etc. In the end the result was the same: last month AIG said that these restrictions are being written into new policies.

I know about Pete Zaccagnino, Mel, etc. and have already signed up for their initial training course (ground school next month is in Napa - nice choice!) But besides this talented crew - who else is a factory approved instructor? And as for inspectors, who ya gonna call? I will ask the factory, but what about the guys building in Florida or Connecticut or Illinois? Pay to fly an inspector in? And how long to schedule? What will it cost? How many inspectors are approved now?

I've heard that so far only AIG is on this bandwagon. They gave me a budgetary quote 4 months ago without these restrictions. I'll be interested to see the actual numbers and verbiage when I get the final quote in November. And if AIG demands it now, how long before the others fall in line?

BTW - Lancair contacted me today and said that the Katrina aftermath has broken some lines of communication within Lancair and with AIG. Perhaps in December as the hurricane season winds down we'll learn more.

Robert M. Simon, ES-P N301ES

GilliamDL@aol.com wrote:

Is AIG the only company requiring this?

These inspections are now mandatory? By Lancair?

Dave Gilliam

--------------000407030003090108020003-- --------------080207060105030103010804 Content-Type: text/x-vcard; charset=utf-8; name="lancair.vcf" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="lancair.vcf" begin:vcard fn:Robert M. Simon n:Simon;Robert M. org:Lancair ES-P N301ES adr:;;;Columbus;OH;;U.S.A. email;internet:lancair@ustek.com version:2.1 end:vcard --------------080207060105030103010804--