Sender: <marv@lancaironline.net>
To: lml
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2006 13:01:49 -0400
Message-ID: <redirect-1344988@logan.com>
Received-SPF: none
 receiver=logan.com; client-ip=68.142.229.101; envelope-from=lorn@dynacomm.ws
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v752.2)
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed
From: Lorn H Olsen <lorn@dynacomm.ws>
Subject: Re: ok,, enough,, by why the non standard installation

Douglas,

Why the heck are you building this plane? If you want to design and  
build your own plane, go right ahead. No one is stopping you.

All aircraft have many compromises. Why don't we just design an  
aircraft that cruises at mach .9, uses 6 gal/hr of auto fuel, lands  
in under 1,000 ft at 40 kts, has a 10,000 hour TBO, has an insurance  
premium of under $1,000 and costs under $10,000? Every one of the  
above mentioned design criterion have been met but not all in the  
same aircraft.

In your whole diatribe, I didn't hear even one iota of solution to  
any of your perceived problems.

I am very seldom critical, but in your case I just can't understand  
why you are both building this plane and trying to hurt its'  
reputation at the same time.

Lorn

> From: Douglas Kay <lmlturbineexe@yahoo.com>
>
> I have heard from plenty of Lancair builders,,, and thank you all.  
> But the problem that I have is WHY THE NON STANDARD PRESSURIZATION  
> INSTALLATION???
> .
> .
> I just have an opinion about this plane and the turmoil makes me  
> really uncomfortable...
--
Lorn H. 'Feathers' Olsen, MAA, DynaComm, Corp.
248-345-0500, mailto:lorn@dynacomm.ws
LNC2, O-320-D1F, 1,200 hrs, N31161, Y47, SE Michigan