X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com X-SpamCatcher-Score: 2 [X] Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2007 12:37:22 -0500 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from p01c11o143.mxlogic.net ([208.65.144.66] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.1.7) with ESMTPS id 1909613 for lml@lancaironline.net; Thu, 08 Mar 2007 12:29:51 -0500 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=208.65.144.66; envelope-from=dave@edt.com Received: from unknown [198.107.46.129] (EHLO p01c11o143.mxlogic.net) by p01c11o143.mxlogic.net (mxl_mta-4.0.2-2) with ESMTP id 01840f54.2584763312.11027.00-504.p01c11o143.mxlogic.net (envelope-from ); Thu, 08 Mar 2007 10:29:52 -0700 (MST) Received: from unknown [198.107.46.129] (EHLO swift.edt.com) by p01c11o143.mxlogic.net (mxl_mta-4.0.2-2) with ESMTP id fd740f54.2542803888.10936.00-016.p01c11o143.mxlogic.net (envelope-from ); Thu, 08 Mar 2007 10:29:03 -0700 (MST) Received: from CO2 ([10.2.2.3]) by swift.edt.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7) with SMTP id l28HR5cP018058 for ; Thu, 8 Mar 2007 09:27:05 -0800 (PST) X-Original-Message-ID: <004e01c761a7$39ad2630$260214ac@CO2> From: "David Lowry" X-Original-To: "Lancair Mailing List" References: Subject: Re: [LML] Re: Life Limited Items (L-IVP) X-Original-Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2007 09:28:45 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=response Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3028 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3028 X-Spam: [F=0.0622158495; S=0.062(2007030701)] X-MAIL-FROM: X-SOURCE-IP: [198.107.46.129] I am pretty sure that these would be "on condition" for part 91 ops. Which experimental is required to be. Of course experimental probably does not have any rule. Dave > My understanding is that both the (Hartzell) prop and the prop governor > need to be overhauled at five year intervals. I will recheck today. > > Thanks, Bill H.