Sender: <marv@lancaironline.net>
To:  lml@lancaironline.net
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2013 21:21:59 -0500
Message-ID: <redirect-6037840@logan.com>
Received-SPF: neutral
 receiver=logan.com; client-ip=66.94.236.19; envelope-from=browncc1@verizon.net
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1085)
Subject: Re: [LML] Re: Accident rate for LOBO members vs non-members
From: Charles Brown <browncc1@verizon.net>
In-Reply-To: <list-6037723@logan.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
References: <list-6037723@logan.com>


Lots of good comments on LOBO and other organizations.  However I didn't =
hear anyone pick up on a very critical difference between an =
organization for Twin Cessnas, Bonanzas, MU2s, Malibus, etc, and LOBO.  =
Lancairs are experimental.  I can't see that Lancair Inc would want to =
touch LOBO with a 10-foot pole, it might involve them in liability that =
they can otherwise avoid.  And while I would not choose Scott Keighan's =
tone, I think I detect a shared sentiment -- I got into Experimental =
aviation in a large measure to AVOID as much regulation, organization, =
and regimentation as possible....  in other words, to do my own thing.  =
That's why the category was created in the first place, and that's why a =
lot of people go there.

LML is worth more than money, and I've donated -- only hope I can =
contribute a fraction of what I've gained by hearing all your thoughts =
and experiences.  But joining an organization (LOBO), creating what =
might be considered a set of Advisory Circulars for Lancair owners, =
paying somebody else (HIPAT) to teach me what I should be able to teach =
myself ...  is antithetical to my whole reason for having a Lancair. =20

Charley Brown=20
Legacy RG #299  180 hr

PS -- Anyone else having problems boresighting your Hellfire wingtip =
rails on your Legacy?=