Received-SPF: pass
 receiver=logan.com; client-ip=205.188.91.95; envelope-from=vtailjeff@aol.com
References: <list-6037845@logan.com>
In-Reply-To: <list-6037845@logan.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=us-ascii
Message-Id: <B2965CFC-644D-4CF6-BA12-3FF723D2547F@aol.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
From: vtailjeff@aol.com
Subject: Re: [LML] Re: Accident rate for LOBO members vs non-members
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2013 07:53:19 -0600
To: Lancair Mailing List <lml@lancaironline.net>
X-AOL-SCOLL-URL_COUNT: 0  
x-aol-sid: 3039ac1d33c6510a774a2f96
X-AOL-IP: 24.107.65.42

Charley,

I agree wholeheartedly with your sentiments about less regulation, etc. Our b=
oard feels the same. However, in 2008 after way too many accidents and 20 li=
ves lost in Lancairs including too many good friends the insurance underwrit=
ers pulled out of the market leaving a lot of us with no insurance at any pr=
ice. When they returned the cost of insurance for IVPs more than doubled. it=
 has not gone down in five years. You can insure an Eclipse jet for less tha=
n a IVP.=20

At the same time the FAA was looking into restricting the Lancair fleet. The=
y are still very concerned about our safety record. We meet with them regula=
rly to address this but not doing anything will not make the problem go away=
. LOBO was formed to address these issues. We need more support-- not less.=20=


This last year we had a Delta captain teach himself how to fly a IVP --- dea=
d in less than 10 hours. Some can do it, some cannot but the unsuccessful on=
es are having a big impact on our freedom to fly. I wish it was not so but w=
ishing is not a solution.=20

I realize you are a successful aviation professional but not all Lancair fli=
ers share your experience.=20

I respect your and others reluctance to participate in LOBO but as Paul Mill=
er said we need a critical mass of owners to solve these problems. We are sl=
owly getting there with over 300 members out of 1000 flying.=20

I urge all of you to be part of the solution. As is often said in DC about p=
olicy making, "either your are at the table or on the plate." We choose to b=
e at the table.

Best regards,

Jeff Edwards
President, LOBO=20
(USN ret./ ex- Boeing)

Sent from my iPad

On Jan 30, 2013, at 8:21 PM, Charles Brown <browncc1@verizon.net> wrote:

>=20
> Lots of good comments on LOBO and other organizations.  However I didn't h=
ear anyone pick up on a very critical difference between an organization for=
 Twin Cessnas, Bonanzas, MU2s, Malibus, etc, and LOBO.  Lancairs are experim=
ental.  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.  An=
d while I would not choose Scott Keighan's tone, I think I detect a shared s=
entiment -- I got into Experimental aviation in a large measure to AVOID as m=
uch regulation, organization, and regimentation as possible....  in other wo=
rds, to do my own thing.  That's why the category was created in the first p=
lace, and that's why a lot of people go there.
>=20
> LML is worth more than money, and I've donated -- only hope I can contribu=
te a fraction of what  I've gained by hearing all your thoughts and experien=
ces.  But joining an organization (LOBO), creating what might be considered a=
 set of Advisory Circulars for Lancair owners, paying somebody else (HIPAT) t=
o teach me what I should be able to teach myself ...  is antithetical to my w=
hole reason for having a Lancair. =20
>=20
> Charley Brown=20
> Legacy RG #299  180 hr
>=20
> PS -- Anyone else having problems boresighting your Hellfire wingtip rails=
 on your Legacy?
> --
> For archives and unsub http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/lml/List.htm=
l