X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2013 10:46:19 -0500 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from mail-vb0-f44.google.com ([209.85.212.44] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 6.0.1) with ESMTPS id 6038702 for lml@lancaironline.net; Thu, 31 Jan 2013 10:32:45 -0500 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=209.85.212.44; envelope-from=toddlong1@gmail.com Received: by mail-vb0-f44.google.com with SMTP id fc26so1850162vbb.3 for ; Thu, 31 Jan 2013 07:32:09 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.52.21.179 with SMTP id w19mr7411681vde.55.1359646329577; Thu, 31 Jan 2013 07:32:09 -0800 (PST) X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from [10.236.100.233] (36.sub-174-252-17.myvzw.com. [174.252.17.36]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id o6sm4953388vdd.11.2013.01.31.07.32.05 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Thu, 31 Jan 2013 07:32:08 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: [LML] Re: Accident rate for LOBO members vs non-members References: From: Todd Long Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-CC65DDBB-CD6E-43D7-B68B-FD2E04BFB280 X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (10A523) In-Reply-To: X-Original-Message-Id: <8D781793-B4DD-46B9-A943-9F162F98A54A@gmail.com> X-Original-Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2013 09:32:25 -0600 X-Original-To: Lancair Mailing List Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) --Apple-Mail-CC65DDBB-CD6E-43D7-B68B-FD2E04BFB280 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-5 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I guess my analogy was lost in translation. Having gone to a lot more train= ing, received multiple type ratings and higher certificate ratings, I have s= pent years more in training than a newly minted CFI.=20 And yes I'd say hazard pay would be some of that price. Lol. I have more "no= shitting there we were" stories training low time pilots than flying around= the world in jets.=20 Typing and grammar errors courtesy of Siri and the iPhone. On Jan 31, 2013, at 9:05, "Bill Bradburry" wrote:= > Hmmm! Bad analogy I would say. Residency for a GP is three years. Resid= ency for a surgeon is 7 years plus whatever is added on for the cardiac fell= owship, probably 2 more years. In other words about 6 years more training! = That is three times the training of the GP! > The rate for a 30K hour instructor is the same as for a 300 hour instructo= r. The rate for a newly minted surgeon is the same as for one with 30 years= practice. You can pick your surgeon and you can pick your instructor and I= think that is what is happening with the HIPAT instructors. Is the value w= orth the price? A few say yes. Apparently, the majority of Lancair drivers= say no. > =20 > I agree with those that say more training is needed. I just wish the trai= ning was not priced out of the market so that it would be obtained by more f= olks. > =20 > I always thought that the HIPAT fee premium was just some sort of hazardou= s duty pay because they were flying in those dangerous Lancairs! :>) > =20 > From: Lancair Mailing List [mailto:lml@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of Tod= d Long > Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2013 7:40 AM > To: lml@lancaironline.net > Subject: [LML] Re: Accident rate for LOBO members vs non-members > =20 > Type training is always more expensive. Why does it cost $100 to see your G= P doctor compared to $1000 for a quick consult from a heart surgeon? I feel m= y time is significantly more valuable when I instruct compared to a newly mi= nted 300 hr TT instructor.=20 >=20 > Typing and grammar errors courtesy of Siri and the iPhone. >=20 > On Jan 31, 2013, at 0:47, "Bill Bradburry" wrot= e: >=20 >> Why is flight training by a HIPAT instructor so much more expensive than f= light training by other instructors? I think that is a larger factor in the= =D2=A2=FAreluctance by some=D2=A2=FC to get training in Lancairs than any o= ther reason with the possible exception of availability of an HIPAT instruct= or. >> =20 >> Bill B >> =20 >> From: Lancair Mailing List [mailto:lml@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of To= dd Long >> Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2013 9:21 PM >> To: lml@lancaironline.net >> Subject: [LML] Re: Accident rate for LOBO members vs non-members >> =20 >> The reluctance by some to regular and ongoing training baffles me. When I= picked up my "preflown" IV-P I met a lobo instructor there and did training= on the way home. I spent 3 days with him and still feel I have a lot to lea= rn. Could I have picked it up and made it home safely? Absolutely. Did I do t= he training just for insurance reasons? No. Im sure some will disagree, but h= ere it is: if you feel you are too good and safe already to not need trainin= g and practice in this aircraft you have no business flying it with passenge= rs. Check the ego at the hanger door. This airplane needs to be flown by a w= ell trained pilot in a professional manner. I applauded Jeff for his efforts= to start an organization dedicated to bettering the safety record of lancai= rs. I think the lancairs can be flown by regular private pilots with appropr= iate training and an appropriate attitude. Training is not a substitute for e= xperience. But without some training you might not live long enough to get t= he experience. Just because the airplane might be capable of something doesn= 't mean the pilot is.=20 >> =20 >> BTW, I spend almost 15 days a year in recurrent simulator training. And s= till think I can benefit from one on one with a lancair instructor every yea= r >> =20 >> Todd Long >> Capt CE-750 (citation X) >> NetJets >>=20 >> Sent from my iPad >>=20 >> On Jan 30, 2013, at 19:41, vtailjeff@aol.com wrote: >>=20 >>> Scott, >>> =20 >>> What Lancair model do you fly? >>> =20 >>> Jeff >>>=20 >>> Sent from my iPad >>>=20 >>> On Jan 30, 2013, at 6:25 PM, Scott E Keighan wrote: >>>=20 >>>> George, >>>> I respect your position with respect to the LOBO but I disagree that be= cause I choose not to be a member I am not >>>> making a commitment to being a better pilot. I am a member of the LML a= mount numerous other organizations. You have no idea whom I am, what I have d= one or what I am doing. I will not get into it here on this forum. Lets just= say that I am a professional within the aviation industry ongoing for over 3= 0 years. I have given numerous talks to various organizations with respect t= o my profession and interests. >>>>=20 >>>> I will not get into whom I think is a safer or a better pilot or how to= achieve that goal. Although I do have my own thoughts on that. >>>>=20 >>>> Scott Keighan >>>>=20 >>>> P.S. I fly IFR and VFR as required in both airplanes and helicopters. I= also do not have any issues getting insurance or training. >>>>=20 >>>> To: lml@lancaironline.net >>>> Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2013 12:30:58 -0500 >>>> From: gw5@me.com >>>> Subject: [LML] Re: Accident rate for LOBO members vs non-members >>>>=20 >>>> Scott, >>>> =20 >>>> It should be obvious that LOBO is not going to get rich off of $40/yr p= er member. This rate should be viewed as a great rate for a couple of reason= s: >>>> =20 >>>> 1. The tremendous amount of information with regard to building the var= ious models of Lancairs, the depth of aviation experience in aerodynamics an= d pilotage of our Lancairs, and the knowledge base of regulations from those= who served in regulatory bodies.=20 >>>> =20 >>>> 2. All of the above plus the commitment of each of us to become better p= ilots whether through proficiency training or increasing our ratings/knowled= ge base enables such a body as LOBO to better represent us as whole whether i= ts for insurance rates or for potential FAA governance.=20 >>>> =20 >>>> In my opinion, for the cost of 7 gallons or a half hour of flying per y= ear we are getting a great deal.=20 >>>> =20 >>>> In sum; you won't be a better pilot because you joined LOBO but because= you made a comittment to be a better pilot by learning from others and taki= ng the step to go beyond the status quo.=20 >>>> =20 >>>> I can't tell you how many pilots that I have talked to that just go bom= bing through MOAs and other high density traffic areas squawking 1200 becaus= e they can without talking to anyone. Just because you can doesn't mean it's= smarter.=20 >>>> =20 >>>> It's fun to fly VFR but having the ability and knowledge to fly IFR in y= our back pocket benefits you and everyone in your plane and the airspace aro= und you.=20 >>>> =20 >>>> George >>>> =20 >>>> =20 >>>> =20 >>>> =20 >>>> =20 >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>> Sent from my iPhone >>>>=20 >>>> On Jan 30, 2013, at 8:27, marv@lancair.net wrote: >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>> Posted for Scott E Keighan : >>>>=20 >>>> So let me get this right. If I pay you $40 to join the LOBO I will be a= =20 >>>> better pilot then a non-LOBO member, cool. >>>> How exactly does that work?=20 >>>> Other then someone getting $40 richer, I don't see it. Is this like a p= yramid=20 >>>> scam? >>>>=20 >>>> Don't insult non members and get a life. As a matter of fact. If the LO= BO is=20 >>>> so great, why are you even on the LML? >>>> I think the LOBO members should go to their own blog. I am sure they ha= ve=20 >>>> one. >>>> Scott keighan >>>> 905 262 5997 >>>>=20 >>>> [Whoa... lighten up. Since the LML had been operating successfully for= a number of years prior to the founding of LOBO and the LML would likely al= ready be in touch with most folks who would be interested in joining and par= ticipating in LOBO, an agreement was forged which allowed LOBO to use the LM= L as its communications arm. It was a logical decision which would benefit b= oth entities. Both organizations exist for the benefit of the Lancair commu= nity, especially where safety is involved. As for cost... if $40/year is to= o much to pay to an organization dedicated to your safety and actively worki= ng to help getting the Lancair fleet insured at better rates then don't joi= n. Also, don't participate in their discussions or learn anything from their= shared knowledge... at least that way you'll get what you paid for. But don= 't throw stones at folks who are trying to help... that doesn't get us anywh= ere. ] >>>> =20 >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>> From: colyncase@earthlink.net >>>> Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2013 22:31:05 -0500 >>>> To: lml@lancaironline.net >>>> Subject: [LML] Re: Accident rate for LOBO members vs non-members >>>>=20 >>>> Dico, >>>> That's a good point. That's one reason we would like to get as many L= ancair=20 >>>> pilots on the LML and into LOBO as possible. It's largely a word of m= outh=20 >>>> process to get let people know about these two resources. Getting the w= ord=20 >>>> out to everyone is one of the "things we can do as a community" to impr= ove the=20 >>>> situation. =20 >>>> LOBO membership is $40 at www.lancairowners.com. >>>> (Marv would love contributions to keep the LML site going too!) >>>> Colyn >>>> On Jan 29, 2013, at 9:41 PM, Dico Reijers wrote:If the accident rate fo= r=20 >>>> Lancairs is 500x that of commercial aviation... do we have a break down= of=20 >>>> what the rate is of LOBO members vs. Non-members. I would hope that by= just=20 >>>> being a LOBO member and reading/learning from this group that the accid= ent=20 >>>> rate for us is more in line with the 300x experimental or even better t= han=20 >>>> that.=20 >>>>=20 >>>> Have we gone through the Lancair accidents to see if the PIC was a LOBO= =20 >>>> member. It would be interesting. >>>> -DIco >>>>=20 >>>> --=20 >>>> Regards, >>>>=20 >>>> Dico Reijers >>>>=20 >>>> InternetWorks Ltd. >>>>=20 >>>> 300 University Avenue >>>> Charlottetown >>>> PE, C1A 4M4 >>>>=20 >>>> 902-892-4671 (T) >>>> 888-368-9484 (F) >>>>=20 >>>> www.internetworks.ca >>>> www.apartmentspei.com >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>> =20 >>>> =20 >>>> -- >>>> =20 >>>> For archives and unsub http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/lml/List.= html --Apple-Mail-CC65DDBB-CD6E-43D7-B68B-FD2E04BFB280 Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I guess my analogy was lost in transla= tion.  Having gone to a lot more training, received multiple type ratin= gs and higher certificate ratings,  I have spent years more in training= than a newly minted CFI. 
And yes I'd say hazard pay would b= e some of that price. Lol. I have more "no shitting there we were" stories t= raining low time pilots than flying around the world in jets. 

T= yping and grammar errors courtesy of Siri and the iPhone.

On J= an 31, 2013, at 9:05, "Bill Bradburry" <bbradburry@bellsouth.net> wrote:

Hmmm!  Bad analogy I would say.&nb= sp; Residency for a GP is three years.  Residency for a surgeon is 7 years plus whate= ver is added on for the cardiac fellowship, probably 2 more years.  In other w= ords about 6 years more training!  That is three times the training of the GP!

The rate for a 30K hour instructor is t= he same as for a 300 hour instructor.  The rate for a newly minted surgeon= is the same as for one with 30 years practice.  You can pick your surgeon and y= ou can pick your instructor and I think that is what is happening with the HIPAT instructors.  Is the value worth the price?  A few say yes.  A= pparently, the majority of Lancair drivers say no.

 

I agree with those that say more traini= ng is needed.  I just wish the training was not priced out of the market s= o that it would be obtained by more folks.

 

I always thought that the HIPAT fee premium was just some sort of hazardous duty pay because they were flying in= those dangerous Lancairs!  :>)

 

From: Lancair Mailing List [mailto:lml@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of Todd Long
Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2= 013 7:40 AM
To: lml@lancaironline.net
Subject: [LML] Re: Accident r= ate for LOBO members vs non-members

 

Type training is always more expensive. Why does it cost $100 to see= your GP doctor compared to $1000 for a quick consult from a heart surgeon? I= feel my time is significantly more valuable when I instruct compared to a ne= wly minted 300 hr TT instructor. 


Typing and grammar errors courtesy of Siri and the iPhone.=


On Jan 31, 2013, at 0:47, "Bill Bradburry" <bbradburry@bellsouth.net> wrote:

Why is flight training by a HIPAT instructor so much more expensive than flight training by other instructors?  I think that is a= larger factor in the =D0=B2=D0=82=D1=9Areluctance by some=D0=B2=D0=82=D1=9C t= o get training in Lancairs than any other reason with the possible exception of availability of an HIPAT ins= tructor.

 <= /o:p>

Bill B<= /o:p>

 <= /o:p>

From: Lancair Mailing List [mail= to:lml@lancaironline.net] On Behalf O= f Todd Long
Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2= 013 9:21 PM
To: lml@lancaironline.net
Subject: [LML] Re: Accident r= ate for LOBO members vs non-members

 

The reluctance by some to regular and ongoing training baffles me. W= hen I picked up my "preflown" IV-P I met a lobo instructor there and did training on the way home. I spent 3 days with him and still feel I have a lo= t to learn. Could I have picked it up and made it home safely? Absolutely. Did= I do the training just for insurance reasons? No. Im sure some will disagree, b= ut here it is: if you feel you are too good and safe already to not need traini= ng and practice in this aircraft you have no business flying it with passengers= . Check the ego at the hanger door. This airplane needs to be flown by a well trained pilot in a professional manner. I applauded Jeff for his efforts to start an organization dedicated to bettering the safety record of lancairs. I= think the lancairs can be flown by regular private pilots with appropriate training and an appropriate attitude. Training is not a substitute for experience. But without some training you might not live long enough to get t= he experience. Just because the airplane might be capable of something doesn't mean the pilot is. 

 

BTW, I spend almost 15 days a year in recurrent simulator training. A= nd still think I can benefit from one on one with a lancair instructor every ye= ar

 

Todd Long

Capt CE-750 (citation X)

NetJets


Sent from my iPad


On Jan 30, 2013, at 19:41, vtailjeff@ao= l.com wrote:

Scott,

 

What Lancair model do you fly?=

 

Jeff

Sent from my iPad


On Jan 30, 2013, at 6:25 PM, Scott E Keighan <scottekeighan@sympatico.ca> wrote:

George,
I respect your position with respect to the LOBO but I disagree that because= I choose not to be a member I am not
making a commitment to being a better pilot. I am a member of the LML amount= numerous other organizations. You have no idea whom I am, what I have done o= r what I am doing. I will not get into it here on this forum. Lets just say th= at I am a professional within the aviation industry ongoing for over 30 years. I= have given numerous talks to various organizations with respect to my profession and interests.

I will not get into whom I think is a safer or a better pilot or how to achi= eve that goal.  Although I do have my own thoughts on that.

Scott Keighan

P.S. I fly IFR and VFR as required in both airplanes and helicopters. I also= do not have any issues getting insurance or training.

To: lml@lancaironline.net
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2013 12:30:58 -0500
From: gw5@me.com
Subject: [LML] Re: Accident rate for LOBO members vs non-members

Scott,

 

It should be obvious that LOBO is not going to get rich off of $40/y= r per member. This rate should be viewed as a great rate for a couple of reasons:<= u1:p>

 

1. The tremendous amount of information with regard to building the various models of Lancairs, the depth of aviation experience in aerodynamics= and pilotage of our Lancairs, and the knowledge base of regulations from tho= se who served in regulatory bodies. =

 

2. All of the above plus the commitment of each of us to become bett= er pilots whether through proficiency training or increasing our ratings/knowle= dge base enables such a body as LOBO to better represent us as whole whether its= for insurance rates or for potential FAA governance. =

 

In my opinion, for the cost of 7 gallons or a half hour of flying pe= r year we are getting a great deal. 

 

In sum; you won't be a better pilot because you joined LOBO but beca= use you made a comittment to be a better pilot by learning from others and takin= g the step to go beyond the status quo. 

 

I can't tell you how many pilots that I have talked to that just go bombing through MOAs and other high density traffic areas squawking 1200 because they can without talking to anyone. Just because you can doesn't mea= n it's smarter. 

 

It's fun to fly VFR but having the ability and knowledge to fly IFR i= n your back pocket benefits you and everyone in your plane and the airspace around you. 

 

George

 

 

 

 

 



Sent from my iPhone


On Jan 30, 2013, at 8:27, marv@lancair.n= et wrote:


Posted for Scott E Keighan <scottekeighan@sympatico.ca>:

So let me get this right. If I pay you $40 to join the LOBO I will be a
= better pilot then a non-LOBO member, cool.
How exactly does that work?
Other then someone getting $40 richer, I don't see it. Is this like a pyrami= d
scam?

Don't insult non members and get a life. As a matter of fact. If the LOBO is=
so great, why are you even on the LML?
I think the LOBO members should go to their own blog. I am sure they have one.
Scott keighan
905 262 5997

[Whoa... lighten up.  Since the LML had been operating successfully for= a number of years prior to the founding of LOBO and the LML would likely alrea= dy be in touch with most folks who would be interested in joining and participating in LOBO, an agreement was forged which allowed LOBO to use the= LML as its communications arm.  It was a logical decision which would benefit both entities.  Both organizations exist for the benefit of the= Lancair community, especially where safety is involved.  As for cost...= if $40/year is too much to pay to an organization dedicated to your safety and actively working to help getting  the Lancair fleet insured at better rates then don't join. Also, don't participate in their discussions or learn= anything from their shared knowledge... at least that way you'll get what yo= u paid for. But don't throw stones at folks who are trying to help... that doesn't get us anywhere.  <marv>    ]

 



From: colyncase@earthlink.net=
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2013 22:31:05 -0500
To: lml@lancaironline.net
Subject: [LML] Re: Accident rate for LOBO members vs non-members

Dico,
That's a good point.   That's one reason we would like to get as m= any Lancair
pilots on the LML and into LOBO as possible.    It's largely a word of mouth
process to get let people know about these two resources.  Getting= the word
out to everyone is one of the "things we can do as a community" to improve the
situation.  
LOBO membership is $40 at www.lancairowners.com.
(Marv would love contributions to keep the LML site going too!)
Colyn
On Jan 29, 2013, at 9:41 PM, Dico Reijers wrote:If the accident rate for Lancairs is 500x that of commercial aviation... do we have a break down of <= br> what the rate is of LOBO members vs. Non-members.  I would hope th= at by just
being a LOBO member and reading/learning from this group that the accident <= br> rate for us is more in line with the 300x experimental or even better than <= br> that.

Have we gone through the Lancair accidents to see if the PIC was a LOBO
= member.  It would be interesting.
-DIco

--
Regards,

Dico Reijers

InternetWorks Ltd.

<= st1:address w:st=3D"on">300 University Avenue
Charlottetown<= br> PE, C1A 4M4

902-892-4671 (T)
888-368-9484 (F)

www.internetworks.= ca
www.apartmentspei= .com


     

 

=
--
 =

For archives and unsub http://mail.lancaironline.n=
et:81/lists/lml/List.html
= --Apple-Mail-CC65DDBB-CD6E-43D7-B68B-FD2E04BFB280--