From: AVIDWIZ@aol.com
Message-ID: <6c.18835c0d.29b79bea@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2002 11:20:58 EST
Subject: Lancair Avionics
To: lancair.list@olsusa.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Reply-To: lancair.list@olsusa.com

          <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<--->>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
          <<  Lancair Builders' Mail List  >>
          <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<--->>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>
Gentlemen:

I see I was in error in my posting regarding Walt Dodsons avionics problems.  
I thought his argument was with a third party supplier not the Lancair 
factory and as you can see I mentioned in my reply:

"I would imagine a company as reputable as Lancair would jump at the 
opportunity to increase the margin of safety in their product line so you 
should expect a warm and helpful response from them.  If they have a supplier 
which is not living upt o their high standards they should know about it and 
a formal certified letter will probably get the attention of those who are in 
position to help.    After all when one of our planes does crash it still 
says XYZ "Lancair" on the NTSB Report.  I am sure that once you have formally 
pointed out the potential defect, they will take steps to remedy the problem. 
  Similarly, since the FAA has substantial experience in determining what is 
deemed safe, they too will no doubt have some suggestions.

Once I re-read Walts posting I saw that he may have been refering to Lancair 
Avionics an in house division of Lancair.  This being the case, the premise 
of taking your complaint to the highest office is still applicable especially 
when it is a safety in flight related problem.   For those who think I have 
an axe to grind against Lancair I would point out that the mere fact they 
refuse to sell the trim indicator as a seperate item may well indicate that 
they have themselves realized the problem and are taking steps to correct it, 
an action which is both prudent and responsible.

However, make no mistake about it, I DO have an axe to grind with vendors 
whoever they are who are using the "experimental" category to "experiment" 
with us  as the test subjects.   Even as I write this I have an avionics 
expert who has spent the better part of the past 2 months un-scrambling a 
wiring mess created by another shop (not Lancair Avionics by the way).

The bottom line is that slip shod workmanship which would never be tollerated 
by the FAA in certified planes is happening in the experimental class.   This 
is causing loss of property, loss of life and is costing all of us in terms 
of higher insurance rates (if available at all).

Something should be done.   I read an article in Flying Magazine this month 
about the steps Robinson Helicopter has taken in the wake of accidents to 
reduce risk and enhance safety.  A great article and Frank Robinson has 
earned the respect of the aviation community worldwide because of his 
committment to safety and the results are obvious.

Whether we police ourselves via some form of type specific association, the 
factory steps up and increases safety by some form of enhanced builder 
supervision or the FAA gets involved with the creation of new rules for "High 
Performance Experimentals" something needs to happen or in the future none of 
us will be able to insure our planes, get financing for the kits or find a 
resale market for the aircraft we invested in building.

Those of you who are skeptics...save this posting and look at it in 5 
years...see what happens..or better yet think to your self..what if he's 
right!   Scary huh?

Dave


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
LML website:   http://members.olsusa.com/mkaye/maillist.html
LML Builders' Bookstore:   http://www.buildersbooks.com/lancair
Please remember that purchases from the Builders' Bookstore
assist with the management of the LML.

Please send your photos and drawings to marvkaye@olsusa.com.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>