Sender: "Marvin Kaye" <marv@lancaironline.net>
To: lml@lancaironline.net
Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 21:31:08 -0400
Message-ID: <redirect-491635@logan.com>
Received-SPF: none
 receiver=logan.com; client-ip=68.230.240.29; envelope-from=danobrien@cox.net
From: Dan O'Brien <danobrien@cox.net>
Subject: Re: Runway size for first flight
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed

I love this list.  I appreciate the honesty and "expressiveness" (for lack 
of a better word) from those with strongly held views.  I was strongly 
leaning toward moving to a bigger strip for initial flights, but some 
little rationalizing Self in the back of my mind said "well, it's really 
not necessary...the thing will take off in less than 1000 feet and climb at 
1500 feet a minute where making the field in the event of a mishap will be 
easy..."  I'm well aware of the gottchas in the narrow-minded Self that 
resides back there, but that Self sometimes seems to behave like a little 
devil.

The responses to my question reinforce moving to a bigger stip, pretty 
uniformly.  Brent Regan's response especially drives home the point.  It 
also reminded me of the terrible mishap at the Regan Ranch a couple years 
ago, where a Lancair comrade was lost trying to maneuver into a small strip 
after hundreds of hours of experience, not on the first flight.  Almost 
makes me feel silly to have posed the question...but I'm glad I did.  I can 
always chalk it up to that rationalizing Self lurking in the background who 
often needs to be put in its place.

Thanks for the great responses,
Dan