Sender: <marv@lancaironline.net>
To: lml@lancaironline.net
Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2005 22:59:16 -0500
Message-ID: <redirect-836139@logan.com>
Received-SPF: pass
 receiver=logan.com; client-ip=198.36.178.141; envelope-from=JJHALLE@stoel.com
content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: RE:  Navigating in the IFR system in an experimental aircraft
Thread-Topic: lml Digest #1421
Thread-Index: AcXrZiGTY0DkhT6xREmsHNAtu5QljgBAganQ
From: "Halle, John" <JJHALLE@stoel.com>

I am a latecomer to the string but would like to add my two cents:  The =
rule only says that the pilot must inform the "tower" that the aircraft =
is experimental.  Nothing about any other ATC person.  I have from the =
beginning referred to my aircraft as a Lancair or Lancair Legacy for the =
obvious reason addressed in other posts: it conveys information that =
could be useful to the controller and others on frequency.  The term =
"experimental" is useful only it one assumes that it is important for =
others to "know" that it is put together with chewing gum and could fall =
apart at any time.  I think I am within the letter of the law except =
when talking to tower operators.  I have asked a number of them and have =
never heard an expressed preference for "experimental."  Because they =
cannot advise me to flaunt the reg, I most often hear that they are fine =
with either.