X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Sat, 18 Sep 2010 11:10:00 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from imr-db03.mx.aol.com ([205.188.91.97] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.3.9) with ESMTP id 4470785 for lml@lancaironline.net; Fri, 17 Sep 2010 12:33:33 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=205.188.91.97; envelope-from=RWolf99@aol.com Received: from imo-da01.mx.aol.com (imo-da01.mx.aol.com [205.188.169.199]) by imr-db03.mx.aol.com (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id o8HGWkxg014070 for ; Fri, 17 Sep 2010 12:32:46 -0400 Received: from RWolf99@aol.com by imo-da01.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v42.9.) id q.f40.18c0b7 (37105) for ; Fri, 17 Sep 2010 12:32:42 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtprly-me02.mx.aol.com (smtprly-me02.mx.aol.com [64.12.95.103]) by cia-db08.mx.aol.com (v129.4) with ESMTP id MAILCIADB083-b2ca4c939826d5; Fri, 17 Sep 2010 12:32:41 -0400 Received: from webmail-d053 (webmail-d053.sim.aol.com [205.188.170.229]) by smtprly-me02.mx.aol.com (v129.4) with ESMTP id MAILSMTPRLYME024-b2ca4c939826d5; Fri, 17 Sep 2010 12:32:38 -0400 X-Original-To: lml@lancaironline.net Subject: Re: [LML] 360 N33AN document question X-Original-Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2010 12:32:37 -0400 X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-AOL-IP: 75.164.84.117 X-MB-Message-Type: User MIME-Version: 1.0 From: rwolf99@aol.com Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--------MB_8CD249D1335B226_1178_4E7E_webmail-d053.sysops.aol.com" X-Mailer: AOL Webmail 32679-STANDARD Received: from 75.164.84.117 by webmail-d053.sysops.aol.com (205.188.170.229) with HTTP (WebMailUI); Fri, 17 Sep 2010 12:32:37 -0400 X-Original-Message-Id: <8CD249D133350C3-1178-2D92@webmail-d053.sysops.aol.com> X-Spam-Flag:NO X-AOL-SENDER: RWolf99@aol.com ----------MB_8CD249D1335B226_1178_4E7E_webmail-d053.sysops.aol.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" I have to disagree with Colyn on this one. The aircraft was obviously sou= nd in initial workmanship as evidenced by the fact that it has flown for= 15 years. You do not mention the total hours but I assume it's in the hu= ndreds or maybe approaching a thousand. What you need to be concerned abo= ut is, for lack of a better phrase, wear and tear. This should be apparen= t to a qualified inspector. I'd recommend having someone familiar with the Lancair, but that's probabl= y not essential. You might have a local A&P doing a pre-buy inspection ca= ll the factory, or one of the guys at RDD or Aircrafters, or someone like= that, for advice on what to look for. In your shoes I would be willing= to pay a fee for the half-hour of their time to share this expertise with= your local A&P. There may be some unique features where the Lancair ages less gracefully= than other airplanes, such as the attachment of the nose gear drag link= to the strut, are the factory service bulletins complied with (available= on line), and so forth. There are other issues, such as was the self-cen= tering mod done to the nose strut, which came around after the aircraft wa= s built. On these matters it would help to have a Lanair-familiar dude lo= ok at it. But I would not shy away from this airplane simply because ther= e is no photo album of the build in progress. That's my two cents, which is probably all my advice is worth anyway... For what it's worth, I have very detailed records of how I have spent my= time and money on the airplane, but very few pictures. - Rob Wolf ----------MB_8CD249D1335B226_1178_4E7E_webmail-d053.sysops.aol.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"
I have to disagree with Colyn on this one.  The aircraft was obv= iously sound in initial workmanship as evidenced by the fact tha= t it has flown for 15 years.  You do not mention the total hours but= I assume it's in the hundreds or maybe approaching a thousand.  What= you need to be concerned about is, for lack of a better phrase, wear and= tear.  This should be apparent to a qualified inspector.
 
I'd recommend having someone familiar with the Lancair, but that's pr= obably not essential.  You might have a local A&P doing a pre-buy= inspection call the factory, or one of the guys at RDD or Aircrafters, or= someone like that, for advice on what to look for.  In your shoes I= would be willing to pay a fee for the half-hour of their time to share th= is expertise with your local A&P.
 
There may be some unique features where the Lancair ages less gracefu= lly than other airplanes, such as the attachment of the nose gear drag lin= k to the strut, are the factory service bulletins complied with (available= on line), and so forth.  There are other issues, such as was the sel= f-centering mod done to the nose strut, which came around after the aircra= ft was built.  On these matters it would help to have a Lanair-famili= ar dude look at it.  But I would not shy away from this airplane simp= ly because there is no photo album of the build in progress.
 
That's my two cents, which is probably all my advice is worth anyway.= ..
 
For what it's worth, I have very detailed records of how I have spent= my time and money on the airplane, but very few pictures.
 
- Rob Wolf

----------MB_8CD249D1335B226_1178_4E7E_webmail-d053.sysops.aol.com--