X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2011 00:40:18 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from snt0-omc3-s19.snt0.hotmail.com ([65.55.90.158] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.4c2) with ESMTP id 4932532 for lml@lancaironline.net; Mon, 04 Apr 2011 18:28:43 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=65.55.90.158; envelope-from=joscales98@hotmail.com Received: from SNT135-W7 ([65.55.90.136]) by snt0-omc3-s19.snt0.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Mon, 4 Apr 2011 15:28:09 -0700 X-Original-Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: joscales98@hotmail.com Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_e9e34c3d-2592-4541-aac0-88d3519de018_" X-Originating-IP: [75.81.231.245] From: Jim Scales X-Original-To: Lancair List Subject: RE: [LML] Re: Lancair Accident X-Original-Date: Mon, 4 Apr 2011 17:28:09 -0500 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 04 Apr 2011 22:28:09.0545 (UTC) FILETIME=[938C8B90:01CBF317] --_e9e34c3d-2592-4541-aac0-88d3519de018_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Does anyone yet know what happened=2C what the pilot did or didn't do=2C wh= at the circumstances were? Seems premature to be drawing conclusions and making comments. My $.02. =20 Jim Scales To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Mon=2C 4 Apr 2011 15:42:58 -0400 From: keith.smith@gmail.com Subject: [LML] Re: Lancair Accident Article mentions a Lancair IV=2C not a 360. A terrible loss. Ask any pilot if turning around at 400ft=2C nose high=2C = in a Lancair is a good idea=2C and every pilot would say it's not. So=2C th= ose 'turnaround' instincts must be VERY powerful=2C as is the urge not to h= it the ground (hence=2C pull up). = --_e9e34c3d-2592-4541-aac0-88d3519de018_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Does anyone yet know what happened=2C what the pilot did or didn't do=2C wh= at the circumstances were?

Seems premature to be drawing= conclusions and making comments.

My $.02. = =3B

Jim Scales

To: = lml@lancaironline.net
Date: Mon=2C 4 Apr 2011 15:42:58 -0400
From: ke= ith.smith@gmail.com
Subject: [LML] Re: Lancair Accident

Article m= entions a Lancair IV=2C not a 360.

A terrible loss. =3B Ask any = pilot if turning around at 400ft=2C nose high=2C in a Lancair is a good ide= a=2C and every pilot would say it's not. So=2C those 'turnaround' instincts= must be VERY powerful=2C as is the urge not to hit the ground (hence=2C pu= ll up).

= --_e9e34c3d-2592-4541-aac0-88d3519de018_--