Return-Path: Sender: (Marvin Kaye) To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Mon, 05 Jan 2004 19:20:28 -0500 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from vwall.chemsoft.net ([209.62.175.89] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.1.8) with ESMTP id 2918338 for lml@lancaironline.net; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 16:31:43 -0500 Received: from gb-server-cs-3.chemsoft.com (gb-server-cs-3.chemsoft.com [10.100.10.65]) by vwall.chemsoft.net (BorderWare MXtreme Mail Firewall) with ESMTP id 6A43F6EDA3 for ; Mon, 5 Jan 2004 15:31:42 -0600 (CST) Received: from HPLAPTOP ([4.72.12.73]) by gb-server-cs-3.chemsoft.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6713); Mon, 5 Jan 2004 15:31:41 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-OriginalArrivalTime: 05 Jan 2004 21:31:42.0139 (UTC) FILETIME=[4F78E8B0:01C3D3D3] X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6249.0 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message Subject: Hobbs Meter X-Original-Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2004 15:31:38 -0600 X-Original-Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-topic: Hobbs Meter Thread-index: AcPT00xA4qUUoHXHTlqWajmZAU8L5w== From: "Ron Jones" X-Original-To: A discussion has arisen regarding the need for a Hobbs meter in our = airplanes. One builder has suggested that all that's needed is the time logging = function of the Chelton Sierra Flight System. While I'm very much a gadget kind of guy, I'm thinking the ol' tried and = true, can't be reprogrammed, reliable hobbs meter is just the ticket. I'm looking for some input from the collective wisdom of the LML. What = do you think? The ol' hobbs or the new-fangled SFS timer? Or are both = equally as good? Regards, Ron Jones ron@legacy-innovations.com www.legacy-innovations.com =20