Return-Path: Sender: (Marvin Kaye) To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Mon, 05 Jan 2004 23:36:12 -0500 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from imo-d05.mx.aol.com ([205.188.157.37] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.1.8) with ESMTP id 2918800 for lml@lancaironline.net; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 22:51:58 -0500 Received: from Tubamanflies@aol.com by imo-d05.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v36_r4.8.) id q.f6.353ba3ff (4184) for ; Mon, 5 Jan 2004 22:51:43 -0500 (EST) From: Tubamanflies@aol.com X-Original-Message-ID: X-Original-Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2004 22:51:43 EST Subject: Re: [LML] Re: Hobbs Meter X-Original-To: lml@lancaironline.net MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_f6.353ba3ff.2d2b8acf_boundary" X-Mailer: 8.0 for Windows sub 6024 --part1_f6.353ba3ff.2d2b8acf_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Just a thought... In an "Experimental" the hours really don't mater but are still good to keep track of. And come on Tack vs Hobbs, Time in service vs engine time. The difference is probably less than the accuacy of the timer. I get the time I put on the plane once a month without anything on the plane. I just take my fuel bill and divide by my average fuel usage rate. It is close enough even if you had to keep track for the FAA. Just fly and be safe Ray --part1_f6.353ba3ff.2d2b8acf_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Just a thought... In an "Experiment= al" the hours really don't mater but are still good to keep track of. =20= And come on Tack vs Hobbs, Time in service vs engine time.  The differe= nce is probably less than the accuacy of the timer.

I get the time I put on the plane once a month without anything on the plane= .  I just take my fuel bill and divide by my average fuel usage rate. I= t is close enough even if you had to keep track for the FAA.

Just fly and be safe

Ray

 --part1_f6.353ba3ff.2d2b8acf_boundary--