Return-Path: Received: from [161.88.255.139] (account marv@lancaironline.net) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro WebUser 4.2) with HTTP id 384698 for lml@lancaironline.net; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 11:05:17 -0400 From: "Marvin Kaye" Subject: Re: [LML] Re: Redundancy pays To: lml X-Mailer: CommuniGate Pro WebUser Interface v.4.2 Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 11:05:17 -0400 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: X-Priority: 5 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Posted for "John Barrett" <2thman@cablespeed.com>: >And that's where the smartness ended-- from redundancy to none at all. Not sure I agree with Jeff - certainly not with the tone of the response!! First of all the post seems to have been intended to share something valuable with the group. It succeeded and should be acknowledged for that. Secondly, I suspect the author checked out the situation under the cowl before taking off and made a reasoned judgment the spring and its effect on the mixture had a very low likelihood of failure for the duration of the ferry flight home. In the certificated world that's what ferry permits are for. I give the author, and others who share their experiences, the credit for stepping up and sharing. Every flight carries risk. My job as pilot is to make those risks manageable and assure myself I have done what I can to ensure safety of the flight. I think most of us do that. Perhaps a description of the spring and its operation with a drawing might be cause for intelligent, constructive discussion on the LML, but this wet blanket verbal slam against the author's decision to ferry back home is not a positive contribution. There wasn't much smartness from the beginning in this response.. Regards, John Barrett Barrett/Garrett Enterprises, Inc. PO Box 428 Pt. Hadlock, WA 98339 www.carbinge.com