From: "Marvin Kaye" <marv@lancaironline.net>
Subject: Re: [LML] Re: Collaborating on checklists
To: lml
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2007 14:21:30 -0500
Message-ID: <web-1835463@logan.com>
In-Reply-To: <7141427652BB3049A7DBF1084B67805B0F7CCB@penumbra.arilabs.net>
References: <7141427652BB3049A7DBF1084B67805B0F7CCB@penumbra.arilabs.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;charset="iso-8859-1";format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

Posted for "Kevin Stallard" <Kevin@arilabs.net>:

  
  "Like any 'bull' session, some topics might not be of
   interest, but the tips and experience of others is invaluable."
  
  What's interesting about this is that when I first learned to fly, the
  guy I rented from could not stop talking about how important it was to
  run an engine rich of peak, regardless of whether it was carbureted or
  fuel injected.
  
  I can remember that this was the accepted knowledge for a long, long
  time.  I remember reading an article about how saving a few bucks on
  running lean would not offset the cost of a worn out engine.  The author
  went to great lengths to explain why rich of peak was the best way to
  go.
  
  Then here comes GAMI and folks who actually spent time and money on
  controlled tests to see how good the "consensus" was.  They've turned it
  all on its head.  Turns out the consensus was pretty much wrong.
  
  I don't like group think, I think it is the worst way to find what you
  are looking for.  I know I'm not making any friends by saying this, but
  beware of group think, and the warm fuzzy you get by agreeing with
  everyone.
  
  Best Regards,
  Kevin
  L2K-291