X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com X-SpamCatcher-Score: 46 [XX] Return-Path: Sender: To: lml Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 13:41:24 -0500 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from ms-smtp-01.southeast.rr.com ([24.25.9.100] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.1.6) with ESMTP id 1837737 for lml@lancaironline.net; Wed, 14 Feb 2007 13:30:28 -0500 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=24.25.9.100; envelope-from=sreeves@sc.rr.com Received: from sreeves10.sc.rr.com (cpe-065-184-125-203.sc.res.rr.com [65.184.125.203]) by ms-smtp-01.southeast.rr.com (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id l1EITF7I026773 for ; Wed, 14 Feb 2007 13:29:15 -0500 (EST) X-Original-Message-Id: <7.0.1.0.0.20070214132624.04265c18@sc.rr.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.0.1.0 X-Original-Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 13:29:14 -0500 X-Original-To: lml@lancaironline.net From: "S. Reeves" Subject: Night vision goggles Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed X-Virus-Scanned: Symantec AntiVirus Scan Engine What do you guys think about night vision goggles for added safety factor for single engine night flying. I'm talking about for the unfortunate event of engine failure, not tooling around wearing them ;). The prices on them have been reduced over the years, and it would be cheaper than buying a twin. Any thoughts? Steve Reeves Glasair 1FT 38SR