|
|
Hey Hamid,
I'm not making an argument that requires data. My argument and issue with the paper is that it contains no data and before we muddy the waters as to what is what we need data.
What if this canopy thing is a red herring? What if people only have to get accustom to the wind noise in order to live? Is all the hubbub and design effort necessary? We need to stop wringing our hands and fly our airplanes.
The bottom line is that the premise of this paper is that there is a problem with the airplane when the canopy is open. It isn't neutral about this. Now folks are running off spending time designing this and that an if we aren't careful, insurance companies are going to require this and that if we don't shed a bright white light on the real cause.
Too many have successfully managed their airplane with the canopy open for us to have to suffer any more negativity surrounding Lancair.
I ran into a Airforce pilot at KSLN the other day. One of his first questions was "Isn't that airplane dangerous?" Uuuggg! I hate that question. The Legacy isn't a dangerous airplane. And papers with these kinds of premises (or is it premi :) ) get into people's head and wham, we have a bad reputation.
Getting out of bed can be dangerous. Don't you see why we have to be careful about the conclusions we draw on some anecdotal evidence? This is all I am trying to say.
Thanks,
Kevin
On May 2, 2014, at 11:03 AM, Hamid Wasti <hwasti@lm50.com> wrote:
> On 5/2/2014 9:19 AM, Kevin Stallard wrote:
>> I apologize for leaving that idea with you. That isn't the intent.
> You are not leaving that idea just with me. It is the gist of your
> argument and is obvious to all who are reading it.
>
> I am merely pointing out that when you go criticizing others for lacking
> rigorous proof while basing your argument on jumping to conclusions, it
> does not look good for you or your arguments.
>
>
> On 5/2/2014 9:19 AM, Kevin Stallard wrote:
>> We shouldn't release this as is.
> As tens of thousands have found out the hard way, the internet does not
> have an undo button. The report has already been posted, which means it
> is "released"
>
> Now if you can figure out a way to "unrelease" things already posted to
> the internet, you will make more than enough money to be flying your own
> Gulfstream (which does not have an open canopy issue) and not have to
> rub elbows with paupers who fly Lancairs :)
>
> Regards,
>
> Hamid
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> For archives and unsub http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/lml/List.html
|
|