Received-SPF: pass
 receiver=logan.com; client-ip=24.25.9.102; envelope-from=echristley@nc.rr.com
Message-ID: <422E67B2.5030103@nc.rr.com>
Date: Tue, 08 Mar 2005 22:04:18 -0500
From: Ernest Christley <echristley@nc.rr.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.9 (X11/20041127)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Rotary motors in aircraft <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: fuel cutoff valve necessary?
References: <list-776015@logan.com>
In-Reply-To: <list-776015@logan.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

rijakits wrote:

>you are probably right.
>BUT, I got that experience over a rather scarcly inhabited rainforest area.
>I am a" burned child":)) I will go for that mechanical device.
>For me it is a little like the EWP, I want to see it work. I want to see it
>work a LOT! :))
>I will go with the " proof me wrong" - concept. In this case it just has to
>be built and used often and long enough and I'll believe it.
>At the rate at which I get closer to my airplane building dreams, it won't
>be no problem - by then there is no more fossil fuel engines except in
>museums  :((
>
>Thomas J.
>  
>

Ain't nothin' wrong with that.  I ain't mad at ya'.

I would like to give you a piece of unsolicited advise, though.  I don't 
know why you're not building, yet, but usually it either money or time.  
I say pick out an airplane that you like  and that you can get plans 
for.  Pick out all the little pieces and start making them one by one.  
You'll spend very little money for materials, and filling a fitting to a 
perfect finish is something you can do in front of the TV or on your 
lunch break.  Don't make it a priority or a must do sort of thing, just 
something to while away the hours with.  By the time you actually get 
the money/time, you'll be over half done with a nearly complete set of 
all the little pieces which actually take the majority of the time.