X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from m12.lax.untd.com ([64.136.30.75] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.0.8) with SMTP id 986960 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Wed, 15 Feb 2006 23:03:29 -0500 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=64.136.30.75; envelope-from=alwick@juno.com Received: from m12.lax.untd.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by m12.lax.untd.com with SMTP id AABB9H8K5AZ9STSA for (sender ); Wed, 15 Feb 2006 20:02:03 -0800 (PST) Received: (from alwick@juno.com) by m12.lax.untd.com (jqueuemail) id LHA7D9Z4; Wed, 15 Feb 2006 20:01:55 PST To: flyrotary@lancaironline.net Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2006 20:01:20 -0800 Subject: Lyc vs Rotary Message-ID: <20060215.200134.1396.7.alwick@juno.com> X-Mailer: Juno 5.0.33 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 0,5,13-14,17-23 From: al p Wick X-ContentStamp: 8:4:1528698812 X-MAIL-INFO:1dfafab79a8a73cbca936bb76a6b4fa7aad3ab6bbe87ef339abeabd3be8ebedbdaeef7affa5eb71ab7979a3a4f0af33acb8a1e X-UNTD-OriginStamp: L941HVjjYzDhN3itp//mkDSbk8zKTt1QPgdeh4SjevbjqlNmryJHLg== X-UNTD-Peer-Info: 127.0.0.1|localhost|m12.lax.untd.com|alwick@juno.com Wow. This is so cool! I can ignore all those years of training in failure prevention. Next time there is an incident with my engine of choice, all I need do is come up with some anecdotes about Lycoming. You know, just throw out some little story about a lyc failure and wham! Totally solves my problem. No need to seek facts anymore. Just rely on anecdotes! I know all the experts warn you about making decisions using impressions and feelings. But hey, what do they know? I mean, it just FEELS so good. I'm sure it won't take too much effort and soon I'll forget about that failure last week, and that one last month, and that one two months ago. Oh, yeah, and since no one died, then it's not really a risk. Right? I mean, he made it back to the ground, so it's not engine related. As long as it's not the "engine" then there's no real risk. Yeah! Wow, I think I can rationalize anything. To hell with facts. Yeah, next failure, I'll just remove a part from my plane. Less parts, less failures. Right? Why do I need to test theories for significance any more? No need, just need to use my FEELINGS. Yes sir. -al wick Artificial intelligence in cockpit, Cozy IV powered by stock Subaru 2.5 N9032U 200+ hours on engine/airframe from Portland, Oregon Prop construct, Subaru install, Risk assessment, Glass panel design info: http://www.maddyhome.com/canardpages/pages/alwick/index.html