X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from zproxy.gmail.com ([64.233.162.200] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.0.8) with ESMTP id 986967 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Wed, 15 Feb 2006 23:10:35 -0500 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=64.233.162.200; envelope-from=wdleonard@gmail.com Received: by zproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id 4so85137nzn for ; Wed, 15 Feb 2006 20:09:52 -0800 (PST) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; b=tYG+I+0BFmQazSHIH5CZwSFAROfW1ss3HiHBlhysxDGQX5ts7fN7wWfDF6uKHiyRtCsGLYadxA5RpLlusxVUcSMW1el2RkHMZ0Ep+7VPKHghMIzxMOmsW/Hsfsp/nVOybYxHdb5ENjUZBpBShIizKFrUviB48l2UgcD9iFEo/nQ= Received: by 10.64.209.5 with SMTP id h5mr467793qbg; Wed, 15 Feb 2006 20:09:52 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.65.192.3 with HTTP; Wed, 15 Feb 2006 20:09:52 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <1c23473f0602152009ubde57c7p252e702ce3bc6a4f@mail.gmail.com> Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2006 20:09:52 -0800 From: David Leonard To: Rotary motors in aircraft Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Lyc vs Rotary In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_885_9312010.1140062992413" References: ------=_Part_885_9312010.1140062992413 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline On 2/15/06, al p Wick wrote: > > 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 > > -- > Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/ > Archive and UnSub: http://mail.lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary/ > Thanks Al good thing YOU are so constructive in you comments. -- Dave Leonard Turbo Rotary RV-6 N4VY http://members.aol.com/_ht_a/rotaryroster/index.html http://members.aol.com/_ht_a/vp4skydoc/index.html ------=_Part_885_9312010.1140062992413 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline

On 2/15/06, = al p Wick <alwick@juno.com>= ; wrote:
Wow. This is so cool!
I can i= gnore 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 littl= e
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 expert= s 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<= br>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. Righ= t? Why do I need to test theories for significance any
more? No need, ju= st 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 des= ign info:
http://www.maddyhome.com/canardpages/pages/alwick/index.html

-= -
Homepage:  http://www.= flyrotary.com/
Archive and UnSub:   http://mail.lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary/

Thanks Al  good thing YOU are so constructive= in you comments.

--
Dave Leonard
Turbo Rotary RV-6 N4VY
http://members= .aol.com/_ht_a/rotaryroster/index.html
http://members.aol.com/_ht_a/vp4skydoc/index.html=20 ------=_Part_885_9312010.1140062992413--