----[Please read http://ercoupers.com/disclaimer.htm before following any advice in this forum.]----
This message was automatically forwarded
on behalf of Bill Bayne. Please address any responses to the mail list or
directly to Bill at: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: William R. Bayne [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, February 06, 2006 1:58 AM
To: Ed Burkhead
Subject: Re: [COUPERS-FLYIN] annual inspections vs. 100 hr. inspections
rlyflyin
There you go again, Jim...
Trying to apply logic and common sense to the world as perfected for bureaucracy.
And thing of the plight of all those good souls your money gave a better life (instead of you).
You selfish thing, you ;-)
WRB
--
On Feb 6, 2006, at 00:23, Jim Phelps wrote:
I've just completed a review of my log books on 2749H and this is what I found. 49 annuals in 59 yrs (this plane had two times it sit without flying once 4 yrs and once 5 yrs.) . all this with a ave. of 24 hrs per yr. (59). NOW if the FAA and formally the CAA would have just made the 100 hr. rule only for inspections I would have only had to have 14 inspections.1400 hrs tt. Think of all the money I would have saved and the plane would not have been worn out by all the taking it apart and putting it back togather again.
Jim Phelps 2749H
============================================================================== To leave this forum go to: http://ercoupers.com/lists.htm
