Matronics Email Lists :: View topic - Time to 'fess up and produce an ELSA

Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists

Get Email Distribution Too! FAQ Search Memberlist Usergroups Register

Profile Log in to check your private messages Log in

Time to 'fess up and produce an ELSA

Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> Lightning-List

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author Message

stevesrolling(at)yahoo.co
Guest

Posted: Sun Aug 17, 2008 12:21 am Post subject: Time to 'fess up and produce an ELSA

"The guys in Shelbyville will do a great job on your aircraft"

 ...and we wonder why the FAA is cracking down on builder assist operations.... with Lightning not even grandfathered in on the existing sham 51% list (who screwed that up? Too late to get on now.), expect some badged visitors if you keep up this line of chatter on a public forum.  

  

 Homebuilt needs to mean just that again, as it did before greed and nouveau riche pilots arrived on the scene.  

  

 Arion needs to produce genuine SLSA or, better yet for starters, the legitimately minimal (as in 1%) builder completion ELSA (carrying no commercial use and some other harmless restrictions). Is Arion working to get ELSA status on the climb prop, no fairings, long wing version of this magnificent aircraft?  If so what is ETA and if not, why not? 

  

 The friendly ASTM approval process could not be simpler.  Just publish a manual and promise to build according to the plans you submit from the first one you build,... and you're an aircraft manufacturer with the phone ringing off the wall and the cash register jumping off the counter.  Caveat Emptor but at least ethically solid... unlike experimental-registered "homebuilt" retractable turbines where the heaviest lifting the owner/builder does is hoisting their Mont Blanc Meisterstück to sign the checks.



           [quote][b]

Kayberg(at)AOL.COM
Guest

Posted: Sun Aug 17, 2008 3:46 am Post subject: Time to 'fess up and produce an ELSA

In a message dated 8/17/2008 4:22:20 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,  stevesrolling(at)yahoo.com writes:

  	  Quote: 	
		                               "The guys in Shelbyville will do a great job          on your aircraft"

         ...and we wonder why the FAA          is cracking down on builder assist operations.... with Lightning not          even grandfathered in on the existing sham 51% list (who screwed          that up? Too late to get on now.), expect some badged visitors if you          keep up this line of chatter on a public forum.  

          

         Homebuilt needs to mean just that again, as it did          before greed and nouveau riche pilots arrived on          the scene.  

          

         Arion needs to produce genuine SLSA or, better          yet for starters, the legitimately minimal (as in 1%) builder          completion ELSA (carrying no commercial use and some other harmless          restrictions). Is Arion working to get ELSA status on the climb prop, no          fairings, long wing version of this magnificent aircraft?  If          so what is ETA and if not, why not? 

          

         The friendly ASTM approval process could not be          simpler.  Just publish a manual and promise to build according to          the plans you submit from the first one you build,... and you're an          aircraft manufacturer with the phone ringing off the wall and the cash          register jumping off the counter.  Caveat Emptor but at          least ethically solid... unlike experimental-registered "homebuilt"          retractable turbines where the heaviest lifting the owner/builder does          is hoisting their Mont Blanc Meisterstück to sign the          checks.

	


 

  

 Just taking a break from writing editorials for the New York  Times?    Or perhaps you are drinking the Kool-Aid of  Big  Brother?

  

 What is not considered, IMHO, is safety.   It is no secret that  more complex planes are being built.   Since "factory" airplanes with  high tech performance are too expensive, the buyers turn to homebuilt  designs.  Those of us who have toured the Lightning factory have seen the  excellent molding of critical parts.  To achieve the strength and weight of  those parts is simply impossible in your garage.   To downgrade any  part of that is at the cost of safety.  I think the changes in the 51% rule  will come at the expense of safety.

  

 I also think that the other issue is time.  "Builder assist" in  whatever form is popular because few people want to spend 10 years building  their first airplane.  Why should you spend 80% of your build time doing  repetitive tasks?   Why should you spend 40-80 hours sanding and  painting if you are not good at either?   Why not give a local body  shop $6,000 and be done with it?   The result will be fewer airplanes  and fewer pilots.  Something we dont need.

  

 The real cause of the policy making was not the Lightning, but the  turbines, jets and huge piston engined birds.  Once again, the Govament is  using nuclear warheads to swat flies.

  

 BTW, Another problem arises with the SLSA.  The speed limit.   True some will want the long wings and reduced speeds.  But others will  want to go fast.  Then it has to be amateur built.   

  

 By the way, we have "badged visitors" who are Lightning owners and  owners.  No worries, mate.

  

  

 Doug Koenigsberg



Looking for a car that's sporty, fun and fits in your budget? Read reviews on AOL Autos.

  [quote][b]

stevesrolling(at)yahoo.co
Guest

Posted: Sun Aug 17, 2008 11:33 am Post subject: Time to 'fess up and produce an ELSA

Yes - I am worried, DK.  Everyone should be.  After welcoming me to the forum by opening with a personal dig and apparent attempt to discredit my post for being "too intellectual" (only in your mind and Dubya Bush America have that and a NY Times reference somehow become insults) you proceed to prove all my points by giving additional concrete examples of how wealth, sloth, and an ethics vacuum have corrupted the Poborezny dream.  Hell, EAA itself has been corrupted by money and power - now willing to compromise fifty year standards to lure dues-paying members thus increasing its political clout and staff salaries and travel budgets.

  

 The full certification process with its attendant Service Bulletins and ADs along with rigorous qualification and experience for the honor of being an AP and IA are what established American GA as preeminently safe through the 20th century.  Homebuilding was introduced as a limited postwar exception maintaining safety by ensuring owners - not the local Earl Schieb minimum wager or drone in a Kunming plastics factory - knew their aircraft inside out and took personal responsibility for each molecule of it.  

  

 More recently Sport Pilot (incorporating ELSA, SLSA, and a few qualifying  experimental and classic designs) was introduced as another limited exception maintaining (jury still out) safety by limiting complexity and performance.  

  

 Your concept (and current practice) of unlimited subcontracted components and extensive manufacturer fabrication and assembly masquerading as builder assist (all without performance constraints) circumvents the intent of homebuilding and leaves no one responsible for safety... although the inevitable lawsuits after accidents will pierce that fantasy soon enough (and potentially shutter Shelbyville).  More significantly, your concept mocks the true foundation of aviation traditions and safety: (full disclosure, honesty, and privileges based on ability not wallet) while punishing legitimate American manufacturers financially by destroying their marketplace.

  

 Everyone's needs can be met within the current system without losing respect for aviation or sacrificing personal integrity (understanding that is not much of a sacrifice for fastbuck artists).  The low budget and/or traditional hobbyists can design and build from scratch up to the limits of their budget and actual personal ability...not beyond.  For a little more money and/or with less skill and time required, there is ELSA. Lightning is right now ready for that with little more than a postcard to ASTM.  At twice the price, one can get in the same airspace immediately via SLSA. SLSA trades no formal medical certification or builder participation for compensatory enhanced safety-based performance constraints (VFR day with limits on weight and seats plus max cruise and stall speeds).  

  

 If high rollers can demonstrate a sufficient market segment exists, then Arion and others will manufacture legitimate certified high performance designs like SwiftFury or some personal luxury variant of Mooney with the ultimate trophy being a good used Mustang.

  

 If as you seem to suggest there are atypically lazy and wealthy FAA Inspectors turning a blind eye to expensive sham builder assist because it gets them into the air faster (both build time and IAS) and cheaper than following the rules, then our industry has found its own pederast priests.

  

  

  

 G'day



           [quote][b]

pete(at)flylightning.net
Guest

Posted: Sun Aug 17, 2008 2:01 pm Post subject: Time to 'fess up and produce an ELSA

Steve,  

   

You are really displaying your lack of knowledge of the ASTM standards and the process needed to prove compliance with those standards.  Perhaps in the world of some aircraft producers the process involves nothing more than signing a few documents stating that the aircraft complies and “mailing in the postcard”.  Those companies are located overseas and have no fear of American lawyers bringing liability lawsuits against them.  Some companies seem to feel no obligation to meet the ASTM requirements.  

   

Arion Aircraft will not fall into that group of LSA producers.  If  we ever apply for S-LSA status you can be assured that we will have tested and documented the Lightning to demonstrate compliance to every paragraph of the applicable ASTM standards.  We won’t just send a postcard.  We will have proved that the landing gear will stand up to a load factor of 2 multiplied by the required safety factor of 1.5 coupled with a side loading of 1.8 multiplied by a safety factor of 1.5.  Do you think that a few of the leading LSA suppliers tested and documented that requirement when 1 out of ten of their aircraft have demonstrated gear collapse?   Should we just “mail it in” and let you the consumer deal with it when things are not right?  I’d bet you would have your attorney on us in a minute yet you advocate just mailing a postcard!  

   

Take a look at the POH and maintenance manuals of many of the LSA producers.  They are a joke but someone signed that they comply with ASTM F2483.  If Arion Aircraft enters the LSA market we will not be a “joke” and nothing about our LSA offering will be so.  Rest assured when we “Mail in the postcard”  it will be after we spend the hundreds of thousands of dollars necessary to demonstrate that we comply.  

   

As to builder assist – Arion is completely  within the spirit and letter of the rule as it stands now.  No one knows what the final rule will look like and the FAA will revise their original NPRM substantially after the comment period ends Sept 30.    

   

I think one of the major points that needs addressing in the amateur built rules is willingness of builders to lie about their involvement in the project.  When builders sign a 8130-12 after building a Glastar (a 3500 hour build project) in the TWO WEEKS TO TAXI program they are making a fraudulent statement.  There is no way that the 80 hours they spend gets them more than cursory  involvement in that project.  Contrast that with Arion’s build assist where the builder is actively involved in every part of the construction.  Our builders are exhausted at the end of each week but they know everything about their aircraft.  

   

But perhaps I’m talking about the same problem whether it is amateur built or S-LSA.  There always have been and always will be those who are willing to lie in a notarized document – who are willing to “Mail the postcard” without doing the work.  It is behavior and integrity (or lack of) that causes the problem.  For the problem of those willing to “Mail the postcard” I have no cure.  I can only assure you that Arion Aircraft will not be a part of that group.  

   

   

Pete Krotje  

Arion Aircraft, LLC  

931-680-1781  

www.flylightning.net  

   

   

   

   

     

From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Steve

 Sent: Sunday, August 17, 2008 2:33 PM

 To: Lightning-List(at)matronics.com

 Subject: Time to 'fess up and produce an ELSA   

  

              

Yes - I am worried, DK.  Everyone should be.    After welcoming me to the forum by opening with a personal dig and   apparent attempt to discredit my post for being "too   intellectual" (only in your mind and Dubya Bush America have that and a   NY Times reference somehow become insults) you proceed to prove all my points   by giving additional concrete examples of how wealth, sloth, and an ethics   vacuum have corrupted the Poborezny dream.  Hell, EAA itself has   been corrupted by money and power - now willing to compromise fifty   year standards to lure dues-paying members thus increasing its   political clout and staff salaries and travel budgets.   

      

    

      

The full certification process with its attendant Service   Bulletins and ADs along with rigorous qualification and experience for   the honor of being an AP and IA are what established American GA as   preeminently safe through the 20th century.  Homebuilding was introduced   as a limited postwar exception maintaining safety by ensuring owners - not   the local Earl Schieb minimum wager or drone in a Kunming plastics factory -   knew their aircraft inside out and took personal responsibility for each   molecule of it.     

      

    

      

More recently Sport Pilot (incorporating ELSA, SLSA,   and a few qualifying  experimental and classic designs)   was introduced as another limited exception maintaining (jury still out)   safety by limiting complexity and performance.     

      

    

      

Your concept (and current practice) of unlimited   subcontracted components and extensive manufacturer fabrication and   assembly masquerading as builder assist (all without performance   constraints) circumvents the intent of homebuilding and leaves   no one responsible for safety... although the inevitable lawsuits after   accidents will pierce that fantasy soon enough (and potentially shutter   Shelbyville).  More significantly, your concept mocks the true   foundation of aviation traditions and safety: (full disclosure, honesty,   and privileges based on ability not wallet) while punishing legitimate   American manufacturers financially by destroying their marketplace.   

      

    

      

Everyone's needs can be met within the current system   without losing respect for aviation or sacrificing personal integrity   (understanding that is not much of a sacrifice for fastbuck   artists).  The low budget and/or traditional   hobbyists can design and build from scratch up to the limits   of their budget and actual personal ability...not beyond.  For a little   more money and/or with less skill and time required, there is   ELSA. Lightning is right now ready for that with little more than a   postcard to ASTM.  At twice the price, one can get in the same airspace   immediately via SLSA. SLSA trades no formal medical certification or builder   participation for compensatory enhanced safety-based   performance constraints (VFR day with limits on weight and   seats plus max cruise and stall speeds).     

      

    

      

If high rollers can demonstrate a sufficient market   segment exists, then Arion and others will manufacture legitimate   certified high performance designs like SwiftFury or some personal luxury   variant of Mooney with the ultimate trophy being a good used Mustang.   

      

    

      

If as you seem to suggest there are atypically lazy and   wealthy FAA Inspectors turning a blind eye to expensive sham builder assist   because it gets them into the air faster (both build time and IAS) and   cheaper than following the rules, then our industry has found its   own pederast priests.   

      

    

      

    

      

    

      

G'day   

        

    	  Quote: 	
		    http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List 	
0 	  Quote: 	
		   	
1 	  Quote: 	
		   	
2 	  Quote: 	
		   	
3 	  Quote: 	
		   	
4 	  Quote: 	
		   	
5 	  Quote: 	
		   	
6 	  Quote: 	
		   	
7 	  Quote: 	
		   	
8 	  Quote: 	
		   	
9

        [quote][b]

info(at)flylightning.net
Guest

Posted: Mon Aug 18, 2008 5:40 am Post subject: Time to 'fess up and produce an ELSA

To group,  

   

I think we have covered this subject many times. The Approved List is not a prerequisite for a AWC or inspection for a EAB aircraft, it only makes determining the “Major Portion” easier for the DAR and the inspection. If you want to prove you built the aircraft keep very detailed builders logs, photos , notes . ect this will prove your case as with any EAB. The Aircraft did not make it on the list prior to the suspension of evaluations because it was too new of a kit to be evaluated and we did not have all items needed for that evaluation. So not a matter of screwing anything up just dealing with the speed of the FAA, anyone who has applied for a AWC knows they do not work fast. Now, Ask any one of the customers who have come to build with Us in TN and they will tell you this is not a vacation and we are not building your aircraft for you in any way. We are here to help you organize your building time and take care of much of the head scratching which goes on while building. Although deemed simple or friendly by those who have not worked with it, the ASTM standards are much different that you think. You can not just simply build one and say that it complies, than go off building them. There are miles of standards to comply with thru testing or computations, than design control and tracking of every single part you make (not needed by a kit manufacturer) and that in fact is the right part out of the approved fixture of mold. I could go on for hours here, I think there are several LSA manufactures who did just that signed on the line with out regards to standards. Just building and promising to comply or build to the plans sounds just like a different version of what your problem is above. The Lightning kit does meet the current 51% rule as the new proposed one is not in effect. And the proposed rule should not prove any problems for the current kit either. We have run thru the evaluation list several times, from several different people and continue to come up with about 56% builder 44% manufacture and well with in the 20% requirements for fabrication and assembly. As far as our plans for a SLSA or an ELSA keep our above mentioned experiences with the standards in mind.  

   

I would and so would all greatly appreciate to know whom is posting to the list by a “ simple” signature.  

   

Nick Otterback  

Arion Aircraft, LLC  

         

  

From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Steve

 Sent: Sunday, August 17, 2008 3:21 AM

 To: lightning-list(at)matronics.com

 Subject: Time to 'fess up and produce an ELSA  

  

              

"[b]The   guys in Shelbyville will do a great job on your aircraft"[/b]   

      

...and we wonder why the FAA is cracking down   on builder assist operations.... with Lightning not even grandfathered in on   the existing sham 51% list (who screwed that up? Too late to get on   now.), expect some badged visitors if you keep up this line of chatter on a   public forum.     

      

    

      

Homebuilt needs to mean just that again, as it did   before greed and [i]nouveau riche[/i] pilots arrived   on the scene.     

      

    

      

Arion needs to produce genuine SLSA or, better   yet for starters, the legitimately minimal (as in 1%) builder   completion ELSA (carrying no commercial use and some other harmless   restrictions). Is Arion working to get ELSA status on the climb prop, no fairings,   long wing version of this magnificent aircraft?  If so what is ETA   and if not, why not?    

      

    

      

The friendly ASTM approval process could not be   simpler.  Just publish a manual and promise to build according to the   plans you submit from the first one you build,... and you're an aircraft   manufacturer with the phone ringing off the wall and the cash register   jumping off the counter.  [i]Caveat   Emptor[/i] but at least ethically solid... unlike   experimental-registered "homebuilt" retractable turbines where   the heaviest lifting the owner/builder does is hoisting their Mont Blanc   Meisterstück to sign the checks.   

        

    	  Quote: 	
		    http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List 	
0 	  Quote: 	
		   	
1 	  Quote: 	
		   	
2 	  Quote: 	
		   	
3 	  Quote: 	
		   	
4 	  Quote: 	
		   	
5 	  Quote: 	
		   	
6 	  Quote: 	
		   	
7 	  Quote: 	
		   	
8 	  Quote: 	
		   	
9

        [quote][b]

stevesrolling(at)yahoo.co
Guest

Posted: Mon Aug 18, 2008 8:10 am Post subject: Time to 'fess up and produce an ELSA

PK, thanks for the righteous indignation and quality control.... on my post and daily in your facility.  I don't think anyone assumed you can literally send a postcard to ASTM and be a manufacturer but knew instead that expression was symbolic of the contrast between the straightforward simplistic paperwork required to submit an existing, tested, and in use experimental design for ASTM ELSA or SLSA approval vs the millions of dollars and years of engineering and political effort required to get full certification of a standard category production aircraft from OK City.

  

 Obviously the strength and reliability of the airframe and the company behind it will vary in this young, still loosey goosey process and you clearly strive to lead the pack.  Caveat emptor.  Same individual variation goes for compliance with the letter and intent of the amateur experimental regulations.  The comments of builders here (I have not been to your headquarters but plan to visit ASAP) DO suggest you are walking a thin line (clearly crossed by those others you mention) with your current builder assist practices and indisputably you missed an opportunity by not getting on the 51% list when that was a slam dunk process.  CZAW (your closest competition in airframe and price terms but not even in your league when it comes to management honesty and customer relations) actually advertised they were on that list when they weren't.  Scumbuckets.

  

 I will put my money where my mouth is the day after you announce ELSA approval for a kit that does not require an all thumbs guy like me to do more than bolt together some big parts and maybe string a few clearly color coded wires in places a full size American can reach.  And despite your coyness, I expect that is going to happen before CZAW offers to actually build and deliver the RTF aircraft I have had a deposit with them on for three years now.



         [quote][b]

info(at)flylightning.net
Guest

Posted: Mon Aug 18, 2008 8:48 am Post subject: Time to 'fess up and produce an ELSA

To Group,  

   

This list is reserved for discussions about the lightning Kit, how it goes together, tricks on building, do’s and don’ts, you get my point. So I would ask that we keep it for that and not fill our email boxes with junk. If you want to discuss policies and rules do that on the FAA list if they have one. If you want to talk about business practices take it up with MR. Trump. As for your morals and indecencies call Oprah. But keep this list for people who are building, flying and or thinking about the Lightning kit as there next project.  

   

Nick  

         

  

From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Steve

 Sent: Monday, August 18, 2008 11:09 AM

 To: lightning-list(at)matronics.com

 Subject: Time to 'fess up and produce an ELSA  

  

              

PK, thanks for the righteous indignation and quality   control.... on my post and daily in your facility.  I don't think anyone   assumed you can literally send a postcard to ASTM and be a manufacturer   but knew instead that expression was symbolic of   the contrast between the straightforward simplistic paperwork required   to submit an existing, tested, and in use experimental design for ASTM ELSA   or SLSA approval vs the millions of dollars and years of engineering and   political effort required to get full certification of a standard category   production aircraft from OK City.   

      

    

      

Obviously the strength and reliability of the   airframe and the company behind it will vary in this young,   still loosey goosey process and you clearly strive to lead the   pack.  Caveat emptor.  Same individual variation goes for   compliance with the letter and intent of the amateur   experimental regulations.  The comments of builders here (I have   not been to your headquarters but plan to visit ASAP) DO suggest you are   walking a thin line (clearly crossed by those others you mention) with your   current builder assist practices and indisputably you missed an opportunity   by not getting on the 51% list when that was a slam dunk process.  CZAW   (your closest competition in airframe and price terms but not even   in your league when it comes to management honesty and customer relations)   actually advertised they were on that list when they weren't.    Scumbuckets.   

      

    

      

I will put my money where my mouth is the day after   you announce ELSA approval for a kit that does not require an all thumbs   guy like me to do more than bolt together some big parts and maybe   string a few clearly color coded wires in places a full size American can   reach.  And despite your coyness, I expect that is going to happen before   CZAW offers to actually build and deliver the RTF aircraft I have had a   deposit with them on for three years now.   

        

   

        [quote][b]

walt.mefford(at)garmin.co
Guest

Posted: Mon Aug 18, 2008 8:55 am Post subject: Time to 'fess up and produce an ELSA

Right on!  

   

N881WP  

Walt M.  

         

  

From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of flylightning

 Sent: Monday, August 18, 2008 9:49 AM

 To: lightning-list(at)matronics.com

 Subject: RE: Time to 'fess up and produce an ELSA  

  

   

To Group,  

   

This list is reserved for discussions about the lightning Kit, how it goes together, tricks on building, do’s and don’ts, you get my point. So I would ask that we keep it for that and not fill our email boxes with junk. If you want to discuss policies and rules do that on the FAA list if they have one. If you want to talk about business practices take it up with MR. Trump. As for your morals and indecencies call Oprah. But keep this list for people who are building, flying and or thinking about the Lightning kit as there next project.  

   

Nick  

         

  

From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Steve

 Sent: Monday, August 18, 2008 11:09 AM

 To: lightning-list(at)matronics.com

 Subject: Time to 'fess up and produce an ELSA  

  

              

PK, thanks for the righteous indignation and quality   control.... on my post and daily in your facility.  I don't think anyone   assumed you can literally send a postcard to ASTM and be a manufacturer   but knew instead that expression was symbolic of   the contrast between the straightforward simplistic paperwork required   to submit an existing, tested, and in use experimental design for ASTM ELSA   or SLSA approval vs the millions of dollars and years of engineering and   political effort required to get full certification of a standard category   production aircraft from OK City.   

      

    

      

Obviously the strength and reliability of the   airframe and the company behind it will vary in this young,   still loosey goosey process and you clearly strive to lead the   pack.  Caveat emptor.  Same individual variation goes for   compliance with the letter and intent of the amateur   experimental regulations.  The comments of builders here (I have   not been to your headquarters but plan to visit ASAP) DO suggest you are   walking a thin line (clearly crossed by those others you mention) with your   current builder assist practices and indisputably you missed an opportunity   by not getting on the 51% list when that was a slam dunk process.  CZAW   (your closest competition in airframe and price terms but not even   in your league when it comes to management honesty and customer relations)   actually advertised they were on that list when they weren't.  Scumbuckets.   

      

    

      

I will put my money where my mouth is the day after   you announce ELSA approval for a kit that does not require an all thumbs   guy like me to do more than bolt together some big parts and maybe   string a few clearly color coded wires in places a full size American can   reach.  And despite your coyness, I expect that is going to happen   before CZAW offers to actually build and deliver the RTF aircraft I have had   a deposit with them on for three years now.   

        

    	  Quote: 	
		    http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List 	
0 	  Quote: 	
		   	
1 	  Quote: 	
		   	
2 	  Quote: 	
		   	
3 	  Quote: 	
		   	
4 	  Quote: 	
		   	
5 	  Quote: 	
		   	
6 	  Quote: 	
		   	
7 	  Quote: 	
		   	
8 	  Quote: 	
		   	
9

   

-------------------------  

This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential material for the sole use of the intended recipient. If you are not the intended recipient, please be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of this e-mail or any attachment is prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please contact the sender and delete all copies. 

Thank you for your cooperation  [quote][b]

N1BZRich(at)AOL.COM
Guest

Posted: Mon Aug 18, 2008 9:49 am Post subject: Time to 'fess up and produce an ELSA

I had written a "nice" response to stevesrolling (see below) but had  not sent yet as I wanted to "let it set a while" then re-read what I had written  before putting it out to the list.  However, after reading his latest post,  I am convinced he is actually just a "troll" looking to get his jollies by  creating controversy.  On his three post he has tried to create "issues"  where none really exist as to the Lightning and Arion Aircraft.  So, "Mr.  Troll", if you are for real, provide a name and address, ask some  valid questions that have to do with building or flying the Lightning, and you  will receive the respect of the Lightning listers.  If you are truly  waiting for an SLSA or ELSA Lightning because you are an "all thumbs guy", then  why "bad mouth" a company you really know nothing about?  Your answer to  the above (if in fact you do answer) will show whether you really are just a  troll.  

 Blue Skies, but check 6,

 Buz Rich

  

  

 Hello stevesrolling,

     I don't think I have seen your email address on the  Lightning list before, so welcome aboard.  However, in order to know who we  are corresponding with, most of us sign our names so that we can become  acquainted with each other and develop a kind of friendly relationship.  It  is also nice to know where you are from so list members near your  location might be able to share their experiences and even provide a flight  or a look at their project.  

     I have read both of your recent post several times,  and try as I might, I am having a hard time understanding exactly what  point you are trying to get across.  In fact, I am not  entirely sure you aren't just a "troll" looking to create some  controversy.  But whatever your reason for posting,  I certainly do  agree with your opening comment that someone saying "The guys in Shelbyville  will do a great job on your aircraft" might possibly be misleading to anyone  unfamiliar with the SYI operation; causing them to think that "your  aircraft gets built with little real involvement by you".    However, I am certain that the person that made that statement  was just being enthusiastic about their great build experience and will  certainly acknowledge that indeed they were heavily involved in all aspects  of the build.  

     Your comment that "Homebuilt needs to mean just  that again, as it did before greed and nouveau riche pilots arrived on the  scene", is very similar to an "attitude" that I have seen at some EAA  meetings  where "old timers" (like me) who have possibly built time  consuming aircraft in the past are a little put off by progress in aircraft  construction techniques that allow kits to be built in much less time.   After giving a briefing on the construction of my Esqual "LS" kit that took me  about 5 months (I made lots of changes), I actually had someone that had built  an early Rutan design (taking many years to complete) say that the new kits  should not be allowed because they can be built so quickly.  He quickly  "shut up" when I said, well I have built a Pitts Special from plans (no kit) and  an aluminum airplane (kit) and that those old methods just take more time to  complete because they are old technology.  Progress in aviation  technology often starts with the homebuilt movement and then moves to the "big  boys".  But when building a modern kit, you learn just as much using modern  construction as you did in the "old days" using the "old ways".  

     I do agree with some of your thoughts that over the  years EAA itself may have lost some of its initial focus on homebuilding, but  that often happens with growth in an organization that is trying to serve all of  its members interest.  Yes, the big Oshkosh show has gotten big and seems  to be moving more towards a "trade show" type of environment, but it still is  the best show of its kind for homebuilding.  And yes, I think the 51% rule  is fine just the way it is, the FAA just needs to enforce the current rule as it  is and not allow the "hired gun" builders or the "factory builds" that really do  all the work and the "owner" just writes the checks.  The real answer  is up to the DAR to decide if the "builder", who signs his name  stating that they did the work, is telling the truth.  The builders  log has to be the key.  

     Pete and Nick have responded to your comments  about ASTM standards and any possible future SLSA Lightning, so I will refrain  from adding to their words.  However, rest assured that the SYI group is  "on top" of things and, busy as they are, they have a great future mapped out  for Airon Aircraft and its customers, past, current, and future.  

      Blue Skies,

 Buz



Looking for a car that's sporty, fun and fits in your budget? Read reviews on AOL Autos.

  [quote][b]

pequeajim

Joined: 03 Sep 2006
Posts: 708
Location: New Holland, PA

Posted: Mon Aug 18, 2008 10:06 am Post subject: Time to 'fess up and produce an ELSA

Nice reply Buz...  Just the way ti should be, not argumentative or insulting, but informative.

 

 On 8/18/08, N1BZRich(at)aol.com (N1BZRich(at)aol.com) <N1BZRich(at)aol.com (N1BZRich(at)aol.com)> wrote: [quote]  I had written a "nice" response to stevesrolling (see below) but had not sent yet as I wanted to "let it set a while" then re-read what I had written before putting it out to the list.  However, after reading his latest post, I am convinced he is actually just a "troll" looking to get his jollies by creating controversy.  On his three post he has tried to create "issues" where none really exist as to the Lightning and Arion Aircraft.  So, "Mr. Troll", if you are for real, provide a name and address, ask some valid questions that have to do with building or flying the Lightning, and you will receive the respect of the Lightning listers.  If you are truly waiting for an SLSA or ELSA Lightning because you are an "all thumbs guy", then why "bad mouth" a company you really know nothing about?  Your answer to the above (if in fact you do answer) will show whether you really are just a troll.  

  Blue Skies, but check 6,

 Buz Rich

  

  

 Hello stevesrolling,

     I don't think I have seen your email address on the Lightning list before, so welcome aboard.  However, in order to know who we are corresponding with, most of us sign our names so that we can become acquainted with each other and develop a kind of friendly relationship.  It is also nice to know where you are from so list members near your location might be able to share their experiences and even provide a flight or a look at their project.  

      I have read both of your recent post several times, and try as I might, I am having a hard time understanding exactly what point you are trying to get across.  In fact, I am not entirely sure you aren't just a "troll" looking to create some controversy.  But whatever your reason for posting,  I certainly do agree with your opening comment that someone saying "The guys in Shelbyville will do a great job on your aircraft" might possibly be misleading to anyone unfamiliar with the SYI operation; causing them to think that "your aircraft gets built with little real involvement by you".   However, I am certain that the person that made that statement was just being enthusiastic about their great build experience and will certainly acknowledge that indeed they were heavily involved in all aspects of the build.  

      Your comment that "Homebuilt needs to mean just that again, as it did before greed and nouveau riche pilots arrived on the scene", is very similar to an "attitude" that I have seen at some EAA meetings  where "old timers" (like me) who have possibly built time consuming aircraft in the past are a little put off by progress in aircraft construction techniques that allow kits to be built in much less time.  After giving a briefing on the construction of my Esqual "LS" kit that took me about 5 months (I made lots of changes), I actually had someone that had built an early Rutan design (taking many years to complete) say that the new kits should not be allowed because they can be built so quickly.  He quickly "shut up" when I said, well I have built a Pitts Special from plans (no kit) and an aluminum airplane (kit) and that those old methods just take more time to complete because they are old technology.  Progress in aviation technology often starts with the homebuilt movement and then moves to the "big boys".  But when building a modern kit, you learn just as much using modern construction as you did in the "old days" using the "old ways".  

      I do agree with some of your thoughts that over the years EAA itself may have lost some of its initial focus on homebuilding, but that often happens with growth in an organization that is trying to serve all of its members interest.  Yes, the big Oshkosh show has gotten big and seems to be moving more towards a "trade show" type of environment, but it still is the best show of its kind for homebuilding.  And yes, I think the 51% rule is fine just the way it is, the FAA just needs to enforce the current rule as it is and not allow the "hired gun" builders or the "factory builds" that really do all the work and the "owner" just writes the checks.  The real answer is up to the DAR to decide if the "builder", who signs his name stating that they did the work, is telling the truth.  The builders log has to be the key.  

      Pete and Nick have responded to your comments about ASTM standards and any possible future SLSA Lightning, so I will refrain from adding to their words.  However, rest assured that the SYI group is "on top" of things and, busy as they are, they have a great future mapped out for Airon Aircraft and its customers, past, current, and future.  

       Blue Skies,

 Buz



   Looking for a car that's sporty, fun and fits in your budget? Read reviews on AOL Autos.

  	  Quote: 	
		  



href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List

href="http://forums.matronics.com/" target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com

href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution



	


[b]

pequeajim

Joined: 03 Sep 2006
Posts: 708
Location: New Holland, PA

Posted: Mon Aug 18, 2008 10:06 am Post subject: Time to 'fess up and produce an ELSA

Now if I can just learn how to type!



 On 8/18/08, Jim Langley <pequeajim(at)gmail.com (pequeajim(at)gmail.com)> wrote: [quote]Nice reply Buz...  Just the way ti should be, not argumentative or insulting, but informative.  



 On 8/18/08, N1BZRich(at)aol.com (N1BZRich(at)aol.com) <N1BZRich(at)aol.com (N1BZRich(at)aol.com)> wrote:   	  Quote: 	
		    I had written a "nice" response to stevesrolling (see below) but had not sent yet as I wanted to "let it set a while" then re-read what I had written before putting it out to the list.  However, after reading his latest post, I am convinced he is actually just a "troll" looking to get his jollies by creating controversy.  On his three post he has tried to create "issues" where none really exist as to the Lightning and Arion Aircraft.  So, "Mr. Troll", if you are for real, provide a name and address, ask some valid questions that have to do with building or flying the Lightning, and you will receive the respect of the Lightning listers.  If you are truly waiting for an SLSA or ELSA Lightning because you are an "all thumbs guy", then why "bad mouth" a company you really know nothing about?  Your answer to the above (if in fact you do answer) will show whether you really are just a troll.  

  Blue Skies, but check 6,

 Buz Rich

  

  

 Hello stevesrolling,

     I don't think I have seen your email address on the Lightning list before, so welcome aboard.  However, in order to know who we are corresponding with, most of us sign our names so that we can become acquainted with each other and develop a kind of friendly relationship.  It is also nice to know where you are from so list members near your location might be able to share their experiences and even provide a flight or a look at their project.  

      I have read both of your recent post several times, and try as I might, I am having a hard time understanding exactly what point you are trying to get across.  In fact, I am not entirely sure you aren't just a "troll" looking to create some controversy.  But whatever your reason for posting,  I certainly do agree with your opening comment that someone saying "The guys in Shelbyville will do a great job on your aircraft" might possibly be misleading to anyone unfamiliar with the SYI operation; causing them to think that "your aircraft gets built with little real involvement by you".   However, I am certain that the person that made that statement was just being enthusiastic about their great build experience and will certainly acknowledge that indeed they were heavily involved in all aspects of the build.  

      Your comment that "Homebuilt needs to mean just that again, as it did before greed and nouveau riche pilots arrived on the scene", is very similar to an "attitude" that I have seen at some EAA meetings  where "old timers" (like me) who have possibly built time consuming aircraft in the past are a little put off by progress in aircraft construction techniques that allow kits to be built in much less time.  After giving a briefing on the construction of my Esqual "LS" kit that took me about 5 months (I made lots of changes), I actually had someone that had built an early Rutan design (taking many years to complete) say that the new kits should not be allowed because they can be built so quickly.  He quickly "shut up" when I said, well I have built a Pitts Special from plans (no kit) and an aluminum airplane (kit) and that those old methods just take more time to complete because they are old technology.  Progress in aviation technology often starts with the homebuilt movement and then moves to the "big boys".  But when building a modern kit, you learn just as much using modern construction as you did in the "old days" using the "old ways".  

      I do agree with some of your thoughts that over the years EAA itself may have lost some of its initial focus on homebuilding, but that often happens with growth in an organization that is trying to serve all of its members interest.  Yes, the big Oshkosh show has gotten big and seems to be moving more towards a "trade show" type of environment, but it still is the best show of its kind for homebuilding.  And yes, I think the 51% rule is fine just the way it is, the FAA just needs to enforce the current rule as it is and not allow the "hired gun" builders or the "factory builds" that really do all the work and the "owner" just writes the checks.  The real answer is up to the DAR to decide if the "builder", who signs his name stating that they did the work, is telling the truth.  The builders log has to be the key.  

      Pete and Nick have responded to your comments about ASTM standards and any possible future SLSA Lightning, so I will refrain from adding to their words.  However, rest assured that the SYI group is "on top" of things and, busy as they are, they have a great future mapped out for Airon Aircraft and its customers, past, current, and future.  

       Blue Skies,

 Buz



   Looking for a car that's sporty, fun and fits in your budget? Read reviews on AOL Autos.

  	  Quote: 	
		  



href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List

href="http://forums.matronics.com/" target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com

href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution



	


	


[b]

dashvii(at)hotmail.com
Guest

Posted: Mon Aug 18, 2008 2:50 pm Post subject: Time to 'fess up and produce an ELSA

Now that IS on topic!  I have not seen any in depth fabricating from metal and/or fabric/wood airplanes C but I have seen a lot of the composites like the Lightning C Jabiru C and the Lancair IV.  I even saw a prototype of a 2 seat Lancair turbine that was hot!  Don't know what happened to that plane.  I do feel good with what is coming from Buz that he considers the Lightning to be a user friendly built composite airplane.  I think that's where the line is being drawn.  Between what is fabricated and what is building an airplane.  As I understand it C you can build 100% of some Rutan designs from scratch!  That's not what this plane is for.  Neither was it for having a preassembled aircraft.  If Arion deems that they wish to go the SLSA market then it will be because it was born out of the heritage of the experimental Lightning segment.  They didn't plan on having a plane where you buy it as an experimental and then they preassemble it either.  In my year and a half or so around them I never saw anything of the sort.  In fact C they tried to help by being there to answer questions and tried not to lay hands on the aircraft as much as possible.  There are obviously some things that are harder than others.  

  

 If anybody is going to have "claims" to any wrongs being done then I think they should sign their name.  Also C claims with admittedly no previous knowledge would seem to me to be as irresponsible.  Yes C you have a good vocabulary C but you don't seem to have great people skills or a responsible nature.  Try and be a little more humble and play nice with others and you'll find that pretty much everybody here will be more than happy to welcome you in C buy you a beer C and forget the first impressions in favor of comradary!  Anyhow C great write-up once again Buz!  Brian W.

   

 From: N1BZRich(at)aol.com

Date: Mon C 18 Aug 2008 13:49:07 -0400

Subject: Re: Time to 'fess up and produce an ELSA 

To: lightning-list(at)matronics.com

  I had written a "nice" response to stevesrolling (see below) but had not sent yet as I wanted to "let it set a while" then re-read what I had written before putting it out to the list.  However C after reading his latest post C I am convinced he is actually just a "troll" looking to get his jollies by creating controversy.  On his three post he has tried to create "issues" where none really exist as to the Lightning and Arion Aircraft.  So C "Mr. Troll" C if you are for real C provide a name and address C ask some valid questions that have to do with building or flying the Lightning C and you will receive the respect of the Lightning listers.  If you are truly waiting for an SLSA or ELSA Lightning because you are an "all thumbs guy" C then why "bad mouth" a company you really know nothing about?  Your answer to the above (if in fact you do answer) will show whether you really are just a troll.  

 Blue Skies C but check 6 C

 Buz Rich

  

  

 Hello stevesrolling C

     I don't think I have seen your email address on the Lightning list before C so welcome aboard.  However C in order to know who we are corresponding with C most of us sign our names so that we can become acquainted with each other and develop a kind of friendly relationship.  It is also nice to know where you are from so list members near your location might be able to share their experiences and even provide a flight or a look at their project.  

     I have read both of your recent post several times C and try as I might C I am having a hard time understanding exactly what point you are trying to get across.  In fact C I am not entirely sure you aren't just a "troll" looking to create some controversy.  But whatever your reason for posting C  I certainly do agree with your opening comment that someone saying "The guys in Shelbyville will do a great job on your aircraft" might possibly be misleading to anyone unfamiliar with the SYI operation; causing them to think that "your aircraft gets built with little real involvement by you".   However C I am certain that the person that made that statement was just being enthusiastic about their great build experience and will certainly acknowledge that indeed they were heavily involved in all aspects of the build.  

     Your comment that "Homebuilt needs to mean just that again C as it did before greed and nouveau riche pilots arrived on the scene" C is very similar to an "attitude" that I have seen at some EAA meetings  where "old timers" (like me) who have possibly built time consuming aircraft in the past are a little put off by progress in aircraft construction techniques that allow kits to be built in much less time.  After giving a briefing on the construction of my Esqual "LS" kit that took me about 5 months (I made lots of changes) C I actually had someone that had built an early Rutan design (taking many years to complete) say that the new kits should not be allowed because they can be built so quickly.  He quickly "shut up" when I said C well I have built a Pitts Special from plans (no kit) and an aluminum airplane (kit) and that those old methods just take more time to complete because they are old technology.  Progress in aviation technology often starts with the homebuilt movement and then moves to the "big boys".  But when building a modern kit C you learn just as much using modern construction as you did in the "old days" using the "old ways".  

     I do agree with some of your thoughts that over the years EAA itself may have lost some of its initial focus on homebuilding C but that often happens with growth in an organization that is trying to serve all of its members interest.  Yes C the big Oshkosh show has gotten big and seems to be moving more towards a "trade show" type of environment C but it still is the best show of its kind for homebuilding.  And yes C I think the 51% rule is fine just the way it is C the FAA just needs to enforce the current rule as it is and not allow the "hired gun" builders or the "factory builds" that really do all the work and the "owner" just writes the checks.  The real answer is up to the DAR to decide if the "builder" C who signs his name stating that they did the work C is telling the truth.  The builders log has to be the key.  

     Pete and Nick have responded to your comments about ASTM standards and any possible future SLSA Lightning C so I will refrain from adding to their words.  However C rest assured that the SYI group is "on top" of things and C busy as they are C they have a great future mapped out for Airon Aircraft and its customers C past C current C and future.  

      Blue Skies C

 Buz



   Looking for a car that's sporty C fun and fits in your budget? Read reviews on AOL Autos.

 	  Quote: 	
		  



st" target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List

ttp://forums.matronics.com

=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/contribution



	
Get thousands of games on your PC C your mobiT/go/108588800/direct/01/' target='_new'>Game with Windows  [quote][b]

Display posts from previous:

	Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> Lightning-List	All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Page 1 of 1

Jump to:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum