Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 08:06 AM - Re: primer! yeah, I know... (Steven Reynard)
2. 08:29 AM - Re: primer! yeah, I know... (Tim Bryan)
3. 04:53 PM - Re: primer! yeah, I know... (Jerry Springer)
4. 07:13 PM - Additional TSA encroachment on GA beyond LASP (Bill Judge)
5. 09:26 PM - Re: Additional TSA encroachment on GA beyond LASP (Robin Marks)
Message 1
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: primer! yeah, I know... |
"anecdotes are fun reading, but" . . . .
"something a little more rigorous seems in order..."
OK Nate, here's what you can do. Build 100 airplanes and place 10 each
strategically all around the world. Do a complete disassembly and
inspection by a team of qualified mechanics, engineers, and metallurgists in
at least three different certified laboratories, every year for 100 years.
When done, they can write a rigorous report for you. Some people will
disagree that there is a lot of opportunity to make it more rigorous, but it
should get you started. . . .
Sorry, sometimes I can't help myself. . . . :(
If you just want another anecdote, find a A&P IA whoes opinion you can trust
and see what they have to say.
Or you could write to Boeing and see if they have any reports? Maybe you
could see if they have a corrosion expert you can talk to?
With all the thousands of posts going back and forth on the issue all over
the internet, that you have already discarded, its not clear why you are
asking for more?!?
I'll ask you a question in return, just for you to think about. Will you be
able to sleep at night if you build an airplane with less effort, labor, and
skill than you can reasonably accomplish and ride in it with a loved one?
My opinion? Do the best you can do and move on.
Steve
Santa Rosa
RV-7 Empennage, left elevator
Message 2
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | primer! yeah, I know... |
Or you can do what I did. Write down the different primers that others have
used then determine what you will use based on which one you can easily find
in your town, one that offers ease of use for you, then use that one on your
airplane. The end result will be, "Yes you primed all the parts internally"
and quite honestly it won't matter much beyond that. I ended up even
changing three times to different primers because of different reasons. One
became no longer available nearby and another kept plugging up the nozzles
and wasting half of every can. My plane parts are all primed and I couldn't
tell you which brand is in which part. I have no worries about longevity or
any other issue.
Good luck and happy building.
Tim Bryan
RV-6 Flying
N616TB over 120 hours now
From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Steven Reynard
Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2009 10:02 AM
Subject: Re: RV-List: primer! yeah, I know...
"anecdotes are fun reading, but" . . . .
"something a little more rigorous seems in order..."
OK Nate, here's what you can do. Build 100 airplanes and place 10 each
strategically all around the world. Do a complete disassembly and
inspection by a team of qualified mechanics, engineers, and metallurgists in
at least three different certified laboratories, every year for 100 years.
When done, they can write a rigorous report for you. Some people will
disagree that there is a lot of opportunity to make it more rigorous, but it
should get you started. . . .
Sorry, sometimes I can't help myself. . . . :(
If you just want another anecdote, find a A&P IA whoes opinion you can trust
and see what they have to say.
Or you could write to Boeing and see if they have any reports? Maybe you
could see if they have a corrosion expert you can talk to?
With all the thousands of posts going back and forth on the issue all over
the internet, that you have already discarded, its not clear why you are
asking for more?!?
I'll ask you a question in return, just for you to think about. Will you be
able to sleep at night if you build an airplane with less effort, labor, and
skill than you can reasonably accomplish and ride in it with a loved one?
My opinion? Do the best you can do and move on.
Steve
Santa Rosa
RV-7 Empennage, left elevator
Message 3
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: primer! yeah, I know... |
"anecdotes are fun reading, but" . . . .
>
> "something a little more rigorous seems in order..."
>
Use what you want and move on, there is no war, pick a primer or not,
and build.
Part of the intereior of my RV-6 is primed and part is not, the unprimed
area looks as good
as it did when I built my airplane 20 years ago.
do not archive
Message 4
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Additional TSA encroachment on GA beyond LASP |
Fellow flyers:
TSA is pushing the LASP regulation through and at the same time
pushing a regulation through that doesn't have a public comment period
because it is masked by National Security. Rumor has it that the no
comment one is talking about badge access to all areas of any airport
that has air carrier serivce. The Bages will cost $200 per airport
and will be specific to each airport.
I decided to put comments in for the TSA proposal that they are
accepting comments for. It didn't take long. I believe it is one way
that we can stem additional erosion of our flying freedom. The the
LASP fails then the more draconian proposal shrouded in secrecy will
have no chance. Friday is the last day to comment. If you'd like to
do the same EAA will guide you through the process:
http://eaa.org/govt/tsa.asp#Comment
If you're lost for words Here is what I wrote:
The proposed security regulation attempts to make
cost benefit comparisons and show that the cost associated with the
regulations are clearly worth the benefits of avoiding a potential
terrorist attack. The reader is lead to conclude that no further
analysis is necessary. The analysis does not take into account the
value of the freedom of the American people and demonstrated
acceptance of risk by the American people. The continual erosion of
our way of life in the name of security is unacceptable.
Risk is associated with everything a human does.
In 2007 37,248 people perished in car accidents in the US. In the same
time period, exactly zero died in general aviation related terror
incidents. The greatest loss of life associated with the scenarios in
the analysis was 3000 from a September 11 type attack. Despite the
most horrific scenario that a general aviation security breach could
lead to the benefit would only be avoiding 1/10th that of what we
willingly accept every year on the roadways. If that the doomsday
event happens once every 10 years we are now proposing new
limitations on the freedom of the public for 1/100th of the accepted
risk associated driving a car. This risk we are trying to prevent
is only imagined and not demonstrated the way auto accident risk and
risk acceptance is demonstrated year after year. The public is not
crying out for auto accident risk mitigation nor should they. This
proposal falls in the same category: long odds against relatively
minor risks.
The analysis may seem to stand muster against the
limited scope of risk associated with general aviation but when
compared with risks that the American people accept on a daily basis
the reality is that general aviation does not pose a significant risk.
Message 5
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Additional TSA encroachment on GA beyond LASP |
Thank you Bill.
Robin
Do Not Archive
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bill Judge
Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2009 7:09 PM
Subject: RV-List: Additional TSA encroachment on GA beyond LASP
Fellow flyers:
TSA is pushing the LASP regulation through and at the same time
pushing a regulation through that doesn't have a public comment period
because it is masked by National Security. Rumor has it that the no
comment one is talking about badge access to all areas of any airport
that has air carrier serivce. The Bages will cost $200 per airport
and will be specific to each airport.
I decided to put comments in for the TSA proposal that they are
accepting comments for. It didn't take long. I believe it is one way
that we can stem additional erosion of our flying freedom. The the
LASP fails then the more draconian proposal shrouded in secrecy will
have no chance. Friday is the last day to comment. If you'd like to
do the same EAA will guide you through the process:
http://eaa.org/govt/tsa.asp#Comment
If you're lost for words Here is what I wrote:
The proposed security regulation attempts to make
cost benefit comparisons and show that the cost associated with the
regulations are clearly worth the benefits of avoiding a potential
terrorist attack. The reader is lead to conclude that no further
analysis is necessary. The analysis does not take into account the
value of the freedom of the American people and demonstrated
acceptance of risk by the American people. The continual erosion of
our way of life in the name of security is unacceptable.
Risk is associated with everything a human does.
In 2007 37,248 people perished in car accidents in the US. In the same
time period, exactly zero died in general aviation related terror
incidents. The greatest loss of life associated with the scenarios in
the analysis was 3000 from a September 11 type attack. Despite the
most horrific scenario that a general aviation security breach could
lead to the benefit would only be avoiding 1/10th that of what we
willingly accept every year on the roadways. If that the doomsday
event happens once every 10 years we are now proposing new
limitations on the freedom of the public for 1/100th of the accepted
risk associated driving a car. This risk we are trying to prevent
is only imagined and not demonstrated the way auto accident risk and
risk acceptance is demonstrated year after year. The public is not
crying out for auto accident risk mitigation nor should they. This
proposal falls in the same category: long odds against relatively
minor risks.
The analysis may seem to stand muster against the
limited scope of risk associated with general aviation but when
compared with risks that the American people accept on a daily basis
the reality is that general aviation does not pose a significant risk.
Other Matronics Email List Services
These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.
-- Please support this service by making your Contribution today! --
|