Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 05:18 PM - Re: Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co (Albert Gardner)
2. 05:41 PM - Re: Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co (John W. Cox)
3. 07:26 PM - Re: Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co (John Ackerman)
4. 08:38 PM - Re: Fuel Tanks - To Alodine or Not to Alodine - That is the Question? (Stephen Blank)
5. 08:41 PM - Re: Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co ()
6. 08:41 PM - Re: Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co ()
7. 10:17 PM - Dynon Fuel Tank Calibration (Albert Gardner)
8. 10:33 PM - Re: Dynon Fuel Tank Calibration (Tim Olson)
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: | Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co |
I think this letter is a prime example of what should NOT be on the RV-10
List.
Albert Gardner
Yuma, AZ
-----Original Message-----
Subject: RV10-List: Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co
posted by: "bob.kaufmann" <bob.kaufmann@cox.net>
Bob Kaufmann Rick Sked
Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co. Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co.
bob@AIRCRAFTMUTUAL.COM rick@AIRCRAFTMUTUAL.COM
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: | Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co |
It was a clear opportunity for a rate reduction for all builders of
RV-10s (oh yeh... all RVs - that seems to be "on subject".
To each their own Albert. However, my questions were... are we going to
pay the rate increases found with Harmon Rocket technology, Professional
hired guns and third parties purchasers like the incident in California
two weeks ago.
I read clearly that YES, the pool is wide and deep to help lower costs
and will not discriminate. I regularly attend HPAT training at
significantly more cost to me so I can be in a "selective pool" that
excludes and refines the gene pool.
I have worked for thirty years to avoid claims and incidents with no
desire to assist third party purchasers of what should have been OBAM
aircraft and were operated by someone other than the builder.
Builders Yes/ Purchasers NO!.
Still, Bob and Rick are to be commended for the effort, now is the time
to validate their premise regardless of us doubters.
John Cox
Aircraft Insurance investor
Do not Archive
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Albert
Gardner
Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2007 5:15 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co
<ibspud@roadrunner.com>
I think this letter is a prime example of what should NOT be on the
RV-10
List.
Albert Gardner
Yuma, AZ
-----Original Message-----
Subject: RV10-List: Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co
posted by: "bob.kaufmann" <bob.kaufmann@cox.net>
Bob Kaufmann Rick Sked
Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co. Aircraft Mutual Benefit
Co.
bob@AIRCRAFTMUTUAL.COM rick@AIRCRAFTMUTUAL.COM
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: Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co |
Al, I respectfully disagree. I have not made up my mind on this, but
I believe the RV-10 list is the right venue for Bob and Rick to reach
us all.
John Ackerman
40458 finishing kit
On Sep 26, 2007, at 5:14 PM, Albert Gardner wrote:
> <ibspud@roadrunner.com>
>
> I think this letter is a prime example of what should NOT be on the
> RV-10
> List.
> Albert Gardner
> Yuma, AZ
>
> -----Original Message-----
> Subject: RV10-List: Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co
> posted by: "bob.kaufmann" <bob.kaufmann@cox.net>
> Bob Kaufmann Rick Sked
> Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co. Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co.
> bob@AIRCRAFTMUTUAL.COM rick@AIRCRAFTMUTUAL.COM
>
>
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: | Re: Fuel Tanks - To Alodine or Not to Alodine - That is the |
Question?
Vernon,
I see it this way.... fuel is hydrophobic (does not like water), so hard
to corrode the metal when it has hydrocarbons next to it most of the time.
Also, if the tank is kept mostly full, there is little O2 for oxidation.
The risk of any alodine reacting with some future gas product or coming off
from a poor metal prep seems to be a greater risk vs any benefit it may
provide. My 1952 C-170b has just Alclad aluminum in the tail cone and is
still fine after 55 years (based in Florida, 1.5 miles from the ocean).
How old are you???? I am 49, and figure on flying 20-30 more years... if
lucky. The plane should out last me with no extra metal protection.
--
Stephen G. Blank, DDS # 40499 Building the tail cone finally!!
184 NW Central Park Plaza
Port St. Lucie, FL 34986
772-475-5556 >>> Cell
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: | Re: Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co |
I think this is a good idea, from my experience in the insurance industry, These
are commonly referred to as 'groups' Where there is a large enough group of
similarly motivated people that essentially self insure all but the most catastrophic
losses from a shared pool of resources. Think of it as a cooperative for
buying/purchasing insurance. Why send excess profits to the insurance carriers
or agents?
The key to success of this and other groups is the behavior of the participants.
So long as everyone acts with a similar/shared interest it works. When someone
tried to 'take advantage' of the 'pool' it falls apart. Insurance rates are
often higher than they could be because of claims that are frequently brought
which are nuisance or borderline fradulant.
---- John Ackerman <johnag5b@cableone.net> wrote:
>
> Al, I respectfully disagree. I have not made up my mind on this, but
> I believe the RV-10 list is the right venue for Bob and Rick to reach
> us all.
> John Ackerman
> 40458 finishing kit
>
> On Sep 26, 2007, at 5:14 PM, Albert Gardner wrote:
>
> > <ibspud@roadrunner.com>
> >
> > I think this letter is a prime example of what should NOT be on the
> > RV-10
> > List.
> > Albert Gardner
> > Yuma, AZ
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > Subject: RV10-List: Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co
> > posted by: "bob.kaufmann" <bob.kaufmann@cox.net>
> > Bob Kaufmann Rick Sked
> > Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co. Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co.
> > bob@AIRCRAFTMUTUAL.COM rick@AIRCRAFTMUTUAL.COM
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
Message 6
| 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: Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co |
I think this is a good idea, from my experience in the insurance industry, These
are commonly referred to as 'groups' Where there is a large enough group of
similarly motivated people that essentially self insure all but the most catastrophic
losses from a shared pool of resources. Think of it as a cooperative for
buying/purchasing insurance. Why send excess profits to the insurance carriers
or agents?
The key to success of this and other groups is the behavior of the participants.
So long as everyone acts with a similar/shared interest it works. When someone
tried to 'take advantage' of the 'pool' it falls apart. Insurance rates are
often higher than they could be because of claims that are frequently brought
which are nuisance or borderline fradulant.
---- John Ackerman <johnag5b@cableone.net> wrote:
>
> Al, I respectfully disagree. I have not made up my mind on this, but
> I believe the RV-10 list is the right venue for Bob and Rick to reach
> us all.
> John Ackerman
> 40458 finishing kit
>
> On Sep 26, 2007, at 5:14 PM, Albert Gardner wrote:
>
> > <ibspud@roadrunner.com>
> >
> > I think this letter is a prime example of what should NOT be on the
> > RV-10
> > List.
> > Albert Gardner
> > Yuma, AZ
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > Subject: RV10-List: Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co
> > posted by: "bob.kaufmann" <bob.kaufmann@cox.net>
> > Bob Kaufmann Rick Sked
> > Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co. Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co.
> > bob@AIRCRAFTMUTUAL.COM rick@AIRCRAFTMUTUAL.COM
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
Message 7
| 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: | Dynon Fuel Tank Calibration |
On the subject of Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co., originally I thought only Bob
and Rick were wrong but now I see that many more could possibly being
joining that group. I mean, since I'm - by definition 'right' - anyone who
disagrees with me must be 'wrong'. :)
On another subject:
I was doing the calibration of my fuel tanks for the Dynon 180 and found an
interesting situation. The float isn't right at the root of the tank and
hits the top before the tank is full so it can't register levels across the
entire 30 gal. capacity of the tanks. It looks like the float hits the top
at about the 22 gal. mark so the Dynon says a full tank is 22 gal. and will
hold that reading until the float begins to drop. I guess that will have to
be OK and the backup is to enter the proper fuel amount into the fuel
computer and use its calculations of fuel used and remaining. Oh well, the
gages only have to be accurate at empty to be legal. A call to Dynon
confirms the situation and provided some additional information but it
appears that this is the way things work.
This isn't a new situation since the cap. gages I had on the RV-9A couldn't
read empty and full tanks either but the software in the EI fuel gage
handled it differently than the Dynon does.
Albert Gardner
Yuma, AZ
Message 8
| 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: Dynon Fuel Tank Calibration |
Yup, been that way on all the RV-10's so far. I think it's about
24 gallons though where the floats start to drop. No big deal,
because the totalizer is way better at telling you how much is
left.
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
do not archive
Albert Gardner wrote:
>
>
> On the subject of Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co., originally I thought only Bob
> and Rick were wrong but now I see that many more could possibly being
> joining that group. I mean, since I'm - by definition 'right' - anyone who
> disagrees with me must be 'wrong'. :)
>
> On another subject:
> I was doing the calibration of my fuel tanks for the Dynon 180 and found an
> interesting situation. The float isn't right at the root of the tank and
> hits the top before the tank is full so it can't register levels across the
> entire 30 gal. capacity of the tanks. It looks like the float hits the top
> at about the 22 gal. mark so the Dynon says a full tank is 22 gal. and will
> hold that reading until the float begins to drop. I guess that will have to
> be OK and the backup is to enter the proper fuel amount into the fuel
> computer and use its calculations of fuel used and remaining. Oh well, the
> gages only have to be accurate at empty to be legal. A call to Dynon
> confirms the situation and provided some additional information but it
> appears that this is the way things work.
>
> This isn't a new situation since the cap. gages I had on the RV-9A couldn't
> read empty and full tanks either but the software in the EI fuel gage
> handled it differently than the Dynon does.
>
> Albert Gardner
> Yuma, AZ
> rums.matronics.com
>
>
>
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! --
|