No brawl. This is normal. Everyone here is wrong but me.
But its ok to let them speak their simple minds. :-).
Seriously, you will get lots of opinions here, many are very good, a
few bad. But the ultimate decision on anything and everything is
yours. But its a great resource.
Blue skies.
Dutch
JWL wrote:
Having kicked off this thread it was not, repeat
NOT, my intention to
generate a chute, no chute argument. Basically Im flying an old aircraft,
that I dont own, that is fitted with a BP. Not knowing anything
about the
chute it scared the $hit out of me. Thanks to Jim Williamsons very
clear
reply Im now a lot happier that the thing is inert, and will remain
so,
until I say otherwise. The way I fly, what I fly and where I
fly very
probably wouldnt induce me to fit one to any future aircraft I may
own but
I perfectly understand, and respect, the requirement for some
pilots to fit
it to their a/c.
This forum (the virtual flying club bar) has added greatly to my knowledge
of micro/ultralights and particularly thing Rotax, for that I thank
you all
but I would hate to think Ive started a (virtual) bar-room brawl.
john
J. Dutch Revenboer <dutchr@ionet.net> wrote in message
news:3A660333.D13F7775@ionet.net...
> Lou,
>
> This thread could (and has in the past) gone on forever, the old
chute
> vs. no chute debate. Now, hopefully all of us do a fair preflight
> before we take to the skies. But your message implies that
by owning
> and flying a Weed, you must inspect every nut, bolt and rivet.
Im not
> sure I want to fly in anything that has that kind of caveat, with
or
> without a chute. Im perfectly happy, and feel quite safe,
flying in
> the Cessna 172 or my Falcon XP without a chute. Yes, something
"could"
> happen in either, but it is a risk management decision.
>
> Dutch
> N507AA
> Stillwater, OK
>
> Lou Hinshaw wrote:
> >
> > "JWL" <jwleaper@online.no> wrote:
> >
> > >How many mid air structural failures are there (not pilot induced)
when
it
> > >could be used? Pretty few Id guess, Other than a
survivable
collision,
> > >not very likely, when would you use one?
> > >
> > >Now sits back and awaits for the inevitable incomng!
> > >
> > This attitude is why it became law to have insurance on cars.
> > It is a rewrite of "it cant happen to me"
> >
> > As it chances, I bought a used Weed and that means inspect
> > every nut, bolt, and rivet.
> > The inspection revealed several things that dould result in
> > a failure. One was a wallowed-out hole that would never
> > ordinarily be noticed, but in the wrong location, it would lost
all
> > tail contol. CHUTE TIME!
> >
> > FWIW
> >
> > "The learned Fool writes his nonsense in better language,
> > but tis still nonsense."
> > B.Franklin Poor Richard Improved (1754)
> >
> > Lou H.
> > Semi-Learned, and very foolish,
> > Prolific inventor, now on VP prop
> > and cheap jet for GA
> > Lousy Salesman,
> > Incompetent businessman.
> > (Typical of the Breed)
> > Looking for both around
> > Tulsa OK, USA
> > (need working partner)
