Future Club Training Gliders

Tom Mara and Bob Whelan;

THANK YOU for being the 'VOICES OF REASON" on this thread! (With
apologies to BK and TC)

As for the rest of you, how about post on the FAA Blanik AD comment
page to inform them of the effect the AD will have on 1/5 of the
training fleet, as most of the students I know can't afford north of
$60 just to get thier rating in Modern glass, and will cease their
training as a result. Your comments here outnumber those on the FAA
page by three to one!

If not able to do so, I imagine the combined hot air on this thread
could be directed vertically with measurable effect!

aerodine

On Sep 15, 10:27*pm, wrote:
Tom Mara and Bob Whelan;

THANK YOU for being the 'VOICES OF REASON" on this thread! (With
apologies to BK and TC)

As for the rest of you, how about post on the FAA Blanik AD comment
page to inform them of the effect the AD will have on 1/5 of the
training fleet, as most of the students I know can't afford north of
$60 just to get thier rating in Modern glass, and will cease their
training as a result. *Your comments here outnumber those on the FAA
page by three to one!

If not able to do so, I imagine the combined hot air on this thread
could be directed vertically with measurable effect!

aerodine

I'm missing the point of just telling the FAA what the effect of the
AD will be on grounding L13 fleet -- I kinda suspect people directly
involved at the FAA know. The FAA seems pretty set that a testing
procedure needs to be developed. They seem to have invested a fair
amount of time and effort lookign at this already and went out of
their way in the recent letter to the SSA to present a nice report.
What is it you actually want people to ask the FAA to do? That the FAA
engineer a test procedure on their own? That they provide more help
(what exactly?) to develop that in collaboration? That they try to
pressure the LAK to do something? That they just accept the past
visual inspection AD?

Thanks

Darryl