Cessna's response to negative feedback on Skycatcher being builtin China

M wrote:
On Jan 4, 9:38 am, pittss1c wrote:
I wonder if they will use lead paint.


It's funny people complains about lead paint here where defending the
use of leaded fuel. Don't forget that tetraethyl lead hasn't been
made in U.S. in years and China might be the only supplier of TEL in
our fuel :-)

http://buy.ecplaza.net/search/1s1nf2...thyl_lead.html

But we don't generally coat our children's toys with 100LL.

Gig601XLBuilder wrote in
:

M wrote:
On Jan 4, 9:38 am, pittss1c wrote:
I wonder if they will use lead paint.


It's funny people complains about lead paint here where defending the
use of leaded fuel. Don't forget that tetraethyl lead hasn't been
made in U.S. in years and China might be the only supplier of TEL in
our fuel :-)

http://buy.ecplaza.net/search/1s1nf2...d_tetra_ethyl_
lead.html

But we don't generally coat our children's toys with 100LL.


Used to do.


Bertie

Gig601XLBuilder,

How else do you expect us to deal with non-uniformed combatants in a
combat zone?


That's not what is done at Gitmo. Come on now, nobody can follow the
news and be that naive.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

William Hung wrote:
On Jan 4, 10:58 am, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
William Hung wrote in news:f410af67-3d69-42ec-b5ff-
:

On Jan 4, 10:29 am, Gig601XLBuilder wrote:
http://www.cessnaskycatcher.com/home/124.html
I brownsed the gallery. That's got to be the ugilest Cessna ever.
I have to say, none of those new LSAs look very good at all. HAving said
that, I haven't flown one, so I really ought to see what one will do

Bertie

Not that what I think matters, but I think that the 150/2s are great
looking, even better looking than the 172s. Doesn't the 150/2s
qualify for LSA status? I would sonner buy them over the new one and
just use the balance to fully pimp it out(zero time engine, new prop,
new interior and paintjob, new toys for the panel...etc.), but that's
just me.

Wil


No unfortunately it doesn't Max Gross Weight for LSA is 1320 lbs. I
think this was the single biggest error in the creation of the LSA rules.

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:


Yeah, but I don't post pics of it ordinarily.
I sold one iu had for years a while back, but just bought a Citabria (
also not qualified for LSA)
I had a Luscombe, but I don;t think I'd have bothered with LSA
certification even if I had kept it. Not aq lot of advantage for me. I
did most of the maintenance myself anyway so it would have saved me
nothing.


On the Luscombe you wouldn't have had to bother with any additional
certification issues and still wouldn't. Just don't fail a medical and
keep your BFR and drivers license up to date. Fly till you can't fly
anymore.

Gig601XLBuilder wrote:
Mxsmanic wrote:
Morgans writes:

Prisoners in the US are there for good reason, and most all are
multiple offenders, or else major felony offenders.

Eighty percent of U.S. prisoners are in prison on drug charges.

That 80% number while technically either true or close to true also
include a metric-butt load of people that the drug offense was secondary
to another offense non-drug related offense. Which pretty much proves
the point that that drugs cause crime in general.

Hardly. Keep repeating this mantra: correlation does not prove causation.

Thomas Borchert wrote in
:

Gig601XLBuilder,

How else do you expect us to deal with non-uniformed combatants in a
combat zone?


That's not what is done at Gitmo. Come on now, nobody can follow the
news and be that naive.


You've not seen fox news then?


Bertie

Gig601XLBuilder wrote in
:

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:


Yeah, but I don't post pics of it ordinarily.
I sold one iu had for years a while back, but just bought a Citabria
(
also not qualified for LSA)
I had a Luscombe, but I don;t think I'd have bothered with LSA
certification even if I had kept it. Not aq lot of advantage for me.
I
did most of the maintenance myself anyway so it would have saved me
nothing.


On the Luscombe you wouldn't have had to bother with any additional
certification issues and still wouldn't. Just don't fail a medical and
keep your BFR and drivers license up to date. Fly till you can't fly
anymore.



Well, I kinda need my medical anyway, so that isn't an issue either. I
see the benifits, but I'm a bit worried about the probable abuses.
I might be talking apples and oranges here,but a few years ago I was
visiting someone who had a two place ultralight. Sort of a Breezy type
thing. Parasol, open in front. Rotax 582 pusher. Can;'t remember the
type. Anyhow, we went out to see this thing and it was parked outside
for one thing. harldy flown at all. It had amphib floats and it had to
be waaaay overweight. It was corroded and had been tied down with a rope
halfway up the strut and the wind had bent the strut slightly. Needless
to say I wouldn't fly it ( actually I don;t fly lawn furniture anyway,
so probably wouldn't have even if it was perfect) Iasked them why they
had gotten involvd in this thing in the first place. Why hadn't they
bought a cub? Well, the reasons they gave me were "nah, you gotta get a
licence for that, you gotta have it inspected every year, all that happy
horse****, so we got this" Now, at the time, a Cub was cheaper to buy
anyway, so I siad, "right, you want me to go up in an airplane that has
had no maintenance and is in rag order in any case, and is flown by a
guy who couldn't be bothered to learn to fly properly. Right".
Still haven't been up in one of those things.
I fear that having seen this and also having seen all sorts of abuses(
some by me!) in "traditional" light aviation the potential for abuse in
LSA is large..
Having said that.there are some ultralights and LSAs I would love to
try.

Bertie

Rich Ahrens wrote:
Gig601XLBuilder wrote:
Mxsmanic wrote:
Morgans writes:

Prisoners in the US are there for good reason, and most all are
multiple offenders, or else major felony offenders.

Eighty percent of U.S. prisoners are in prison on drug charges.

That 80% number while technically either true or close to true also
include a metric-butt load of people that the drug offense was
secondary to another offense non-drug related offense. Which pretty
much proves the point that that drugs cause crime in general.

Hardly. Keep repeating this mantra: correlation does not prove causation.

But it doesn't disprove it either.

Thomas Borchert wrote:
Gig601XLBuilder,

How else do you expect us to deal with non-uniformed combatants in a
combat zone?


That's not what is done at Gitmo. Come on now, nobody can follow the
news and be that naive.


That is exactly who is at Gitmo. Unless you are one of those nit-wits
that think they are sending people there after grabbing people off the
streets for holding up and anti-Bush poster.