Letters

Adding it up

Your article, " Airframe and Powerplant: The Additive Game" (November 1994 Pilot), was timely. Mattituck Aviation recently overhauled the Continental E-225-4 from my 1948 Navion. With two complete runs of mineral oil behind me, I am now using AeroShell 15W-50 and two cans of AvBlend as recommended by the manufacturer. I'm hoping that AvBlend will help retard internal wear as well as reduce valve sticking. At the present time I have logged 23 hours with AvBlend and haven't noticed any changes. With the high cost of flying these days, we could all use a miracle elixir to help keep operating costs down.

Robert G. Giacobone AOPA 923382
Lincoln, Rhode Island

This letter is in specific reference to the comments about Microlon and the outrageous performance claims made by its inventor.

You are correct to question how the elimination of four percent of engine friction can result in a 37 percent power increase and 12 percent better fuel consumption. Among claims in other publications, the inventor states that his Microlon product saved Voyager's world flight, and alleged that the airplane ran for two hours without oil. Both allegations are untrue. Those precious Voyager engines were never treated with Microlon.

My main point in writing, however, is that your article blindly accepted his claim that Microlon is an "FAA-approved additive containing Teflon," which is also not true. While the agency accepted the use of Microlon in aircraft piston engines of less than 1,000 cubic inches displacement, the manufacturer's claims regarding benefits were not approved by the FAA.

Dick Rutan AOPA 976839
Mojave, California

Expo endorsements

At the recent AOPA Expo '94 held in Palm Springs, many of the exhibitors went out of their way to appeal to children and young people — giving them aviation-oriented pins, ballpoint pens, and candy. In addition, they allowed the children to inspect their products and gave permission for them to actually sit in the aircraft which, needless to say, left a lasting impression.

Another person who especially went out of her way for the children was airshow pilot Joann Osterud. She spent time talking with each one, telling them how she became interested in flying and asking about their interests. She gave them all pins and hats which she proceeded to autograph, and graciously posed for numerous photographs with the children and her airplane.

Aviation will certainly benefit from the enthusiasm generated in these young people at Expo. AOPA is to be commended for its far-sighted actions in including these young people in its activities.

Paul E. Lighthill AOPA 835355
Palm Springs, California

I returned from Expo '94 in Palm Springs with a weary head and a heavy heart. The convention itself was marvelous, from the static displays to the information booths. But I attended two seminars — "FAA Enforcement: Avoiding a Violation" with John S. Yodice and "How to Handle a Ramp Check" with Glenn C. McGovern — that made me reflect the direction in which aviation is heading today.

While these seminars were excellent and very informative, I was disturbed to witness such a negative and angry attitude toward the FAA from the commercial and general aviation communities. I agree that there are numerous problems and inconsistencies in this government bureaucracy, but I see a trend in which pilots are becoming uncooperative and essentially fearful of the FAA. This disposition stems from incidents with what is probably a small minority of examiners and inspectors within the agency. Then again, maybe I am simply naive and gullible enough to believe in the "kinder, gentler FAA."

Kassandra Cassano AOPA 1040111
Walnut Creek, California

Encouraging future pilots

I would like to commend AOPA on its efforts to get more people into aviation by encouraging new flight students and future pilots. I would like to point out another great segment of the population that could use a boost to get into the air: the great many former pilots who have found themselves groundbound for various reasons.

I am amazed at the number of people with whom I come in contact who tell me they used to fly. These are people who gave up flying grudgingly, but for good reasons — usually family and/or financial considerations. Many of them have now resolved these considerations; they need to be reminded about what drew them into flying in the first place and be reassured that they can brush up their flying skills and join the rest of us once again. These former fliers don't need a hard sell to get into the cockpit, because they have been there before and loved it.

It doesn't take much, sometimes just a few hours of flight time or a trip to the local FBO, but it does take some effort. Let's take them flying with us and re-introduce them to aviation. I think the only thing more rewarding than introducing someone to flying for the first time is helping someone who truly loves flying to get back into the air.

David M. Harman AOPA 789393
Ridgecrest, California

Protesting Part 67 proposal

I am writing to register my protest of the FAA's proposed new rules regarding airmen medical certification ("President's Position: Your Comments, Please," December 1994 Pilot. I am 64 years old and an airplane owner. After a 25-year hiatus since my last flight, I finally got back into "sport flying" after retirement. To be able to afford an airplane, I try to do the routine maintenance myself; I also voted in the November election to show my disgust with a Congress and administration that are regulating us to death.

I am alarmed after reading that the FAA is proposing new rules, new regulations, and new impediments that will make my flying more expensive, more regulated, and more complex without increasing aviation safety one iota. These new regulations are totally inappropriate for general aviation, unless the FAA is attempting to eliminate a large segment of us. There is no proof in NTSB records that the kinds of problems addressed by these regulations have detracted from general aviation's safety record. It appears that the FAA is trying to justify its existence by the constant promotion of new regulations.

Let's get some sensibility back into the FAA structure. Give us a cost/benefit analysis of every regulation, every employee, and every FAA activity. Let's make the FAA really support private aviation by examining its structure and eliminating onerous rules and regulations. Contact your legislators and tell them what we need to bring vitality back into general aviation.

George H. Luhr
Charlotte, Vermont

The unwary

In " Pilot Counsel: The Unwary Get Trapped" (November 1994 Pilot), John Yodice expertly expounds on how the "kinder and gentler FAA" hounds and prosecutes pilots who have strayed into the realm of very minor technical violations of the FARs. It certainly seems reasonable that the FAA should have dismissed the motor vehicle action because it occurred prior to the pilot's medical application, but the FAA is apparently still trying to show that it's carrying a big stick.

Yodice's statement that the regulation "requires a pilot to notify the FAA of any `motor vehicle action' within 60 days of the action" isn't quite correct. A pilot does not have to give notice of any motor vehicle action, but only for driving offenses "while intoxicated by, while impaired by, or while under the influence of alcohol or a drug."

Harold M. Miller AOPA 873992
Bay City, Michigan

I would like to hear the FAA's side of the story. John Yodice makes it sound as if drinking and driving should be of no concern to the FAA. There is good reason to believe that people who drink before driving will also drink before flying.

The FAA got the pilot on a technicality, but their real concern probably was that he is unsafe. Even though the FAA and NTSB are blundering bureaucracies, they do make the skies safer.

David G. Shroyer AOPA 1143687
Ridgefield, Washington

Like father, like....

I read Mark R. Twombly's columns (" Pilotage: Like Father, Like...," September 1994 Pilot, and " Pilotage: Final Flight," December 1994 Pilot) and felt both times as if I were there. I was very fond of his father, Ralph Twombly. My very first air race in the T-6, in 1973, was against the remarkable talents he had in the cockpit. It was fun, challenging, competitive, and whenever I was on the wing, or above, or below Ralph in formation, it was always professional. I would fly his wing or race with him anytime.

There is more to air racing than what happens on the course. Through the years we would rally about safety and about things we thought were dangerous or could cause harm. Ralph Twombly was a great asset to air racing and contributed wholeheartedly to the sport. I learned a lot from him about the sport of air racing.

We will all miss Ralph at the Reno Air Races. I will miss his competitiveness, companionship, and smile on the ramp. Somehow I know he will always be there in spirit — maybe helping someone new on the course, flying his race through them.

Ralph J. Rina AOPA 1090627
Long Beach, California

Clubs not at fault

Although I am not a member of a flying club, I'd like to comment on the "AOPA Action" brief titled "NTSB Faults Flying Clubs on Rules and Procedures" (December 1994 Pilot). I believe the NTSB's recommendations for flying club management are helpful; however, going by the limited material reprinted in the journal, I'm of the opinion that the greater issue has been left unaddressed.

We have experienced a number of GA accidents here in California over the past six to eight months, more than a few of which involved multiple fatalities. Reported causes of the accidents were diverse: fuel starvation, stalls on approach or departure (with two separate incidents of loading Cessna 172 cabins to the gills and then topping the tanks when the density altitude was greater than 6,000 feet), and propeller strikes of children standing near the front of the aircraft. There can be no discussion that these were anything but pilot error of the worst kind: negligence of pilot in command responsibilities.

Better procedures at the flying clubs may have prevented some of these, but to place fault at their doorstep is unfair and myoptic. While it is a club's responsibility to keep the aircraft maintained, not one of the accidents I have come across involved mechanical failures — just poor performance by the PIC. It is not the club's responsibility to police member pilots beyond assuring that the pilots are legally competent to command the particular aircraft. I am not saying the observance of strict bylaws would not benefit all, but I am suggesting that the liability for these accidents be placed on the pilots who failed to fill up, failed to do their preflight arithmetic, or failed to clear the ramp before starting the engine. Clubs which demand more from their pilots in terms of recurrent training are unquestionably superior organizations, but this diligent conduct should not divert responsibility from pilot to administration.

Kevin D. Cooksy AOPA 1186750
Cameron Park, California

Big-airport perspective

I enjoy reading Pilot each month. Articles on new aircraft, safety, new developments in the field, and those like "Training Wings" (November 1994 Pilot) are all of interest.

But an article in the latest issue was enough to make me take the trouble to write and thank you. William Kershner's account, " New Pilot: Practice Area: Visiting the 'Big' Airport" (November 1994 Pilot), was just about the funniest thing I have ever read. Thanks for including it.

Leonard Gaston AOPA 1017747
Wilberforce, Ohio

Lower wing loading

I believe there is an error in the data table with your review of the Ruschmeyer R90 230 RG (November 1994 Pilot). The table says the wing area is only 42.45 square feet, giving a wing loading of 70.1 pounds per square foot.

In the several years since I've been compiling data on aircraft performance, my computer assures me I have noted only seven aircraft with loadings above 60, including such exotica as the Learjet 60 and AV-8B Harrier. For a single-engine aircraft going 71 knots at the clean stall to develop this kind of loading would require a lift coefficient of more than 2. Without some fancy high lift devices, this is practically impossible.

A. Steven Toby AOPA 1005713
Arlington, Virginia

You hit the nail on the head. Ruschmeyer's specifications are in metric units, and an error was made during the conversion to English. The R90 230 RG's wing loading is 21.3 pounds per square foot. — Ed.

Errata

An incorrect advertisement for Falcon Watch Company was published in the December 1994 Pilot. The ad listed an incorrect price for the company's GMT-2000 watch. Pilot regrets the error.

In " Better Than New: On The Inside" (November 1994 Pilot), an incorrect address was listed for Rosen Product Development, Incorporated. The address should be Post Office Box 21636.

The fact card that traditionally appears in the January issue of Pilot is not in this issue because the latest FAA data was not available at press time. The card will appear in a future issue.

We welcome your comments. Address your letters to: Editor, AOPA Pilot, 421 Aviation Way, Frederick, Maryland 21701. Include your full name, address, and AOPA number on all correspondence. Letters will be edited for style and length.