Letters

Praise for turbonormalizing

I thoroughly enjoyed Steven W. Ells' " AOPA Bonanza Sweepstakes: Up, Up, and Away" (May Pilot) about turbonormalizing. From a purely technical point of view, no aircraft piston engine should be designed without the benefits of turbocharging. The system described by Ells is a major step in advancing the utility of general aviation aircraft.

However, Ells failed to touch on two things that are important. First, turbonormalizing differs from straight turbocharging to the extent that it maintains good performance at low altitudes — where normally aspirated engines are optimized — and still performs well at high altitudes.

Second, turbonormalizing was first introduced in the early 1960s by a brilliant engineer named Joe Leach, who was the technical genius behind the Rajay Corporation, which developed turbonormalizing kits for a wide variety of airplanes — many of which are still flying. I own and fly a 1965 Piper Aztec C with a Rajay system; the airplane is now on its third set of engines, with two of the four turbochargers originally installed still in service.

The original Rajay system was primitive by today's standards, but the fundamental requirement of providing sea-level inlet system conditions at altitude is identical to modern systems. The old Rajay system was simple, with no wastegate controller, no intercooler, and no electronics — it was completely pilot-controlled. Later models had a fixed wastegate with an inlet manifold pop-off valve, as used on the Piper Seneca II. These systems lacked the sophistication and design elegance of the Tornado Alley Turbo system, but they did provide the option for manual override in an emergency.

Joe Leach is now in his 80s, still lives in Southern California, and spends his mornings with other seasoned citizens drinking coffee, reading The Wall Street Journal, and contemplating the fate of the universe. It is refreshing to see his ideas reach fruition with the help of new technology, new materials, and more sophisticated design. Leach's contribution should be recognized.

Gordon H. Millar AOPA 236198
Daytona Beach, Florida

Millar is a former president of the Society of Automotive Engineers Inc. — Ed.

Robinson's will

I just read Thomas B. Haines' " Waypoints: The Robinson Story" (May Pilot). I own an R44 instrument trainer that I use for business and pleasure. I started learning to fly in March 1998 in an R22, got my certificate in November, and went to the factory to pick up my own R22 that same month.

I ordered an R44 in September 1999 when I found out that the hydraulics were becoming standard. I took delivery of my ship in January 2000. I have more than 500 hours logged. I fly to New York and land at the Wall Street heliport. My ship is also Part 135 certified, and I occasionally lease back some time to a charter operator.

Frank Robinson has built an aircraft that is truly within reach of a wider market. I had never even considered owning a helicopter, but once I started down this path Robinson was the obvious choice — from both a cost and quality perspective. The factory safety training course is one example of the extent to which Robinson provides valuable knowledge to pilots (regardless of which type of helicopter they fly).

I enjoyed Haines' article. There are few published on helicopters or on the people who build them. I've met Frank Robinson and the only attribute Haines didn't capture is his strong will — a quality I admire. His name is on every helicopter leaving the factory and he takes that quite seriously. I believe this has resulted in quality and performance beyond what would typically be provided.

Richard Ordowich AOPA 1372419
Princeton, New Jersey

Type rating clarification

Barry Schiff's " Proficient Pilot: Type Club" (May Pilot) contained an error of fact. He says, "Previously, one could obtain a type rating for a Lockheed P-38 Lightning (L-P38) or a Martin B-26 Marauder (M-B26), but no longer." This simply is not true.

I recently conducted a pilot's flight examination on a P-38, then added this type rating on the applicant's FAA pilot certificate and have been requested to do another in the near future. If a Martin B-26 with the appropriate type certificate is available, then the pilot is eligible for a type rating on his pilot certificate. The pilot is required to have a Letter of Authorization (LOA) only if the airplane is licensed with an Experimental certificate. This, incidentally, is the certificate I use to fly the Boeing B-29 since no type rating exists for it.

If the airplane is certificated in the Normal, Restricted, or Limited category, then the pilot does need a type rating and we specifically do issue these ratings following the appropriate flight examination. The FAA has provided, and will continue to provide, type ratings in any of the above vintage and rare airplanes. Any appropriately rated designated pilot examiner or authorized national designated pilot examiner can issue this rating.

While on the subject, it should be noted that the LOA cannot be used in lieu of a type rating — however, if one has the type rating, it may be used in lieu of the LOA. This is a common misperception, perhaps only exceeded by the mistaken assumption that an "all makes of high performance" (commonly referred to as an "all makes, all models") LOA entitles a pilot to fly any airplane he can get into. Again, not so — all it does is allow him to not ask the FAA for a separate LOA in that airplane. The pilot must still be endorsed by the holder of an endorsement authority for that airplane before flying it.

Randall L. Sohn AOPA 1032319
Savage, Minnesota

Sohn is coordinator of the National Designated Pilot Examiner Registry, a cooperative effort between the FAA and the EAA Warbirds of America designed to provide qualified check airmen to pilots requiring type ratings in warbirds and other rare, historic aircraft. Additional information about the program can be found on the Web site ( www.warbirds-eaa.org/programs/prog_examiner.html) — Ed.

Another user fee argument

An argument against user fees I haven't yet heard is its potential for choking off the crucial supply of pilots. In a day when former military pilots constitute a much smaller percentage of new airline transport pilots, the importance of civilian aviation as a breeding ground for commercial pilots is now greater than ever. If user fees were to be implemented, the toll exacted on general aviation would eventually mean that pilot-needy airlines, which have already ravaged GA for its CFIs, would either have to look for pilots internationally (sacrificing potential American jobs) or lower their standards (probably, quite literally sacrificing passengers and airplanes) — or both.

Not all GA pilots are rich people who don't know how else to burn their money. There are many men and women who work very hard just to earn enough money to fly — many of them with dreams of becoming an ATP. With their finances already stretched to the limit, user fees would pose a nearly insurmountable hurdle for a great many.

Daniel Vellekoop AOPA 1362462
Lakeside, California

Other side of a nightmare

Letters to the editor in May's Pilot concerning the article " Surviving an Industry Nightmare" (March Pilot) suggest that misconceptions exist about how our legal civil justice system works. Before Arthur Alan Wolk files a lawsuit for negligence, he must carefully examine facts and the law. If Wolk expects to win, he knows he must prove to a normally skeptical jury that his client was injured, and that these injuries were the results of the defendant's negligence. The jury must answer both questions affirmatively or Wolk is told to take a hike. The negligence standard is simple: The jury must be convinced that the defendant has breached the "ordinary man" standard of behavior. This means the defendant has not complied with the standard of an ordinary and responsible person in his or her conduct. This must be proven before a jury selected by Wolk and the defense attorney.

The attorneys representing manufacturers normally work for insurance companies and are the best and brightest trial attorneys practicing law. Unlike the injured party's attorney, these attorneys normally have access to piles of money and the very best experts that the money can buy. To win against most insurance companies in a court of law is very, very difficult. The odds are about the same as that of your local high school football team's beating the NFL Super Bowl champs. The law says the plaintiff only has to win by a preponderance of the evidence. In truth the facts and the law must be overwhelmingly in favor of the injured party to prevail.

Wolk faces two other hurdles. First, he knows that if he loses, he must personally eat all costs associated with the case. These costs can be enormous. Second, Wolk knows that if he files a case that is without merit — i.e., frivolous — he may be sanctioned and have his license to practice law either suspended or revoked. And he may have to pay all the costs of defending the case, including the defense lawyers' costs and fees. As a result many otherwise meritorious cases never see the light of day.

Finally, what is wrong with holding one responsible for negligently causing injuries? If an aircraft manufacturer is judged negligent in a court of law by a jury, shouldn't the manufacturer or his insurer have to pay for the damage that flows from that negligence? Sadly, though other factors are often in play, in many cases it is the threat of monetary damages from a lawsuit that causes a manufacturer to design a safe product in the first place. Don't we all ultimately benefit from that?

Glen DeBroder AOPA 782697
Winston-Salem, North Carolina

Errata

" Cessna T182T Turbo Skylane: Climb High" (June Pilot) listed an incorrect price for Cessna's new turbocharged Skylane. The T182T with the Nav II avionics package is priced at $316,900. Pilot regrets the error.

The World Wide Web address for the NTSB animation of American Airlines Flight 1420's accident in Little Rock, Arkansas, contained a typographical error in " Safety Pilot Landmark Accidents: Bowling Alley Blues" (June Pilot). The correct URL ( www.ntsb.gov/events/2000/aa1420/anim_summary.htm) was provided on Pilot's Web links page ( www.aopa.org/pilot/links.shtml). That page, updated monthly, contains links to all Web sites mentioned in the magazine and is intended to be bookmarked by readers who are regular Web users.

---

We welcome your comments. Address your letters to: Editor, AOPA Pilot, 421 Aviation Way, Frederick, Maryland 21701. Send e-mail to [email protected]. Include your full name, address, and AOPA member number on all correspondence, including e-mail. Letters will be edited for style and length.