I Want My Own Bird

[Yeah_right]

I really want to make a good decision on this so, I'm giving myself plenty
of time, two years, to get my ducks lined up. I've want either an Archer or
an Arrow with an IFR package.

I've started looking at and pricing hanger space at selected airports in the
Houston area where it'll be based. DWH prices it at $250 a month. Haven't
had a chance to look anywhere else as yet.

I guess what I'm looking for from the board is a breakdown on how much some
of you are paying for loans, insurance, tie-down and upkeep on planes with
similar packages.

Just some financial facts please. Other than the fun factor and the
knowledge that I'll have my own bird to fly whenever I please, I know the
cost of owning a plane is next to impossible to justify.

But I'm a recent empty nester, my source and income is stable, reliable, and
on the increase. I'm fairly young, late 30's, and feel lthat I've paid my
dues to my kid and now it's time I spoil myself.

[Ben Jackson]

In article >,
Yeah_right > wrote:
>Just some financial facts please.

For about 100 hours/year it will cost about $10,000/yr. You'd have
to buy into a partnership or a twin to significantly move the cost
up or down.

More importantly you have to be ready to spend $1000 with no warning
without flinching too badly. You should be able to absorb a $20,000
cost (like a rebuilt engine) without becoming destitute.

If you move up to a twin turboprop I think you just multiply all those
costs by 20 or so. :)

--
Ben Jackson
>
http://www.ben.com/

[[email protected]]

I'm based at West Houston (IWS) and have a 1968 Cherokee 180
(basically the Archer). Annual runs around $800 (the inspection
anyway), T-Covers go for $175, T-hangars I think are about $250.
Insurance runs me about another $800 or so

IWS is also manned 24/7 so it's really convenient. Very helpful staff
also.

On Thu, 07 Oct 2004 04:50:58 GMT, "Yeah_right" >
wrote:

>I really want to make a good decision on this so, I'm giving myself plenty
>of time, two years, to get my ducks lined up. I've want either an Archer or
>an Arrow with an IFR package.
>
>I've started looking at and pricing hanger space at selected airports in the
>Houston area where it'll be based. DWH prices it at $250 a month. Haven't
>had a chance to look anywhere else as yet.
>
>I guess what I'm looking for from the board is a breakdown on how much some
>of you are paying for loans, insurance, tie-down and upkeep on planes with
>similar packages.
>
>Just some financial facts please. Other than the fun factor and the
>knowledge that I'll have my own bird to fly whenever I please, I know the
>cost of owning a plane is next to impossible to justify.
>
>But I'm a recent empty nester, my source and income is stable, reliable, and
>on the increase. I'm fairly young, late 30's, and feel lthat I've paid my
>dues to my kid and now it's time I spoil myself.
>
>

[kontiki]

I was in a similar situation (although a few years older than you),
with my kids gone and some time to spend my money on myself for a change.
Bought my Comanche 250 in April and so far I've put a set of tires on it,
replaced the wing root seals and cowl chafe, some SCAT hoses I'm still
troubleshooting an intermittent problem with the NAV radio (actually the
antenna/feedline now). I think you have to have plenty of cash available
to fix whatever goes wrong and not sweat about spending it. Also if you
can do a lot of your own maintenance and minor repairs as I do it will
save you plenty.

My insurance is $1900/yr, hangar is $125/mo and fuel around here (50nm
west of SAV) is $2.75. It would be painful to have to pay $250 - $300
for a hangar because I plan on $150 a month just for incidentals. I have
not regretted doing it at all.. on the other hand I have a fairly simple
lifestyle in other ways and prefer to spend my extra money on the plane
and associated traveling. Just remember you can't take it with you.
I have already explained to my kids that there will be no inheritance
because I plan on spending it all. :^)


Yeah_right wrote:
> I really want to make a good decision on this so, I'm giving myself plenty
> of time, two years, to get my ducks lined up. I've want either an Archer or
> an Arrow with an IFR package.
>
> I've started looking at and pricing hanger space at selected airports in the
> Houston area where it'll be based. DWH prices it at $250 a month. Haven't
> had a chance to look anywhere else as yet.
>
> I guess what I'm looking for from the board is a breakdown on how much some
> of you are paying for loans, insurance, tie-down and upkeep on planes with
> similar packages.
>
> Just some financial facts please. Other than the fun factor and the
> knowledge that I'll have my own bird to fly whenever I please, I know the
> cost of owning a plane is next to impossible to justify.
>
> But I'm a recent empty nester, my source and income is stable, reliable, and
> on the increase. I'm fairly young, late 30's, and feel lthat I've paid my
> dues to my kid and now it's time I spoil myself.
>
>

[PaulH]

>
> For about 100 hours/year it will cost about $10,000/yr. You'd have
> to buy into a partnership or a twin to significantly move the cost
> up or down.
>
> More importantly you have to be ready to spend $1000 with no warning
> without flinching too badly. You should be able to absorb a $20,000
> cost (like a rebuilt engine) without becoming destitute.
>
> If you move up to a twin turboprop I think you just multiply all those
> costs by 20 or so. :)

About right - my partner and I budgeted 450/mo plus gas/oil each for
an Arrow. That did not provide for an engine reserve and ultimately
turned out to be not quite enough.

[Dave S]

My take on it.. 250 is CHEAP for the Houston area. Hooks is in my
opinion an EXCELLENT GA field with a restaurant, tower, daytime fuel
truck, 24 hour fuel pump access and several schools on field for a
decent sized instructor pool.

I am part of a partnership that is joining into an existing hangar lease
crosstown at EFD, and the small hangars are running $400/mo (but these
hold 2-3 small planes). At Clover/Pearland Regional the rent is running
$350 average for T-hangars that vary from all-metal to "metal sheeting
over wood frame" (boat shed quality)

I can't comment on West Houston or Weiser's prices..

That being said.. for a used midtime $65,000 archer with 75% financing
your 10 year note payment will be balpark $575-600 depending on
interest. $250/mo is cheap for hangar, if you can get it at that price.
I have not priced insurance, but count on $20-25/hr based on current
fuel costs ($200/mo for a 100 hr year), Engine reserve cost I have heard
people say $5-10/hr and that is probably an even broader range.. Direct
operating costs of $40 an hour would probably be very conservative (and
comes out to $320/mo for a 100 hr year).

So far, without insurance, you are looking at $1400/mo in rough
calculations. Are you considering sole ownership? A partnership? The
Houston Chronicle always seems to have a partnership or used a/c
available in the classifieds, section 201 I believe, right after the
trucks and before the boats.

I also want to say Woody Leskal, the developer/owner down at West
Houston has a business where he refurbs older commanche 250's and the
like, and sells 1/3rd share for $33,000. If you keep the plane at IWS he
will even offer to manage the plane/partnership for you (im sure for a
fee.. but it takes some of the hassle out of ownership).

Also, Myplane.com is supposedly offering fractional ownership in the
Houston area, but they have not responded to the single internet inquiry
I made of their local rep.

I apologize if this isn't quite what you are looking for (my numbers are
rough and estimated, not from personal experience)... I'm part of an
experimental build that we hope to have airborne by next summer that
will blow the socks off an Archer class aircraft. Building your own
isn't for everyone, but it may give you a lot more plane for your $$, if
its capable of suiting your needs and situation (family supportive, have
the time, etc).

Good luck, and if you to discuss this or anything else regarding Houston
area aviation issues further, you can reach me at doggtyredATyahooDOTcom.

Dave



Yeah_right wrote:

> I really want to make a good decision on this so, I'm giving myself plenty
> of time, two years, to get my ducks lined up. I've want either an Archer or
> an Arrow with an IFR package.
>
> I've started looking at and pricing hanger space at selected airports in the
> Houston area where it'll be based. DWH prices it at $250 a month. Haven't
> had a chance to look anywhere else as yet.
>
> I guess what I'm looking for from the board is a breakdown on how much some
> of you are paying for loans, insurance, tie-down and upkeep on planes with
> similar packages.
>
> Just some financial facts please. Other than the fun factor and the
> knowledge that I'll have my own bird to fly whenever I please, I know the
> cost of owning a plane is next to impossible to justify.
>
> But I'm a recent empty nester, my source and income is stable, reliable, and
> on the increase. I'm fairly young, late 30's, and feel lthat I've paid my
> dues to my kid and now it's time I spoil myself.
>
>

[Dude]

Do yourself a favor, go talk to the new owner at High Tech aviation.

I flew into Hooks after more than a year when I met him. He has done the
hugest 180 on a FBO I have ever seen - from dust bunnies to busy bodies. I
don't know how long it took him, but the place is totally different.

Tell him what you are thinking about doing. He knows a lot about pipers, as
he owns a few. In the meantime, you can rent from him too. His insurance
will be much more, but since you will be nicer to your plane than his
renters, his maintenance costs will be a conservative figure for you. I
assume he gets the planes serviced at the hangar next to him, so you can
find out if that guy is a good AP.

And figure that you will pay much more for fuel when you are not at Hooks.
That place is dirt cheap (besides the resturaunt, that is why I stopped
there).

The posters so far have been about right for budgeting, especially the rainy
day fund.

Two years from now, it could all change.

[Yeah_right]

I was considering a sole ownership, but I have to admit, it would be a
little bit uncomfortable for me to spend $1400 at this particular time. Two
years from now....who knows.

My target range was $800 to $900 dollars, not including what I'd expected to
pay for fuel and oil. Perhaps I should move that target north. It appears
that if I partner with someone, the costs could be cut dramatically. I
don't have a problem partnering with someone if it came down to that. but,
how to you determine a partner's reliability....someone who won't leave you
holding the bag or literally trashing the plane?

I planned on going to West Houston and Weiser this weekend to scout out the
area and get prices on hanger costs. I'll report back any information I
find.

ksmithATnhmccdDOTedu

"Dave S" > wrote in message
nk.net...
> My take on it.. 250 is CHEAP for the Houston area. Hooks is in my
> opinion an EXCELLENT GA field with a restaurant, tower, daytime fuel
> truck, 24 hour fuel pump access and several schools on field for a
> decent sized instructor pool.
>
> I am part of a partnership that is joining into an existing hangar lease
> crosstown at EFD, and the small hangars are running $400/mo (but these
> hold 2-3 small planes). At Clover/Pearland Regional the rent is running
> $350 average for T-hangars that vary from all-metal to "metal sheeting
> over wood frame" (boat shed quality)
>
> I can't comment on West Houston or Weiser's prices..
>
> That being said.. for a used midtime $65,000 archer with 75% financing
> your 10 year note payment will be balpark $575-600 depending on
> interest. $250/mo is cheap for hangar, if you can get it at that price.
> I have not priced insurance, but count on $20-25/hr based on current
> fuel costs ($200/mo for a 100 hr year), Engine reserve cost I have heard
> people say $5-10/hr and that is probably an even broader range.. Direct
> operating costs of $40 an hour would probably be very conservative (and
> comes out to $320/mo for a 100 hr year).
>
> So far, without insurance, you are looking at $1400/mo in rough
> calculations. Are you considering sole ownership? A partnership? The
> Houston Chronicle always seems to have a partnership or used a/c
> available in the classifieds, section 201 I believe, right after the
> trucks and before the boats.
>
> I also want to say Woody Leskal, the developer/owner down at West
> Houston has a business where he refurbs older commanche 250's and the
> like, and sells 1/3rd share for $33,000. If you keep the plane at IWS he
> will even offer to manage the plane/partnership for you (im sure for a
> fee.. but it takes some of the hassle out of ownership).
>
> Also, Myplane.com is supposedly offering fractional ownership in the
> Houston area, but they have not responded to the single internet inquiry
> I made of their local rep.
>
> I apologize if this isn't quite what you are looking for (my numbers are
> rough and estimated, not from personal experience)... I'm part of an
> experimental build that we hope to have airborne by next summer that
> will blow the socks off an Archer class aircraft. Building your own
> isn't for everyone, but it may give you a lot more plane for your $$, if
> its capable of suiting your needs and situation (family supportive, have
> the time, etc).
>
> Good luck, and if you to discuss this or anything else regarding Houston
> area aviation issues further, you can reach me at doggtyredATyahooDOTcom.
>
> Dave
>
>
>
> Yeah_right wrote:
>
> > I really want to make a good decision on this so, I'm giving myself
plenty
> > of time, two years, to get my ducks lined up. I've want either an
Archer or
> > an Arrow with an IFR package.
> >
> > I've started looking at and pricing hanger space at selected airports in
the
> > Houston area where it'll be based. DWH prices it at $250 a month.
Haven't
> > had a chance to look anywhere else as yet.
> >
> > I guess what I'm looking for from the board is a breakdown on how much
some
> > of you are paying for loans, insurance, tie-down and upkeep on planes
with
> > similar packages.
> >
> > Just some financial facts please. Other than the fun factor and the
> > knowledge that I'll have my own bird to fly whenever I please, I know
the
> > cost of owning a plane is next to impossible to justify.
> >
> > But I'm a recent empty nester, my source and income is stable, reliable,
and
> > on the increase. I'm fairly young, late 30's, and feel lthat I've paid
my
> > dues to my kid and now it's time I spoil myself.
> >
> >
>

[Yeah_right]

Great idea.

Actually, I did my primary training there when it was ran by a lady named
Alice under the banner National Aviation. I think the new owner's name is
Michael. They have a website. It's http://www.nationalaviation.com/ . I
went there for Alice's celebratory retirement party where they fed a bunch
of pilots who patronized the business.

Though a little rough around the edges, it at least seemed to be a bustling
place when I was training there, at least that's what I perceived through
the naive starstruck aviation eyes I had at the time 6 years ago.

They don't know it yet, but they're about to get a lot of money from me in a
big way as I plan on going back there pretty soon to work on my IRF,
commercial, and multi engine tickets. The last time I was there, they had a
Seneca in the hanger my mouth was watering over.


"Dude" > wrote in message
...
> Do yourself a favor, go talk to the new owner at High Tech aviation.
>
> I flew into Hooks after more than a year when I met him. He has done the
> hugest 180 on a FBO I have ever seen - from dust bunnies to busy bodies.
I
> don't know how long it took him, but the place is totally different.
>
> Tell him what you are thinking about doing. He knows a lot about pipers,
as
> he owns a few. In the meantime, you can rent from him too. His insurance
> will be much more, but since you will be nicer to your plane than his
> renters, his maintenance costs will be a conservative figure for you. I
> assume he gets the planes serviced at the hangar next to him, so you can
> find out if that guy is a good AP.
>
> And figure that you will pay much more for fuel when you are not at Hooks.
> That place is dirt cheap (besides the resturaunt, that is why I stopped
> there).
>
> The posters so far have been about right for budgeting, especially the
rainy
> day fund.
>
> Two years from now, it could all change.
>
>

[Nathan Young]

On Thu, 07 Oct 2004 04:50:58 GMT, "Yeah_right" >
wrote:

>I really want to make a good decision on this so, I'm giving myself plenty
>of time, two years, to get my ducks lined up. I've want either an Archer or
>an Arrow with an IFR package.
>
>I've started looking at and pricing hanger space at selected airports in the
>Houston area where it'll be based. DWH prices it at $250 a month. Haven't
>had a chance to look anywhere else as yet.
>
>I guess what I'm looking for from the board is a breakdown on how much some
>of you are paying for loans, insurance, tie-down and upkeep on planes with
>similar packages.
>
>Just some financial facts please. Other than the fun factor and the
>knowledge that I'll have my own bird to fly whenever I please, I know the
>cost of owning a plane is next to impossible to justify.
>
>But I'm a recent empty nester, my source and income is stable, reliable, and
>on the increase. I'm fairly young, late 30's, and feel lthat I've paid my
>dues to my kid and now it's time I spoil myself.

An Archer will cost roughly as follows:

$1k/year insurance ($55k hull, $1M liability, $100k/seat)
$3k/year hangar (the $250/month is a great price by the way)
$3k/year annual and misc maintenance (this is a conservative number)
--------------------------------------------------------------
$7k/year fixed costs

Regarding a loan. If you have to finance, try to use a home equity
line to pay for the loan. Most home equities are in the <6.0% range,
and would be tax deductible for an effective cost of 4.0%. This is a
huge advantage over what you will find for conventional aircraft loan
rates, which are probably in the upper 7s or 8s now.

55k financed @ 8% for 20 years = $460/month = $5520/year

Direct hourly costs:
Fuel = 10gph * $3.00/gallon = $30/hr
Oil = $1/hr
-------------------------------
$31/hr

Other hourly costs:
Engine overhaul. An overhauled O-360 will cost close to $20k
installed, with a TBO of 2000 hrs, so this is $10/hr. Even if you do
not save an overhaul resever, your plane will depreciate at roughly
half this value ($5/hr) because of the increased engine time.

There are other costs too. Gyros, radios, paint, interior do not last
forever.

So flying approx 150hrs / year (which is more than most owners).
Hourly costs = 150 * 31 = $4650
Reserve costs = $1500
Finance costs = $5520
Fixed costs = $7000
------------------------------------------
$18670 / year

I'm sure you can own an Archer for cheaper than this, especially if
you can shop around, do some of your own maintenance, and get lucky
with (no) major maintenance.

One offsetting variable, used airplanes typically appreciate, which
can offset some of the costs, but I sure would not count on it - as
light GA has not shown much price growth in the last 2-3 years.

-Nathan

[tony roberts]

In addition to reading the replys that you generate here - do a Google
search. This question is asked every month - there is a lot of
information already posted.

HTH

--

Tony Roberts
PP-ASEL
VFR OTT
Night
Cessna 172H C-GICE

Tony
In article >,
"Yeah_right" > wrote:

> I really want to make a good decision on this so, I'm giving myself plenty
> of time, two years, to get my ducks lined up. I've want either an Archer or
> an Arrow with an IFR package.
>
> I've started looking at and pricing hanger space at selected airports in the
> Houston area where it'll be based. DWH prices it at $250 a month. Haven't
> had a chance to look anywhere else as yet.
>
> I guess what I'm looking for from the board is a breakdown on how much some
> of you are paying for loans, insurance, tie-down and upkeep on planes with
> similar packages.
>
> Just some financial facts please. Other than the fun factor and the
> knowledge that I'll have my own bird to fly whenever I please, I know the
> cost of owning a plane is next to impossible to justify.
>
> But I'm a recent empty nester, my source and income is stable, reliable, and
> on the increase. I'm fairly young, late 30's, and feel lthat I've paid my
> dues to my kid and now it's time I spoil myself.

[Jay Honeck]

> My insurance is $1900/yr

??

That's more than Mary and I pay, combined!

What kind of insurance are you carrying?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Bob Noel]

In article <9nw9d.211861$D%.54175@attbi_s51>, "Jay Honeck"
> wrote:

> > My insurance is $1900/yr
>
> ??
>
> That's more than Mary and I pay, combined!
>
> What kind of insurance are you carrying?

Remember that it's a Comanche 250 that he only bought in April.
He probably doesn't have a lot of time in the make/model.

--
Bob Noel
Seen on Kerry's campaign airplane: "the real deal"
oh yeah baby.

[John Theune]

Bob Noel > wrote in news:ihatessppaamm-
:

> In article <9nw9d.211861$D%.54175@attbi_s51>, "Jay Honeck"
> > wrote:
>
>> > My insurance is $1900/yr
>>
>> ??
>>
>> That's more than Mary and I pay, combined!
>>
>> What kind of insurance are you carrying?
>
> Remember that it's a Comanche 250 that he only bought in April.
> He probably doesn't have a lot of time in the make/model.
>

And retracts cost much more to insure then fixed-gear birds.

[Dude]

I think you will find the place has changed a lot.



"Yeah_right" > wrote in message
...
> Great idea.
>
> Actually, I did my primary training there when it was ran by a lady named
> Alice under the banner National Aviation. I think the new owner's name is
> Michael. They have a website. It's http://www.nationalaviation.com/ .
> I
> went there for Alice's celebratory retirement party where they fed a bunch
> of pilots who patronized the business.
>
> Though a little rough around the edges, it at least seemed to be a
> bustling
> place when I was training there, at least that's what I perceived through
> the naive starstruck aviation eyes I had at the time 6 years ago.
>
> They don't know it yet, but they're about to get a lot of money from me in
> a
> big way as I plan on going back there pretty soon to work on my IRF,
> commercial, and multi engine tickets. The last time I was there, they had
> a
> Seneca in the hanger my mouth was watering over.
>
>
> "Dude" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Do yourself a favor, go talk to the new owner at High Tech aviation.
>>
>> I flew into Hooks after more than a year when I met him. He has done the
>> hugest 180 on a FBO I have ever seen - from dust bunnies to busy bodies.
> I
>> don't know how long it took him, but the place is totally different.
>>
>> Tell him what you are thinking about doing. He knows a lot about pipers,
> as
>> he owns a few. In the meantime, you can rent from him too. His insurance
>> will be much more, but since you will be nicer to your plane than his
>> renters, his maintenance costs will be a conservative figure for you. I
>> assume he gets the planes serviced at the hangar next to him, so you can
>> find out if that guy is a good AP.
>>
>> And figure that you will pay much more for fuel when you are not at
>> Hooks.
>> That place is dirt cheap (besides the resturaunt, that is why I stopped
>> there).
>>
>> The posters so far have been about right for budgeting, especially the
> rainy
>> day fund.
>>
>> Two years from now, it could all change.
>>
>>
>
>

[Dude]

> Engine overhaul. An overhauled O-360 will cost close to $20k
> installed, with a TBO of 2000 hrs, so this is $10/hr. Even if you do
> not save an overhaul resever, your plane will depreciate at roughly
> half this value ($5/hr) because of the increased engine time.
>

Although the rest looked good, I gotta disagree here.

it will depreciate for about 8 or 9 per hour over all due to engine time.
Near the beginning and near the end it can get more complicated, but in the
middle its at least 8 per hour.

[Newps]

>>Engine overhaul. An overhauled O-360 will cost close to $20k
>>installed, with a TBO of 2000 hrs, so this is $10/hr. Even if you do
>>not save an overhaul resever, your plane will depreciate at roughly
>>half this value ($5/hr) because of the increased engine time.

And this is where you see a large difference for you Lyc boys. Lyc
prices are ridiculous. I can have my O-470 overhauled and reinstalled
for closer to $15K. I will be turning my 470 into a 520 and it will
still be less than $20K installed.

[xyzzy]

Dude wrote:

>>Engine overhaul. An overhauled O-360 will cost close to $20k
>>installed, with a TBO of 2000 hrs, so this is $10/hr. Even if you do
>>not save an overhaul resever, your plane will depreciate at roughly
>>half this value ($5/hr) because of the increased engine time.
>>
>
>
> Although the rest looked good, I gotta disagree here.
>
> it will depreciate for about 8 or 9 per hour over all due to engine time.
> Near the beginning and near the end it can get more complicated, but in the
> middle its at least 8 per hour.

According to AOPA's VREF service, a 1976 Archer II would depreciate at
the rate of $6.75/hr on the engine and $1.52/hr on the airframe

[kontiki]

The actual premium was $1885 (I just rounded it up) The PA24-250
is a high performance retract which will generally cost more than
a fixed gear airplane. When I bought it I had 50 hours retract
time and 0 hours in type. I now have 50 hours in the plane and
a multi-engine rating added since then too so I'm hoping it may
go down a bit.

Actually though, I'll be happy if it just doesn't go up. :^)

John Theune wrote:
> Bob Noel > wrote in news:ihatessppaamm-
> :
>
>
>>In article <9nw9d.211861$D%.54175@attbi_s51>, "Jay Honeck"
> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>My insurance is $1900/yr
>>>
>>>??
>>>
>>>That's more than Mary and I pay, combined!
>>>
>>>What kind of insurance are you carrying?
>>
>>Remember that it's a Comanche 250 that he only bought in April.
>>He probably doesn't have a lot of time in the make/model.
>>
>
>
> And retracts cost much more to insure then fixed-gear birds.

[Dave S]

Yea... those overhaul costs just totally suck.. I'm rebuilding the first
of 3 Mazda rotary 13B engine cores I obtained for $700 batch cost. I've
spent maybe $500 in tools that I didn't already possess.. The first
engine has minimal wear (I've mic'd all the clearances) and all the
major components will be reuseable. I'm expecting an outlay of maybe
$1000 for new seals, gaskets, seal springs, oil pump chain... Another
$1000 for the ECU.. another $1000 for engine monitoring equipement. The
the radiators, peripherals and such should run under $1000 (no vacuum
needed, dual alt bird).. Another $3,000 for the gearbox/psru.

So.. my initial cost is going to be $7500 or so... and when rebuild time
comes again (whenever that may be... As long as compressions and temps
are good, keep on running...) I will have to spring for another $1000 in
springs/seals/gaskets.. Or start working on one of the other two
engines.. Oh yea... maybe $2,000 or less for the turbo assembly and
wastegate to mildly charge/normalize the engine, so that we get 200-250
hp max up to altitude.

Yea.. those engine rebuild costs just eat your lunch.
Dave (putting on asbestos suit)



Seriously, homebuilts aren't for everyone, and neither are
auto-conversions. Unless you are prepared to spend the time, money and
RISK troubleshooting a truly custom powerplant its best to stick with
tried and true. I would not even be attempting this if it were not for
the large base of knowledge and experience I've been able to tap in some
other venues with regards to this venture. I'm learning every day. But
when its over with, I am hoping to realize economies and performance on
a scale that would not be possible with the certified air cooled engines.


Newps wrote:
>
>
>
>>> Engine overhaul. An overhauled O-360 will cost close to $20k
>>> installed, with a TBO of 2000 hrs, so this is $10/hr. Even if you do
>>> not save an overhaul resever, your plane will depreciate at roughly
>>> half this value ($5/hr) because of the increased engine time.
>
>
> And this is where you see a large difference for you Lyc boys. Lyc
> prices are ridiculous. I can have my O-470 overhauled and reinstalled
> for closer to $15K. I will be turning my 470 into a 520 and it will
> still be less than $20K installed.
>

[Dave S]

if the above got double posted... I apologize.. Problems with
Netscrape.. My story and I'm stickin to it.

Dave

Dave S wrote:

> Yea... those overhaul costs just totally suck.. I'm rebuilding the first
> of 3 Mazda rotary 13B engine cores I obtained for $700 batch cost. I've
> spent maybe $500 in tools that I didn't already possess.. The first
> engine has minimal wear (I've mic'd all the clearances) and all the
> major components will be reuseable. I'm expecting an outlay of maybe
> $1000 for new seals, gaskets, seal springs, oil pump chain... Another
> $1000 for the ECU.. another $1000 for engine monitoring equipement. The
> the radiators, peripherals and such should run under $1000 (no vacuum
> needed, dual alt bird).. Another $3,000 for the gearbox/psru.
>
> So.. my initial cost is going to be $7500 or so... and when rebuild time
> comes again (whenever that may be... As long as compressions and temps
> are good, keep on running...) I will have to spring for another $1000 in
> springs/seals/gaskets.. Or start working on one of the other two
> engines.. Oh yea... maybe $2,000 or less for the turbo assembly and
> wastegate to mildly charge/normalize the engine, so that we get 200-250
> hp max up to altitude.
>
> Yea.. those engine rebuild costs just eat your lunch.
> Dave (putting on asbestos suit)
>
>
>
> Seriously, homebuilts aren't for everyone, and neither are
> auto-conversions. Unless you are prepared to spend the time, money and
> RISK troubleshooting a truly custom powerplant its best to stick with
> tried and true. I would not even be attempting this if it were not for
> the large base of knowledge and experience I've been able to tap in some
> other venues with regards to this venture. I'm learning every day. But
> when its over with, I am hoping to realize economies and performance on
> a scale that would not be possible with the certified air cooled engines.
>
>
> Newps wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>>>> Engine overhaul. An overhauled O-360 will cost close to $20k
>>>> installed, with a TBO of 2000 hrs, so this is $10/hr. Even if you do
>>>> not save an overhaul resever, your plane will depreciate at roughly
>>>> half this value ($5/hr) because of the increased engine time.
>>
>>
>>
>> And this is where you see a large difference for you Lyc boys. Lyc
>> prices are ridiculous. I can have my O-470 overhauled and reinstalled
>> for closer to $15K. I will be turning my 470 into a 520 and it will
>> still be less than $20K installed.
>>
>

[Jay Honeck]

> The actual premium was $1885 (I just rounded it up) The PA24-250
> is a high performance retract which will generally cost more than
> a fixed gear airplane. When I bought it I had 50 hours retract
> time and 0 hours in type. I now have 50 hours in the plane and
> a multi-engine rating added since then too so I'm hoping it may
> go down a bit.

Hmmm.

Our Pathfinder is a high performance (albeit stiff-legged) aircraft, with
the same (albeit low-compression) engine as your Comanche, and the same
constant speed prop. The only real difference is the retractable gear.

And I'm insuring TWO pilots, for less than you're paying for one. Both of
us are VFR only. I've got around 900 hours, Mary has around 450 hours. When
we bought the plane, neither of us had the high performance endorsement, nor
any time in type. (They didn't count our zillion hours of Warrior time --
the birds are too different, in their words. We had to fly off 5 or 10?
hours with a CFI to become insurable.)

Either you are way over-insured (if that's possible nowadays), or methinks
you need to get another insurance agent to run some quotes for you.
Somebody appears to be funding their 401K on your nickel.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Ben Jackson]

In article <7ZI9d.213826$D%.4022@attbi_s51>,
Jay Honeck > wrote:
>
>Our Pathfinder is a high performance (albeit stiff-legged) aircraft,

And how do you propose to land that gear-up?

(I also pay north of $2000 for a 1965 PA-24-260, with >100 in type, >100
retract, and an instrument rating).

--
Ben Jackson
>
http://www.ben.com/

[Jay Honeck]

>>Our Pathfinder is a high performance (albeit stiff-legged) aircraft,
>
> And how do you propose to land that gear-up?

Actually, the very first owner landed our plane "gear up" within 6 months of
buying it, way back in 1974.

Well, the left gear went up, anyway...

(In fact, Atlas is celebrating his 30th re-birthday this month, marking the
date when he emerged from a west-coast Piper service center with new left
landing gear, prop and engine, way back when...)

;-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Andrew Gideon]

Ben Jackson wrote:

> In article <7ZI9d.213826$D%.4022@attbi_s51>,
> Jay Honeck > wrote:
>>
>>Our Pathfinder is a high performance (albeit stiff-legged) aircraft,
>
> And how do you propose to land that gear-up?

Invert.

Of course, that pesky rudder will get in the way.

- Andrew

[Doug]

It is hard to compare insurance premiums. For instance, what is HIS
liability limits compared to yours. You don't know, they could be
high. What is your deductible? (Mine aircraft is $10k). I just won
the hail lottery (house insurance) on my roof, and was comparing
insurance rates with neighbors. I have a high deductible and higher
liability (insure for what you can't afford to loose). Next door
neighbor has lower permiums, but minimum deductible and LOW liability.
She thinks she's getting a better deal just because "her premiums are
lower".

Anyway, cursory insurance comparisons aren't very accurate unless the
policies have identical terms and they almost never do.

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message news:<7ZI9d.213826$D%.4022@attbi_s51>...
> > The actual premium was $1885 (I just rounded it up) The PA24-250
> > is a high performance retract which will generally cost more than
> > a fixed gear airplane. When I bought it I had 50 hours retract
> > time and 0 hours in type. I now have 50 hours in the plane and
> > a multi-engine rating added since then too so I'm hoping it may
> > go down a bit.
>
> Hmmm.
>
> Our Pathfinder is a high performance (albeit stiff-legged) aircraft, with
> the same (albeit low-compression) engine as your Comanche, and the same
> constant speed prop. The only real difference is the retractable gear.
>
> And I'm insuring TWO pilots, for less than you're paying for one. Both of
> us are VFR only. I've got around 900 hours, Mary has around 450 hours. When
> we bought the plane, neither of us had the high performance endorsement, nor
> any time in type. (They didn't count our zillion hours of Warrior time --
> the birds are too different, in their words. We had to fly off 5 or 10?
> hours with a CFI to become insurable.)
>
> Either you are way over-insured (if that's possible nowadays), or methinks
> you need to get another insurance agent to run some quotes for you.
> Somebody appears to be funding their 401K on your nickel.

[Howard Nelson]

"Doug" > wrote in message
m...
> It is hard to compare insurance premiums. For instance, what is HIS
> liability limits compared to yours. You don't know, they could be
> high. What is your deductible? (Mine aircraft is $10k). I just won
> the hail lottery (house insurance) on my roof, and was comparing
> insurance rates with neighbors. I have a high deductible and higher
> liability (insure for what you can't afford to loose). Next door
> neighbor has lower permiums, but minimum deductible and LOW liability.
> She thinks she's getting a better deal just because "her premiums are
> lower".
>
> Anyway, cursory insurance comparisons aren't very accurate unless the
> policies have identical terms and they almost never do.

Yes, Liability coverage plays a big part. Insurance on my C182 is well above
2K for clean record/IFR/>1000hrs. I could get it around $700 for same hull
coverage with minimum liability. Personally I would like to be able to buy
more liability insurance but max seems to be about 2m smooth. Insurers must
know something.

Howard


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.775 / Virus Database: 522 - Release Date: 10/8/2004

[Ben Jackson]

In article >,
Doug > wrote:
>It is hard to compare insurance premiums. For instance, what is HIS
>liability limits compared to yours. You don't know, they could be
>high. What is your deductible?

That's very true. My premiums only went down about 15% after my first
year of ownership, but the big difference was having my pick of insurers
rather than being limited to one or two who were willing to write the
risk.

--
Ben Jackson
>
http://www.ben.com/

[Jay Honeck]

> That's very true. My premiums only went down about 15% after my first
> year of ownership, but the big difference was having my pick of insurers
> rather than being limited to one or two who were willing to write the
> risk.

That's true with many types of insurance.

Hotel/motel insurance, for example, is seen as a very high risk endeavor.
As a result, there are just two major players left in the business.

Not surprisingly, they just jacked us $900 per year (which is about what we
had been paying per month) -- and I have no recourse but to suck it up and
pay it. Mind you, we've never had a claim of any kind -- they just hiked us
because, well, because they could.

Which is why I hate product liability and ambulance chasing attorneys almost
beyond measure. I'm sure some trailer trash "tripped" and fell at a hotel
last year, and the *******s sued the poor saps for $20 million -- and now we
ALL have to pay for it.

I really can't believe that any pilot in their right mind would want a
product liability attorney a heartbeat away from the presidency. Has
everyone forgotten that these are the same a**holes that almost eliminated
aircraft manufacturing in this country?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Dave S]

Actually, while not discounting the very real cost of "trash trippers"
and those who see the legal system as a lottery reward for their own
stupidity...there is another factor to consider.

The underwriters invest the premiums they recieve. When the returns on
that investment perform sub-par, they need to increase premiums to make
up for the shortfall in investment income. In effect, your premium is
actually subsidized through investment, and when the subsidy comes up
short, the policyholder pays. This sort of effect has been felt
throughout the healthcare malpractice-liability industry as well. Its
true that there are lots of judgements for "**** happens" rather than
negligence, but you can also notice that premiums take a sharp hike when
the economy (and investments) is (are) down.

That being said, be thankful they didnt jack your rates in relation to
an actual claim!!.

Dave

Jay Honeck wrote:
>>That's very true. My premiums only went down about 15% after my first
>>year of ownership, but the big difference was having my pick of insurers
>>rather than being limited to one or two who were willing to write the
>>risk.
>
>
> That's true with many types of insurance.
>
> Hotel/motel insurance, for example, is seen as a very high risk endeavor.
> As a result, there are just two major players left in the business.
>
> Not surprisingly, they just jacked us $900 per year (which is about what we
> had been paying per month) -- and I have no recourse but to suck it up and
> pay it. Mind you, we've never had a claim of any kind -- they just hiked us
> because, well, because they could.
>
> Which is why I hate product liability and ambulance chasing attorneys almost
> beyond measure. I'm sure some trailer trash "tripped" and fell at a hotel
> last year, and the *******s sued the poor saps for $20 million -- and now we
> ALL have to pay for it.
>
> I really can't believe that any pilot in their right mind would want a
> product liability attorney a heartbeat away from the presidency. Has
> everyone forgotten that these are the same a**holes that almost eliminated
> aircraft manufacturing in this country?

[Dude]

One thing they know is that the higher the covered amount, the more likely a
lawyer will take a case for a percentage and pursue it vigourously.

This is why the states have started requiring malpractice insurance. The
insurers and the plaintifs attourneys watched in horror as all the doctors
started to go without insurance. This kept the insurance companies from
making money, and made it risky for the lawyers to take cases when they may
never collect.

If you want to be a really responsible person, then go for the high amounts,
but if you want to avoid a suit, by as little as you need to protect your
assets.



"Howard Nelson" > wrote in message
. ..
>
> "Doug" > wrote in message
> m...
>> It is hard to compare insurance premiums. For instance, what is HIS
>> liability limits compared to yours. You don't know, they could be
>> high. What is your deductible? (Mine aircraft is $10k). I just won
>> the hail lottery (house insurance) on my roof, and was comparing
>> insurance rates with neighbors. I have a high deductible and higher
>> liability (insure for what you can't afford to loose). Next door
>> neighbor has lower permiums, but minimum deductible and LOW liability.
>> She thinks she's getting a better deal just because "her premiums are
>> lower".
>>
>> Anyway, cursory insurance comparisons aren't very accurate unless the
>> policies have identical terms and they almost never do.
>
> Yes, Liability coverage plays a big part. Insurance on my C182 is well
> above
> 2K for clean record/IFR/>1000hrs. I could get it around $700 for same hull
> coverage with minimum liability. Personally I would like to be able to buy
> more liability insurance but max seems to be about 2m smooth. Insurers
> must
> know something.
>
> Howard
>
>
> ---
> Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> Version: 6.0.775 / Virus Database: 522 - Release Date: 10/8/2004
>
>

[xyzzy]

Dave S wrote:

> Actually, while not discounting the very real cost of "trash trippers"
> and those who see the legal system as a lottery reward for their own
> stupidity...there is another factor to consider.
>
> The underwriters invest the premiums they recieve. When the returns on
> that investment perform sub-par, they need to increase premiums to make
> up for the shortfall in investment income. In effect, your premium is
> actually subsidized through investment, and when the subsidy comes up
> short, the policyholder pays. This sort of effect has been felt
> throughout the healthcare malpractice-liability industry as well. Its
> true that there are lots of judgements for "**** happens" rather than
> negligence, but you can also notice that premiums take a sharp hike when
> the economy (and investments) is (are) down.
>
> That being said, be thankful they didnt jack your rates in relation to
> an actual claim!!.
>
> Dave
>
> Jay Honeck wrote:
>
>>> That's very true. My premiums only went down about 15% after my first
>>> year of ownership, but the big difference was having my pick of insurers
>>> rather than being limited to one or two who were willing to write the
>>> risk.
>>
>>
>>
>> That's true with many types of insurance.
>>
>> Hotel/motel insurance, for example, is seen as a very high risk
>> endeavor. As a result, there are just two major players left in the
>> business.
>>
>> Not surprisingly, they just jacked us $900 per year (which is about
>> what we had been paying per month) -- and I have no recourse but to
>> suck it up and pay it. Mind you, we've never had a claim of any kind
>> -- they just hiked us because, well, because they could.
>>
>> Which is why I hate product liability and ambulance chasing attorneys
>> almost beyond measure. I'm sure some trailer trash "tripped" and fell
>> at a hotel last year, and the *******s sued the poor saps for $20
>> million -- and now we ALL have to pay for it.
>>
>> I really can't believe that any pilot in their right mind would want a
>> product liability attorney a heartbeat away from the presidency. Has
>> everyone forgotten that these are the same a**holes that almost
>> eliminated aircraft manufacturing in this country?


Whether you think that high liability insurance cost is due to trial
lawyers or to bad insurance company investments is usually a function of
your political orientaton, as illustrated by Jay here. He really just
wanted to take a shot at the Democratic ticket.

However, the only answer that is actually supported by factual evidence
is that liability insurance rates are mostly a function of how insurance
company investments do in the stock and bond markets, not to any
asserted explosion of jury awards -- especially since most of them get
reduced significantly, and actual lawsuit payouts are a tiny fraction of
premiums. The insurance companies have a nice game going there, they
get people like Jay to cover for their poor investment returns, then
successfully direct his anger at an imagined cause that isn't even a
factor in the real world but suits their purposes. If every business
could fool their customers like that, we'd have a hell of an economy.

For example, Jay is "sure" that some "trailer trash" won 20 million
somewhere for tripping over something, but he doesn't cite an actual
award that was paid -- and you would bet that in his business, word of
that would spread fast.

[Howard Nelson]

"xyzzy" > wrote in message
...

> For example, Jay is "sure" that some "trailer trash" won 20 million
> somewhere for tripping over something, but he doesn't cite an actual
> award that was paid -- and you would bet that in his business, word of
> that would spread fast.

Well it is near the election and politics seems to be on the table.

What I do know is that J. Edwards has a publicized net worth north of $30m.
Much of that money (after taxes) could be in the hands of the injured
infants he has said he was aiding. I would be more impressed with his
commitment if he had retained for himself an hourly rate of $200/hr after
expenses. Lets see $60m/200 = 300,000 hours = 21428 14hr days = 4285 5day
weeks = 82 years with no vacation. Nope, I don't think that accurately
represents his work schedule.

Of course the actual outcome is a trial system so filled with FUD that the
defendant's insurance company many times simply writes a check for some
intermediate amount rather than fighting in courts.

The current system of liability and litigation in this country makes a
10-20% payoff sometimes needed in countries less enamored of the "rule of
law" seem like a bargain. Hence we see some productive companies and
individuals running for the door and others just ease back and do the
minimal needed to get by or retire early. Not a good long term program for
the country.

Howard



---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.775 / Virus Database: 522 - Release Date: 10/8/2004

[Bob Noel]

In article >, xyzzy >
wrote:

> Whether you think that high liability insurance cost is due to trial
> lawyers or to bad insurance company investments is usually a function of
> your political orientaton, as illustrated by Jay here. He really just
> wanted to take a shot at the Democratic ticket.
>
> However, the only answer that is actually supported by factual evidence
> is that liability insurance rates are mostly a function of how insurance
> company investments do in the stock and bond markets,

well, given how the stock markets and bond markets performed in the
past twenty years, I would have expected to see liability rates
plummet instead of rising. hmmmm...

--
Bob Noel
Seen on Kerry's campaign airplane: "the real deal"
oh yeah baby.

[ET]

Bob Noel > wrote in
:

> In article >, xyzzy >
> wrote:
>
>> Whether you think that high liability insurance cost is due to trial
>> lawyers or to bad insurance company investments is usually a function
>> of your political orientaton, as illustrated by Jay here. He really
>> just wanted to take a shot at the Democratic ticket.
>>
>> However, the only answer that is actually supported by factual
>> evidence is that liability insurance rates are mostly a function of
>> how insurance company investments do in the stock and bond markets,
>
> well, given how the stock markets and bond markets performed in the
> past twenty years, I would have expected to see liability rates
> plummet instead of rising. hmmmm...
>

Insurance company's are limited where they can invest premium dollars.
They mostly have to invest in interest rate sensative investements.

Have you SEEN interest rates lately???

ET

[Bob Noel]

In article >, ET
> wrote:

> >> However, the only answer that is actually supported by factual
> >> evidence is that liability insurance rates are mostly a function of
> >> how insurance company investments do in the stock and bond markets,
> >
> > well, given how the stock markets and bond markets performed in the
> > past twenty years, I would have expected to see liability rates
> > plummet instead of rising. hmmmm...
> >
>
> Insurance company's are limited where they can invest premium dollars.
> They mostly have to invest in interest rate sensative investements.
>
> Have you SEEN interest rates lately???

Yes. Did you forget what the rates were in the 70's and 80's?
High interest rates, yet liability insurance still went up.

--
Bob Noel
Seen on Kerry's campaign airplane: "the real deal"
oh yeah baby.

[Jay Honeck]

> Whether you think that high liability insurance cost is due to trial
> lawyers or to bad insurance company investments is usually a function of
> your political orientaton, as illustrated by Jay here. He really just
> wanted to take a shot at the Democratic ticket.

I wouldn't vote for a product liability attorney if he was running for city
council -- let alone the presidential ticket.

> For example, Jay is "sure" that some "trailer trash" won 20 million
> somewhere for tripping over something, but he doesn't cite an actual award
> that was paid -- and you would bet that in his business, word of that
> would spread fast.

You need to see EVIDENCE of this phenomenon? You really do need to read the
newspaper once in a while.

There's a huge case going on right now, here in Iowa City, where the father
of a girl who was injured in a car accident is suing the Highlander Inn
(another local hotel) for MILLIONS of dollars, because they (*gasp!*) served
the driver alcohol at a wedding reception!

Of course, there's a god-damned liability attorney behind it all, playing on
the grief of a father in an attempt to pad his own pockets, with no regard
to the fact that they're going to put the Highlander Inn out of business.
Everything the founders of that business have worked a lifetime to achieve
is now at stake, at incredible expense, and for what?

An accident.

Oh, but I forgot: "Accidents" don't happen anymore. Especially not when
the drive is under-insured. The idiot who drank himself into oblivion, and
then got behind the wheel, apparently doesn't have deep enough pockets to
satisfy these scum. (He also killed his best friend -- whose parents are,
of course, also suing.)

This is just ONE example, of the hundreds I (and anyone with a functioning
brain stem) could quote.

It's sickening, it's wrong, it's devastating small businesses -- and we ALL
pay for it.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Dave Butler]

Jay Honeck wrote:

> There's a huge case going on right now, here in Iowa City, where the father
> of a girl who was injured in a car accident is suing the Highlander Inn
> (another local hotel) for MILLIONS of dollars, because they (*gasp!*) served
> the driver alcohol at a wedding reception!

Totally off-topic, sorry: is it legal to (*gasp!*) serve alcohol to 19-year-olds
at wedding receptions in Iowa?

[ET]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in
news:DBbbd.241057$D%.10372@attbi_s51:

>> Whether you think that high liability insurance cost is due to trial
>> lawyers or to bad insurance company investments is usually a function
>> of your political orientaton, as illustrated by Jay here. He really
>> just wanted to take a shot at the Democratic ticket.
>
> I wouldn't vote for a product liability attorney if he was running for
> city council -- let alone the presidential ticket.
>
>> For example, Jay is "sure" that some "trailer trash" won 20 million
>> somewhere for tripping over something, but he doesn't cite an actual
>> award that was paid -- and you would bet that in his business, word
>> of that would spread fast.
>
> You need to see EVIDENCE of this phenomenon? You really do need to
> read the newspaper once in a while.
>
> There's a huge case going on right now, here in Iowa City, where the
> father of a girl who was injured in a car accident is suing the
> Highlander Inn (another local hotel) for MILLIONS of dollars, because
> they (*gasp!*) served the driver alcohol at a wedding reception!
>
> Of course, there's a god-damned liability attorney behind it all,
> playing on the grief of a father in an attempt to pad his own pockets,
> with no regard to the fact that they're going to put the Highlander
> Inn out of business. Everything the founders of that business have
> worked a lifetime to achieve is now at stake, at incredible expense,
> and for what?
>
> An accident.
>
> Oh, but I forgot: "Accidents" don't happen anymore. Especially not
> when the drive is under-insured. The idiot who drank himself into
> oblivion, and then got behind the wheel, apparently doesn't have deep
> enough pockets to satisfy these scum. (He also killed his best friend
> -- whose parents are, of course, also suing.)
>
> This is just ONE example, of the hundreds I (and anyone with a
> functioning brain stem) could quote.
>
> It's sickening, it's wrong, it's devastating small businesses -- and
> we ALL pay for it.

I'm with you....

It has recently been ruled hear in Texas that the plaintiff in a civil
case can demand to know how much your liability insurance covers!!!
Totally negating any reason to have much more liability insurance than
the bare "minumum". The scum will go for every dime the insurance
covers, then "convince" the jury that the only way to "punish" the
defendant is to award a large amount ABOVE that!!!


Disgusting!!!

ET

[xyzzy]

Dave Butler wrote:

> Jay Honeck wrote:
>
>> There's a huge case going on right now, here in Iowa City, where the
>> father of a girl who was injured in a car accident is suing the
>> Highlander Inn (another local hotel) for MILLIONS of dollars, because
>> they (*gasp!*) served the driver alcohol at a wedding reception!
>
>
> Totally off-topic, sorry: is it legal to (*gasp!*) serve alcohol to
> 19-year-olds at wedding receptions in Iowa?
>

Good catch Dave.

Actually the driver was only 18 when he was served acohol by the
Highlander Inn (he's 19 now). Interesting that Jay left that bit of
information out of his rant.

http://www.dailyiowan.com/news/2004/09/10/Metro/Former.Ui.Student.Faces.Sentencing.In.Vehicular.Ho micide-715207.shtml

or

http://tinyurl.com/6624g

Further googling reveals that Iowa has a dram shop law, which
specifically makes establishments liable for actions of patrons they
serve alcohol to. This law also requires them to carry insurance
against this liability, so the owners of this place that helped an 18
year old illegally get stinking drunk can't say they didn't know about
their potential liability. This looks like exactly the kind of case
that dram shop laws were designed for.

It sounds to me like Jay's anger needs to be directed at Mothers Against
Drunk Driving (who was really pushing these laws many years ago) not the
lawyer who files a case under this law -- this is exactly what it was
for. Or does he think the law should have been passed but never invoked?

Plus, I suggest Jay wait and see how much, if anything, is actually paid
out in this lawsuit. Its easy to get headlines filing lawsuits with
large numbers. Jury awards with large numbers get big headlines and get
remembered too. But when the final payment is much less, either reduced
on appeal or settled, the headlines are smaller or nonexistent, so the
big number sticks in peoples' memories, even if it's not an amount
anybody actually paid.

[Jay Honeck]

> Actually the driver was only 18 when he was served acohol by the
> Highlander Inn (he's 19 now). Interesting that Jay left that bit of
> information out of his rant.

And this has what to do with my point?

At 18, the driver was a legal adult. He made a series of bad decisions. He
was at a wedding reception, where anyone who walks up to a beer tapper is
going to drink a beer. He drank too much, drove like an idiot, killed his
best friend -- and he's now been sent away to prison for TWENTY FIVE YEARS
(another absurd part of this story, but that's another post). He has "paid
his debt to society" -- times ten.

But that debt apparently isn't enough. The girl in the backseat was
injured, and her father now has an ambulance-chasing attorney suing the
hotel for millions, because the driver's parents apparently don't have deep
enough pockets.

So, another business bites the dust. (They have actually sold the hotel --
it's now a "Quality Inn")

The scenario that happened here could happen at our hotel, at any
restaurant, or at most people's homes. It's just bull****, and anyone who
supports this kind of legal action is part of the problem.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Newps]

Jay Honeck wrote:
>>Actually the driver was only 18 when he was served acohol by the
>>Highlander Inn (he's 19 now). Interesting that Jay left that bit of
>>information out of his rant.
>
>
> And this has what to do with my point?
>
> At 18, the driver was a legal adult. He made a series of bad decisions. He
> was at a wedding reception, where anyone who walks up to a beer tapper is
> going to drink a beer.

Doesn't matter. You cannot serve or allow to be served, anyone under 21.

[Matt Whiting]

Jay Honeck wrote:

>>Actually the driver was only 18 when he was served acohol by the
>>Highlander Inn (he's 19 now). Interesting that Jay left that bit of
>>information out of his rant.
>
>
> And this has what to do with my point?
>
> At 18, the driver was a legal adult. He made a series of bad decisions. He
> was at a wedding reception, where anyone who walks up to a beer tapper is
> going to drink a beer. He drank too much, drove like an idiot, killed his
> best friend -- and he's now been sent away to prison for TWENTY FIVE YEARS
> (another absurd part of this story, but that's another post). He has "paid
> his debt to society" -- times ten.

Really? I think 25 years is a light sentence for killing someone. I
prefer the death penalty.


Matt

[Jay Honeck]

> Really? I think 25 years is a light sentence for killing someone. I
> prefer the death penalty.

He didn't kill someone in the same sense as a criminal with a gun. He
killed someone through neglect. Worse, he killed his best friend in a car
accident, which will surely haunt him all the days of his life.

There is a woman in Iowa City who stabbed her husband in the chest and
killed him in cold blood. Because she was a person of stature in the
community, and her husband (a local university big shot) was cheating on
her, she will be surely be walking the streets as a free woman in less than
25 years -- while this stupid kid will still be rotting in jail.

To sentence a dumb kid who was driving drunk as (or more) severely than a
cold-blooded murderer is absurd and immoral.

And to go after the owner of the hotel where he was drinking before the
accident is equally wrong.

I can't believe I'm even arguing this. Whatever happened to personal
responsibility in this country?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Jay Honeck]

> Doesn't matter. You cannot serve or allow to be served, anyone under 21.

And that is a ridiculous law. Also, there is more to it in Iowa City than
meets the eye.

Three Iowa City businesses have been shut down (and their owners bankrupted)
for serving alcohol to 18 year olds, just in the past year. Funny thing is,
local ordinance PERMITS 18 year olds to be in bars -- but if they are caught
drinking, it is the bar OWNER who is punished.

I think this is crazy. As an 18 year old, you can sign a legal contract.
You can buy a gun. You can (in wartime) be drafted. In every respect,
save one, you are legally an adult at age 18.

Why this type of unconstitutional discrimination is legal is a complete
mystery to me. When I was growing up, we could have a beer at 18.

Either make adulthood start at age 21, or make it 18 -- but don't try to
fudge the distinction.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Dave S]

Jay Honeck wrote:

>
> I can't believe I'm even arguing this. Whatever happened to personal
> responsibility in this country?

The owner of the Hotel was PERSONALLY RESPONSIBLE for insuring that
illegal activity didnt take place on his property. He failed in that
endeavor and is under fire for it. No.. that doesn't absolve the drunk
teen of responsibility, but as is the case in most tragic events, its
not a "single point" of failure that results in tragedy but rather a
comedy of errors. While the key factor is the kid got drunk, nobody
hosting the party cut him off. Nobody stopped him when he tried to go
driving. His friend made a choice to get in a drunk's car. It takes a
village to raise a child, people.. and.. more than you want to
acknowledge.. you ARE your brother's keeper.

If a client was dealing drugs out of your hotel... maybe just a little
Pot.. nothing really dangerous... but you knew about it and turned your
head the other way... you could potentially loose your livelyhood and
property to seizure. But.. we are only talking about a little MJ, right?
Its harmless, right? Who knows, but it IS the law of the land, imposed
directly or indirectly by the voters (your peers).

Dave

[Matt Whiting]

Jay Honeck wrote:

>>Really? I think 25 years is a light sentence for killing someone. I
>>prefer the death penalty.
>
>
> He didn't kill someone in the same sense as a criminal with a gun. He
> killed someone through neglect. Worse, he killed his best friend in a car
> accident, which will surely haunt him all the days of his life.
>
> There is a woman in Iowa City who stabbed her husband in the chest and
> killed him in cold blood. Because she was a person of stature in the
> community, and her husband (a local university big shot) was cheating on
> her, she will be surely be walking the streets as a free woman in less than
> 25 years -- while this stupid kid will still be rotting in jail.
>
> To sentence a dumb kid who was driving drunk as (or more) severely than a
> cold-blooded murderer is absurd and immoral.
>
> And to go after the owner of the hotel where he was drinking before the
> accident is equally wrong.
>
> I can't believe I'm even arguing this. Whatever happened to personal
> responsibility in this country?

Not in my book. Driving after drinking, unless someone forces you at
gunpoint, is just as intentional as any other form of murder.

Letting people who do this get off easy is the immoral action.


Matt

[Jay Honeck]

> If a client was dealing drugs out of your hotel... maybe just a little
> Pot.. nothing really dangerous... but you knew about it and turned your
> head the other way... you could potentially loose your livelyhood and
> property to seizure. But.. we are only talking about a little MJ, right?
> Its harmless, right? Who knows, but it IS the law of the land, imposed
> directly or indirectly by the voters (your peers).

That's an interesting point.

We have had, on two occasions, highly suspicious guests who appeared to be
completely out of character with our usual guests. On both occasions, they
were people of color, they paid with a large sum of cash, they were
extraordinarily well dressed, said very little to anyone, had no interest in
the aviation theme -- and there were cars coming and going at all hours,
with people going in and out of their suite all night long.

They also took many phone calls, far more than the normal guest.

Should I have called the local constable? Homeland security?

Or do people still have a right to privacy, and a degree of personal
responsibility?

"You make the call."
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Jay Honeck]

> Not in my book. Driving after drinking, unless someone forces you at
> gunpoint, is just as intentional as any other form of murder.

How can you equate premeditated murder with a car accident while under the
influence?

I would hope that "criminal intent" still counts for *something* in this
country, or we are surely all doomed.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Dude]

Jay,

You are absolutely right about this point.

There should be one age of majority - period. It's this kind of crap that is
ruining this country by burdening us with too many laws to keep track of.

At some point people should be considered adults. I too cannot believe that
we would let someone vote who we cannot trust to drink responsibly. I also
don't care what age they make it, just so that it is consistent.

We used to keep lots of people we should not have from voting, and that was
wrong. Allowing children to vote is worse though.





"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:e8nbd.387285$Fg5.160236@attbi_s53...
>> Doesn't matter. You cannot serve or allow to be served, anyone under 21.
>
> And that is a ridiculous law. Also, there is more to it in Iowa City than
> meets the eye.
>
> Three Iowa City businesses have been shut down (and their owners
> bankrupted) for serving alcohol to 18 year olds, just in the past year.
> Funny thing is, local ordinance PERMITS 18 year olds to be in bars -- but
> if they are caught drinking, it is the bar OWNER who is punished.
>
> I think this is crazy. As an 18 year old, you can sign a legal contract.
> You can buy a gun. You can (in wartime) be drafted. In every respect,
> save one, you are legally an adult at age 18.
>
> Why this type of unconstitutional discrimination is legal is a complete
> mystery to me. When I was growing up, we could have a beer at 18.
>
> Either make adulthood start at age 21, or make it 18 -- but don't try to
> fudge the distinction.
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"
>

[Matt Whiting]

Jay Honeck wrote:

>>Not in my book. Driving after drinking, unless someone forces you at
>>gunpoint, is just as intentional as any other form of murder.
>
>
> How can you equate premeditated murder with a car accident while under the
> influence?
>
> I would hope that "criminal intent" still counts for *something* in this
> country, or we are surely all doomed.

Because driving while intoxicated greatly increases the chances of
having an accident that kills someone. Driving after drinking is a
choice that is made. Getting drunk was a choice. So, you have someone
who has made a choice to engage in a behavior that has a significant
chance of killing someone. Sounds premeditated to me. Sounds criminal
to me.

That is no different that me getting mad at you and cutting the brake
lines on your car. You then go out and get killed because you can't
stop at an intersection. I may have only intended to scare you, didn't
really mean to kill you, however, the fact remains that I consciously
took an action that could result in your death and did result in your
death. I see this as being virtually identical to DWI.

I realize the law would probably consider both as manslaughter rather
than murder, but I still feel that is too light.


Matt

[Jay Honeck]

>> I would hope that "criminal intent" still counts for *something* in this
>> country, or we are surely all doomed.
>
> I realize the law would probably consider both as manslaughter rather than
> murder, but I still feel that is too light.

So what responsibility do the victims have here? The dead best friend and
the girl who was injured (whose parents are suing the hotel where the
wedding reception was held) apparently got into this guy's car knowing that
he was drunk, right?

Is there any personal responsibility here? Or was there no way for them to
know that this kid was loaded to the point of making a stupid decision?

Obviously this will come out in court, and this is sheer speculation, but I
suspect that her attorney is going to portray her as a victim who had no way
of knowing the driver was drunk. Which, if true, will absolve the hotel of
all liability, since how could *they* possibly know the kid was drunk, if
his own friends didn't?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Dave Stadt]

"Matt Whiting" > wrote in message
...
> Jay Honeck wrote:
>
> >>Not in my book. Driving after drinking, unless someone forces you at
> >>gunpoint, is just as intentional as any other form of murder.
> >
> >
> > How can you equate premeditated murder with a car accident while under
the
> > influence?
> >
> > I would hope that "criminal intent" still counts for *something* in this
> > country, or we are surely all doomed.
>
> Because driving while intoxicated greatly increases the chances of
> having an accident that kills someone. Driving after drinking is a
> choice that is made. Getting drunk was a choice. So, you have someone
> who has made a choice to engage in a behavior that has a significant
> chance of killing someone. Sounds premeditated to me. Sounds criminal
> to me.

Actually the person made two bad choices which without a doubt adds up to
premeditation.

[Dave Stadt]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:XdHbd.393727$Fg5.164566@attbi_s53...
> >> I would hope that "criminal intent" still counts for *something* in
this
> >> country, or we are surely all doomed.
> >
> > I realize the law would probably consider both as manslaughter rather
than
> > murder, but I still feel that is too light.
>
> So what responsibility do the victims have here? The dead best friend
and
> the girl who was injured (whose parents are suing the hotel where the
> wedding reception was held) apparently got into this guy's car knowing
that
> he was drunk, right?
>
> Is there any personal responsibility here? Or was there no way for them
to
> know that this kid was loaded to the point of making a stupid decision?
>
> Obviously this will come out in court, and this is sheer speculation, but
I
> suspect that her attorney is going to portray her as a victim who had no
way
> of knowing the driver was drunk. Which, if true, will absolve the hotel
of
> all liability, since how could *they* possibly know the kid was drunk, if
> his own friends didn't?
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"

The hotel served or allowed alcohol to be served to an underage person.
Soon as they do that their fate is sealed and they only have to look in a
mirror to find the guilty party.

[Jay Honeck]

> The hotel served or allowed alcohol to be served to an underage person.
> Soon as they do that their fate is sealed and they only have to look in a
> mirror to find the guilty party.

Total, utter crap.

Have you ever been to a big wedding reception? You know as well as I do
that there is a beer tapper in a corner, and a mob scene at the bar. In the
celebratory chaos it is child's play (literally!) for a 21-year old friend
to feed beers to an 18-year old at a wedding reception.

To hold the hotel responsible for the death of that boy is ridiculous, and a
travesty of justice. To send the victim's best friend to prison for 25
pointless years is even more of an injustice. What possible point is there
in sending that kid away for a quarter of a century?

At some point in life you just have to say "**** happens", and stop trying
to blame everyone for it. To equate this tragic accident with premeditated
murder is ignorant, and not at all in keeping with the spirit of the law.

THIS is why I despise liability attorneys, and everything they stand for.
They're not interested in justice; they're interested in cash, and they're
playing on a victim's desire for revenge in order to achieve their goals.

And everyone pays for it.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Dave Stadt]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:_9Ibd.250150$D%.247549@attbi_s51...
> > The hotel served or allowed alcohol to be served to an underage person.
> > Soon as they do that their fate is sealed and they only have to look in
a
> > mirror to find the guilty party.
>
> Total, utter crap.
>
> Have you ever been to a big wedding reception? You know as well as I do
> that there is a beer tapper in a corner, and a mob scene at the bar. In
the
> celebratory chaos it is child's play (literally!) for a 21-year old friend
> to feed beers to an 18-year old at a wedding reception.

That in no way makes it right. The hotel assumes the responsability and
liability when they purchase a liquor license. They might get away with it
9,999 times out of 10,000 but that one time ends up deadly. They rolled the
dice and lost.

> To hold the hotel responsible for the death of that boy is ridiculous, and
a
> travesty of justice. To send the victim's best friend to prison for 25
> pointless years is even more of an injustice. What possible point is
there
> in sending that kid away for a quarter of a century?

Simple, he made at least two bad decisions that resulted in one death and
one injured person. The hotel made a bad decision by allowing alcohol to be
served to an underage person plus it sounds like they allowed him to be over
served.. All were conscious decisions with known consequences. He
consciously killed the kid same as if he held a gun to his head and pulled
the trigger.

> At some point in life you just have to say "**** happens", and stop trying
> to blame everyone for it. To equate this tragic accident with
premeditated
> murder is ignorant, and not at all in keeping with the spirit of the law.

This case is premeditated. The kid made at least two horrible decisions
that resulted in a death. Your "**** happens" example results in 20,000
deaths per year in this country. The spirit of the law says if you kill
someone you go to jail. Are you saying the spirit of the law is to ignore
someone that gets drunk and kills someone? There were at least three
chances for the murderer and the hotel to avoid the tragedy. No one took
advantage of those chances.

> THIS is why I despise liability attorneys, and everything they stand for.
> They're not interested in justice; they're interested in cash, and they're
> playing on a victim's desire for revenge in order to achieve their goals.

The kid going to jail has nothing to do with liability lawyers. It is a
criminal case. You gotta think if liberal Iowa sent the kid up the road for
25 years it is probably a pretty reasonable sentence.

> And everyone pays for it.

That's right, we all pay for alcohol related traffic deaths. Sad thing is,
not much is done to prevent them. This is one case where something was done
to possibly prevent the guy from causing another tragedy. I only wish it
happened more often.

> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"
>
>

[Jay Honeck]

> All were conscious decisions with known consequences. He
> consciously killed the kid same as if he held a gun to his head and pulled
> the trigger.

That, Dave, is just plain wrong.

That dumb kid driver showed no signs of premeditation in his actions, and
he's effectively lost his life because of it. The hotel showed no signs of
premeditation, and (by all accounts) wasn't even serving the beer. (At many
wedding receptions, a member of the wedding party runs that tap.)

Yet the hotel owners have been bankrupted.

Drunk driving that results in an accident is a terrible thing, but to equate
it with premeditated murder (versus, say, manslaughter) is just wrong, and
(IMHO) actually diminishes the gravity of an actual murder.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Dude]

>
> Actually the person made two bad choices which without a doubt adds up to
> premeditation.
>

I am no lawyer, but I do know the language. This is not premeditation. It
is complete lack of forethought, also known as negligence. Society has
decided that the two are differrent, and need different punishments.

Society has also decided that Dram Shop Laws are desirable.

IMO, The 25 years is too much. How do you, on the one hand, say that the
kid is too young to make a decision about alcohol use, but still say that he
is responsible enough to make a decision about alcohol use?

As for the dram shop laws, I would simply not engage in this business in
this way.

Jay, for your own sake. Figure out a way to avoid the liability, insure
yourself against it, or something. Perhaps you should video tape the bar,
and not allow an open tap. Of course, this means your bar tender better be
ckecking id's, and checking sobriety. Tapes cut both ways, but if your
example hotel could show that they did not serve this kid, they should be
able to get out of the suit, or at least avoid much of the damages.

[Newps]

Dude wrote:

>>Actually the person made two bad choices which without a doubt adds up to
>>premeditation.
>>
>
>
> I am no lawyer, but I do know the language. This is not premeditation. It
> is complete lack of forethought, also known as negligence. Society has
> decided that the two are differrent, and need different punishments.
>
> Society has also decided that Dram Shop Laws are desirable.
>
> IMO, The 25 years is too much. How do you, on the one hand, say that the
> kid is too young to make a decision about alcohol use, but still say that he
> is responsible enough to make a decision about alcohol use?
>
> As for the dram shop laws, I would simply not engage in this business in
> this way.
>
> Jay, for your own sake. Figure out a way to avoid the liability, insure
> yourself against it, or something. Perhaps you should video tape the bar,
> and not allow an open tap. Of course, this means your bar tender better be
> ckecking id's, and checking sobriety. Tapes cut both ways, but if your
> example hotel could show that they did not serve this kid, they should be
> able to get out of the suit, or at least avoid much of the damages.

The bars around here have a simple solution. Everybody holds up their
ID as they walk in and they get photographed holding that ID. So if you
are underage and committing fraud to get in the bar cannot be held
liable for serving you. They made a good faith effort to keep you out,
which is all the law requires.

[Dave Stadt]

"Dude" > wrote in message
...
> >
> > Actually the person made two bad choices which without a doubt adds up
to
> > premeditation.
> >
>
> I am no lawyer, but I do know the language. This is not premeditation. It
> is complete lack of forethought, also known as negligence. Society has
> decided that the two are differrent, and need different punishments.
>
> Society has also decided that Dram Shop Laws are desirable.
>
> IMO, The 25 years is too much. How do you, on the one hand, say that the
> kid is too young to make a decision about alcohol use, but still say that
he
> is responsible enough to make a decision about alcohol use?

I did not say he was too young to make a decision about alcohol use. It is
unfortunate the numerous older adults did not step in and stop his abuse.
Seems there are a multitude of guilty parties in a situation like this any
one if which could have stepped forward and prevented the accident.

I work for an organization that serves alcohol from time to time. It is a
major concern and anyone that does not understand the risks and liabilities
is not being honest with themselves. The web has some excellent articles on
dram shop laws. The law is pretty cut and dried and leaves no out for "****
happens."

> As for the dram shop laws, I would simply not engage in this business in
> this way.
>
> Jay, for your own sake. Figure out a way to avoid the liability, insure
> yourself against it, or something. Perhaps you should video tape the bar,
> and not allow an open tap. Of course, this means your bar tender better
be
> ckecking id's, and checking sobriety. Tapes cut both ways, but if your
> example hotel could show that they did not serve this kid, they should be
> able to get out of the suit, or at least avoid much of the damages.
>
>

[Matt Whiting]

Jay Honeck wrote:

>>>I would hope that "criminal intent" still counts for *something* in this
>>>country, or we are surely all doomed.
>>
>>I realize the law would probably consider both as manslaughter rather than
>>murder, but I still feel that is too light.
>
>
> So what responsibility do the victims have here? The dead best friend and
> the girl who was injured (whose parents are suing the hotel where the
> wedding reception was held) apparently got into this guy's car knowing that
> he was drunk, right?

I agree they have responsibility. I wasn't talking about civil
lawsuits, but rather criminal punishment. I don't agree with the big
civil lawsuits for just the reason you mention here.

Matt

[smackey]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message news:<e8nbd.387285$Fg5.160236@attbi_s53>...
> > Doesn't matter. You cannot serve or allow to be served, anyone under 21.
>
> And that is a ridiculous law. Also, there is more to it in Iowa City than
> meets the eye.

So, take it up with your legislature. They make the laws, not
lawyers. I suggest you take a basic course in government.
>
> I think this is crazy. As an 18 year old, you can sign a legal contract.
> You can buy a gun. You can (in wartime) be drafted. In every respect,
> save one, you are legally an adult at age 18.
>
> Why this type of unconstitutional discrimination is legal is a complete
> mystery to me. When I was growing up, we could have a beer at 18.
>
> Either make adulthood start at age 21, or make it 18 -- but don't try to
> fudge the distinction.

So, take it up with Congress. Your republican friends control both
houses and the white house. That's where that distinction was made.

[smackey]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message news:<F1nbd.236384$MQ5.74865@attbi_s52>...
....
> He didn't kill someone in the same sense as a criminal with a gun. He
> killed someone through neglect. Worse, he killed his best friend in a car
> accident, which will surely haunt him all the days of his life.

He killed two people??!! Gee, I really feel sorry for him now. As
for the distinction between a criminal with a gun and this killer,
let's ask the dead girl how she perceives the difference.

>
> I can't believe I'm even arguing this. Whatever happened to personal
> responsibility in this country?

Yes, good question. What did happen to it, Jay?

[smackey]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message news:<HZtbd.246622$D%.7709@attbi_s51>...
> > Not in my book. Driving after drinking, unless someone forces you at
> > gunpoint, is just as intentional as any other form of murder.
>
> How can you equate premeditated murder with a car accident while under the
> influence?
>
> I would hope that "criminal intent" still counts for *something* in this
> country, or we are surely all doomed.

Uhh, Jay, what happened to your plea for "personal responsibility"?

[smackey]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message news:<_9Ibd.250150$D%.247549@attbi_s51>...
> > The hotel served or allowed alcohol to be served to an underage person.
> > Soon as they do that their fate is sealed and they only have to look in a
> > mirror to find the guilty party.
>
> Total, utter crap.

Good argument.
>
> Have you ever been to a big wedding reception? You know as well as I do
> that there is a beer tapper in a corner, and a mob scene at the bar. In the
> celebratory chaos it is child's play (literally!) for a 21-year old friend
> to feed beers to an 18-year old at a wedding reception.
>
> To hold the hotel responsible for the death of that boy is ridiculous, and a
> travesty of justice. To send the victim's best friend to prison for 25
> pointless years is even more of an injustice. What possible point is there
> in sending that kid away for a quarter of a century?
>
"Liability lawyers" have nothing to do with sending the killer to
prison. Your district attorney and judge (not to mention the
legislature that passed the criminal law that governs this) do.
Again, Jay, a good civics course might help.

> At some point in life you just have to say "**** happens", and stop trying
> to blame everyone for it. To equate this tragic accident with premeditated
> murder is ignorant, and not at all in keeping with the spirit of the law.
>
> THIS is why I despise liability attorneys, and everything they stand for.
> They're not interested in justice; they're interested in cash, and they're
> playing on a victim's desire for revenge in order to achieve their goals.
>
> And everyone pays for it.

Actually, "everyone" pays very little for it. What do you suppose is
the cost to everyone for the deaths, destroyed lives, children without
parents and siblings, medical costs and all else that drunk driving
cause? Just so the hotel can make a buck. Go have a few more beers,
Jay.

[Paul Sengupta]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:e8nbd.387285$Fg5.160236@attbi_s53...
> I think this is crazy. As an 18 year old, you can sign a legal contract.
> You can buy a gun. You can (in wartime) be drafted. In every respect,
> save one, you are legally an adult at age 18.

It was apparently brought in because of the large number of 18-21 year
olds drinking and driving. Rather unfair to stop ANY 18-21 yr olds
drinking because of the idiots who then go on to drive. What about
those who don't have a car? Or are drinking within walking distance
of home? Or both? Or are in college?

Paul

[Jay Honeck]

> It was apparently brought in because of the large number of 18-21 year
> olds drinking and driving. Rather unfair to stop ANY 18-21 yr olds
> drinking because of the idiots who then go on to drive. What about
> those who don't have a car? Or are drinking within walking distance
> of home? Or both? Or are in college?

There you go again, Paul. Trying to confuse the thread with facts and
logic... ;-)

(Hey, BTW: We just had a woman from England staying with us this past week.
She gave us a giant bag of Cadbury "roses" -- wow, are *those* awesome
little candies! My caloric intake for today was astronomical, after
munching them like popcorn all day... Next time you come to the states,
bring us a bunch of those, please -- along with some more of that great ale
you brought last time!

Or is it our turn to visit next?)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Paul Sengupta]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:1ejcd.404194$Fg5.271656@attbi_s53...
> (Hey, BTW: We just had a woman from England staying with us this past
week.
> She gave us a giant bag of Cadbury "roses" -- wow, are *those* awesome
> little candies! My caloric intake for today was astronomical, after
> munching them like popcorn all day... Next time you come to the states,
> bring us a bunch of those, please -- along with some more of that great
ale
> you brought last time!

I'll have to bring some of each of the different selections. Quality Street
is
rather nice too.

> Or is it our turn to visit next?)

Hey, renting out my spare room again, but if you don't mind staying
in a hotel/B&B, you're welcome any time! Summer if best though
especially if you want to attempt to come flying...

Not sure I'll be coming back to the US soon due to all the restrictions
on flying and so on now happening. Still, got some more aviation
museums on my list to see!

The beer is easier if you do come here! :-)

Paul

[Jay Honeck]

> Not sure I'll be coming back to the US soon due to all the restrictions
> on flying and so on now happening. Still, got some more aviation
> museums on my list to see!

What restrictions on flying?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Paul Sengupta]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:5CFcd.410244$Fg5.312213@attbi_s53...
> > Not sure I'll be coming back to the US soon due to all the restrictions
> > on flying and so on now happening. Still, got some more aviation
> > museums on my list to see!
>
> What restrictions on flying?

The TSA stuff. Non US-citizens having to be photographed,
fingerprinted, forms filled in, $130 paid, records kept, all by each
instructor you go to for a BFR (probably) or checkout (maybe).
The instructor has had to go through mandatory "security
awareness" training in order to do all this. Actually it looks like
they need to do this anyway, so that may be a non-issue.

Since I already have an FAA certificate I don't have to go through
all the other hoops to get one of those, but it's all changed now.

Paul

[Jay Honeck]

> The TSA stuff. Non US-citizens having to be photographed,
> fingerprinted, forms filled in, $130 paid, records kept, all by each
> instructor you go to for a BFR (probably) or checkout (maybe).
> The instructor has had to go through mandatory "security
> awareness" training in order to do all this

Interesting.

I'd be willing to bet that none of the instructors here in Iowa City know
anything about any of that stuff -- and there are a fair number of foreign
pilots training here, thanks to the University of Iowa.

Or, at least, I've never heard any of them talk about -- and you would think
it would be a major topic of discussion.

I'll have to check with them when I next see them.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Paul Sengupta]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:3mOcd.261792$MQ5.111337@attbi_s52...
> > The TSA stuff. Non US-citizens having to be photographed,
> > fingerprinted, forms filled in, $130 paid, records kept, all by each
> > instructor you go to for a BFR (probably) or checkout (maybe).
> > The instructor has had to go through mandatory "security
> > awareness" training in order to do all this
>
> Interesting.
>
> I'd be willing to bet that none of the instructors here in Iowa City know
> anything about any of that stuff -- and there are a fair number of foreign
> pilots training here, thanks to the University of Iowa.
>
> Or, at least, I've never heard any of them talk about -- and you would
think
> it would be a major topic of discussion.
>
> I'll have to check with them when I next see them.

Thanks, would be interested to hear what they've been told.

There are quite a few threads on this on rec.aviation.piloting...for
instance:
http://groups.google.co.uk/groups?q=g:thl2468266717d&dq=&hl=en&lr=&selm=4151c8d9%241%40news.microsoft.com
(or http://makeashorterlink.com/?L24162E89 )

http://groups.google.co.uk/groups?hl=en&lr=&selm=20040924175150.02861.00000034%40mb-m01.aol.com
(or http://makeashorterlink.com/?Y45121E89 )

It's not only people from overseas that are affected, it's also US residents
who aren't citizens.

Paul

[Bob Chilcoat]

Phil Boyer spoke at our annual MAAC (Mid Atlantic Aviation Coalition, a New
Jersey aviation PAC) annual dinner Friday night. He said that AOPA is
desparately trying to get this stopped or at least delayed before it takes
effect on Wednesday. What they are hoping to do is at least get the
requirement reduced to a one-time proof of citizenship examination for US
citizens, with a logbook entry or other permanent documentation, and
something similar (i.e. less onerous than what is currently in the new
regulation) for resident aliens. Unfortunately, I suspect that it will
still be made difficult for non-resident aliens to get flight training here
without some pretty difficult hurdles to jump over.

When I lived in the UK in the 70's, my wife and I had to go in person and
register with the police as aliens every year for seven years, that was
pretty straightforward, but still a bit of a pain.

--
Bob (Chief Pilot, White Knuckle Airways)

I don't have to like Bush and Cheney (Or Kerry, for that matter) to love
America

"Paul Sengupta" > wrote in message
...
> "Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
> news:3mOcd.261792$MQ5.111337@attbi_s52...
> > > The TSA stuff. Non US-citizens having to be photographed,
> > > fingerprinted, forms filled in, $130 paid, records kept, all by each
> > > instructor you go to for a BFR (probably) or checkout (maybe).
> > > The instructor has had to go through mandatory "security
> > > awareness" training in order to do all this
> >
> > Interesting.
> >
> > I'd be willing to bet that none of the instructors here in Iowa City
know
> > anything about any of that stuff -- and there are a fair number of
foreign
> > pilots training here, thanks to the University of Iowa.
> >
> > Or, at least, I've never heard any of them talk about -- and you would
> think
> > it would be a major topic of discussion.
> >
> > I'll have to check with them when I next see them.
>
> Thanks, would be interested to hear what they've been told.
>
> There are quite a few threads on this on rec.aviation.piloting...for
> instance:
>
http://groups.google.co.uk/groups?q=g:thl2468266717d&dq=&hl=en&lr=&selm=4151
c8d9%241%40news.microsoft.com
> (or http://makeashorterlink.com/?L24162E89 )
>
>
http://groups.google.co.uk/groups?hl=en&lr=&selm=20040924175150.02861.000000
34%40mb-m01.aol.com
> (or http://makeashorterlink.com/?Y45121E89 )
>
> It's not only people from overseas that are affected, it's also US
residents
> who aren't citizens.
>
> Paul
>
>