Survey

[Bob Irving]

Awesome job, Steve!

 

I have a couple of suggestions.  In general, I would quote a specific number
for each aircraft, not a range.  Here are my suggestions; (700-100-65)
(800-110-70) (900-120-75). I suggest dropping the warning about complex
endorsement and just say "Constant speed prop". 

 

For the Cardinal I would add zero time engine and prop, new leather
interior, several instruments refurbished. Very reputable shop.

 

For the 1982  172  I would add some kind of a warning.  Private sale. Almost
10,000 hrs airframe time is very suspicious (about 386 hrs per year average
- patrol or police or flight school ? Please also note that most of the
avionics are obsolete, some are not even serviceable.  Northstar M3 GPS, for
instance, is no longer updateable after 3/12/2009. The Argus 3000 moving Map
is 1987 technology - it receives heading info from the aforementioned GPS -
database is contained on permanent eproms and if updateable (I doubt it) can
only be done by a technician ($$$).  We don't know what equipment actually
works and what does not work.  Frankly, the price is very suspicious.  We
should warn that a major avionics upgrade could be necessary. This is
probably a pig with lipstick. We could spend $10,000 or more to bring it up
to a useful standard

 

For the Hawk XP - very low engine time (240) and prop time (24). Very
reputable shop.

 

If this becomes simply a beauty contest, the best pictures will win. This
should be a money contest - see what people are willing to spend. I'm afraid
that not everyone will evaluate each example fully.

 

We have time to work on this as I want to wait for the holiday to be over to
send it out.

 

Bob

 

 

From: eefc-core-bounces at workingcode.com
[mailto:eefc-core-bounces at workingcode.com] On Behalf Of Steve Gordon
Sent: Saturday, April 11, 2009 2:48 AM
To: eefc-core at workingcode.com
Subject: Survey

 

A  survey has been created:

 

http://www.zoomerang.com/Survey/?p=WEB2292ZEB4JWB

 

Please take the survey and feel free to post your comments/questions to the
group.  

 

Thanks,

 

-Steve

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.workingcode.com/pipermail/eefc-core/attachments/20090411/9bb6fb2b/attachment.html