Matronics Email Lists :: View topic

Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists

Get Email Distribution Too! FAQ Search Memberlist Usergroups Register

Profile Log in to check your private messages Log in

A&P Standard
Goto page 1, 2 Next

Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> RV-List

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author Message

panamared5(at)brier.net
Guest

Posted: Thu Sep 04, 2008 12:41 pm Post subject: A&P Standard

 	  Quote: 	
		  ... but what standard are A&P's taught to expect when signing off an

annual for instance?  Do they have a standard to follow for experimental

aircraft?


	


Yes!!  Use the same standard that the repairman uses to sign off of 

the annual conditional inspection.  A good A&P should review the 

previous years inspection checklist.



Part of the manufactures responsibility for either a certified 

aircraft or a homebuilt is to develop an annual or conditional 

inspection checklist.  If the A&P can not get one from the aircraft 

documents, then get one from another builder/repairman/owner.  Or use 

a generic inspection checklist that is found in the some of the FAA 

circulars on how to inspect a homebuilt (there is an FAA circular on 

how to inspect homebuilts).  By the way there are numerous RV 

inspection checklist examples on the World Wide Web.



Guys, this is really not an issue.  It seems more like an excuse to 

get rid of homebuilts.



Bob

RV6 "Wicked Witch of the West"

rickpegser(at)yahoo.com
Guest

Posted: Thu Sep 04, 2008 1:49 pm Post subject: A&P Standard

bob 

   to start with a+p's don't not sign off annuals, for this inspection we are required to do in accordance with the appendix. we can use check list as developed by the manufacturer that comply with the appendix, we can use check list as developed by the i/a that comply with the appendix, or just use the appendix. the problem with using certified aircrafts check lists is that most require compliance with all outstanding service bulletins. and as we all know that is not required. in order to get around this most sign of inspection as per the appendix.

   but we get hit with the bs cya service bulletins, and we also get hit with the real service bulletins. the trick here is to know the difference. 

depending on the airframe i have a list of service bulletins that i feel are required, and will not sign-off an annual if they are not done. i make all owners aware of this prior to start of annual. i find it makes thing alot easier in the end.

so you are going to have an a+p not an i/a do your conditional. go for it. what you have basically asked is an apprentice, that has little experience with the airframe or engine to say that everything is all right. he has no experience with a/d research, does not not where to find the service bulletins on experimental parts. and has seen a lot less of the field failures that we deal with. so at this point we have an amateur

build aircraft , inspected by amateurs. owned by idoits. if you have an a+p and are to lasy to take the test, then don't do inspections.

rick

--- On Thu, 9/4/08, Bob <panamared5(at)brier.net> wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		   From: Bob <panamared5(at)brier.net>

 Subject: RE: A&P Standard

 To: rv-list(at)matronics.com

 Date: Thursday, September 4, 2008, 2:38 PM

 <panamared5(at)brier.net>

 >... but what standard are A&P's taught to

 expect when signing off an

 >annual for instance?  Do they have a standard to follow

 for experimental

 >aircraft?

 Yes!!  Use the same standard that the repairman uses to

 sign off of 

 the annual conditional inspection.  A good A&P should

 review the 

 previous years inspection checklist.

 Part of the manufactures responsibility for either a

 certified 

 aircraft or a homebuilt is to develop an annual or

 conditional 

 inspection checklist.  If the A&P can not get one from

 the aircraft 

 documents, then get one from another

 builder/repairman/owner.  Or use 

 a generic inspection checklist that is found in the some of

 the FAA 

 circulars on how to inspect a homebuilt (there is an FAA

 circular on 

 how to inspect homebuilts).  By the way there are numerous

 RV 

 inspection checklist examples on the World Wide Web.

 Guys, this is really not an issue.  It seems more like an

 excuse to 

 get rid of homebuilts.

 Bob

 RV6 "Wicked Witch of the West"

Vinnfizz(at)aol.com
Guest

Posted: Thu Sep 04, 2008 1:57 pm Post subject: A&P Standard

--> RV-List message posted by: Bob panamared5(at)brier.net (panamared5(at)brier.net)

 

>... but what standard are A&P's taught to expect when  signing off an

 	  Quote: 	
		  annual for instance?  Do they have a standard to  follow for experimental

aircraft?

 
	


Here is my $0.02 worth to try to clear the air here.

  A Certified aircraft in use under Part 91 operations must be  inspected by an A&P with an Inspection Authorization (IA) at least  annually. If the aircraft is used in commercial service a 100 hour  Inspection is also required. (Most General Aviation aircraft use the same  checklist of items for the Annual and the 100 hour.)     They  must use the Manufacturer' s Maintenance Manual Inspection criteria if one  was published by the Manufacturer.  If there was not  one published by the Manufacturer ( like a Cessna 140) then the  A&P w/IA must use any list desired as long as it meets the same Scope  and Detail of the items listed in FAR Part 43 Appendix D as a minimum.  

 For the Experimental world an Annual Condition inspection is required  and must be done by at least an A&P. (an IA is not required) using  the same scope and detail as the items listed in FAR 43 Appendix D  items as a minimum. 

  

  Click here:  FAR Part 43 Appendix D 

  

 The term A&E is a leftover term from the United States Civil Aviation  Authority (CAA) which was replaced by the Federal Aviation Agency (FAA) back in  1958 . The Air Commerce Act of May 20, 1926 was the first attempt at regulating  aviation. Then the Civil Aeronautics Authority was created in 1938. 

 In 1940, President Franklin Roosevelt split the Authority into two  agencies, the Civil Aeronautics Administration (CAA) and the Civil Aeronautics  Board (CAB). The Federal Aviation Agency (FAA) was replaced by the Federal  Aviation Administration when it was moved to the Department of Transportation in  1966. 

 In the UK and other former British Crown Colonies the mechanics are still  called A&E' s, which stands for Airframe and Engine or technically now all  are called Aviation Maintenance Engineers (AME).

 Does that muddy the waters any better?

  

 Ed Flow

 A&P w/IA

 Flight Engineer

 US DHS CBP Air and Marine

 '46 Cessna 140

 Thatcher CX4 #177 in work. 

 RV-8 tail still in work. 



  

 Do Not Archive

  



It's only a deal if it's where you want to go. Find your travel deal here.

  [quote][b]

rickpegser(at)yahoo.com
Guest

Posted: Thu Sep 04, 2008 2:34 pm Post subject: A&P Standard

ed

under part 91 we are not requiired to use the manufactures inspection.

rick





--- On Thu, 9/4/08, Vinnfizz(at)aol.com <Vinnfizz(at)aol.com> wrote:



 	  Quote: 	
		   From: Vinnfizz(at)aol.com <Vinnfizz(at)aol.com>

 Subject: Re: A&P Standard

 To: rv-list(at)matronics.com

 Date: Thursday, September 4, 2008, 2:56 PM

 

 

 (mailto:panamared5(at)brier.net) 

 

 >... but what standard are A&P's taught to

 expect when  signing off an

 >annual for instance?  Do they have a standard to 

 follow for experimental

 >aircraft?

 

 Here is my $0.02 worth to try to clear the air here.

  A Certified aircraft in use under Part 91 operations must

 be  inspected by 

 an A&P with an Inspection Authorization (IA) at least 

 annually. If the 

 aircraft is used in commercial service a 100 hour 

 Inspection is also required. (Most 

 General Aviation aircraft use the same  checklist of items

 for the Annual and 

 the 100 hour.)     They  must use the Manufacturer' s

 Maintenance Manual 

 Inspection criteria if one  was published by the

 Manufacturer.  If there was not  

 one published by the Manufacturer ( like a Cessna 140) then

 the  A&P w/IA must 

 use any list desired as long as it meets the same Scope 

 and Detail of the 

 items listed in FAR Part 43 Appendix D as a minimum. 

 For the Experimental world an Annual Condition inspection

 is required  and 

 must be done by at least an A&P. (an IA is not

 required) using  the same scope 

 and detail as the items listed in FAR 43 Appendix D  items

 as a minimum. 

  

  _Click here:  FAR Part 43 Appendix D_ 

 (http://www.avweb.com/news/avlaw/181908-1.html)  

  

 The term A&E is a leftover term from the United States

 Civil Aviation  

 Authority (CAA) which was replaced by the Federal Aviation

 Agency (FAA) back in  

 1958 . The Air Commerce Act of May 20, 1926 was the first

 attempt at regulating  

 aviation. Then the Civil Aeronautics Authority was created

 in 1938. 

 In 1940, President Franklin Roosevelt split the Authority

 into two  agencies, 

 the Civil Aeronautics Administration (CAA) and the Civil

 Aeronautics  Board 

 (CAB). The Federal Aviation Agency (FAA) was replaced by

 the Federal  Aviation 

 Administration when it was moved to the Department of

 Transportation in  1966. 

 In the UK and other former British Crown Colonies the

 mechanics are still  

 called A&E' s, which stands for Airframe and Engine

 or technically now all  are 

 called Aviation Maintenance Engineers (AME).

 Does that muddy the waters any better?

  

 Ed Flow

 A&P w/IA

 Flight Engineer

 US DHS CBP Air and Marine

 '46 Cessna 140

 Thatcher CX4 #177 in work. 

 RV-8 tail still in work. 

 

  

 Do Not Archive

  

 

 

 

 **************It's only a deal if it's where you

 want to go. Find your travel 

 deal here.      

 (http://information.travel.aol.com/deals?ncid=aoltrv00050000000047)

timb

Joined: 16 Apr 2008
Posts: 77
Location: Frankston, Texas

Posted: Thu Sep 04, 2008 2:34 pm Post subject: A&P Standard

Bob,  

   

Excellent post and understandable.  So here is a hypothetical question:  

Mr. John Jones builds an RX-4 and gets his AWC as an experimental Homebuilt Aircraft.  But he decides since it is an experimental and he can do whatever he wants to he decides to use several non aircraft type parts and automotive wiring, plus RC model servo equipment for electric trims.  Each year if he also obtained the A&P license for this aircraft can perform the conditional inspection.  

   

But then in year 4 he is real busy with work so he hires a licensed A&P mechanic to do his condition inspection.  Does that A&P have the leisure to inspect this aircraft and have no concerns for the parts that were used in this aircraft?  Is he in jeopardy if he inspects this aircraft and one of those parts causes an accident?  This is my real question as an A&P has some obligation to follow the accepted practices in the aviation field but an experimental doesn’t really have to meet the same criteria.  It is an experiment.  

   

Now to provide the disclaimer:  No, I didn’t install these parts in my RV and I have no reason to need to know this for my own purpose.  This is simply trying to clear up this question in my mind.  Should a licensed A&P refuse to sign off a conditional inspection if he decides he wouldn’t have done something the experimenter did.  If not then what is the point of the condition inspection by an A & P other than the builder?  

     

Tim Bryan  

RV-6 Flying  

  

N616TB over 100 hours now        

From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Vinnfizz(at)aol.com

 Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2008 4:57 PM

 To: rv-list(at)matronics.com

 Subject: Re: A&P Standard  

  

  

       

--> RV-List message posted by: Bob panamared5(at)brier.net (panamared5(at)brier.net)  

    



 >... but what standard are A&P's taught to expect when signing off an

 [i]>annual for instance?  Do they have a standard to follow for experimental

 >aircraft?[/i]  

    



 Here is my $0.02 worth to try to clear the air here.  

    

 A Certified aircraft in use under Part 91 operations must be inspected by an A&P with an Inspection Authorization (IA) at least annually. If the aircraft is used in commercial service a 100 hour Inspection is also required. (Most General Aviation aircraft use the same checklist of items for the Annual and the 100 hour.)     They must use the Manufacturer' s Maintenance Manual Inspection criteria if one was published by the Manufacturer.  If there was not one published by the Manufacturer ( like a Cessna 140) then the A&P w/IA must use any list desired as long as it meets the same Scope and Detail of the items listed in FAR Part 43 Appendix D as a minimum.   

    

For the Experimental world an Annual Condition inspection is required and must be done by at least an A&P. (an IA is not required) using the same scope and detail as the items listed in FAR 43 Appendix D items as a minimum.   

    

   

    

 Click here: FAR Part 43 Appendix D   

    

   

    

The term A&E is a leftover term from the United States Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) which was replaced by the Federal Aviation Agency (FAA) back in 1958 . The Air Commerce Act of May 20, 1926 was the first attempt at regulating aviation. Then the Civil Aeronautics Authority was created in 1938.   

    

In 1940, President Franklin Roosevelt split the Authority into two agencies, the Civil Aeronautics Administration (CAA) and the Civil Aeronautics Board (CAB). The Federal Aviation Agency (FAA) was replaced by the Federal Aviation Administration when it was moved to the Department of Transportation in 1966.   

    

In the UK and other former British Crown Colonies the mechanics are still called A&E' s, which stands for Airframe and Engine or technically now all are called Aviation Maintenance Engineers (AME).  

    

Does that muddy the waters any better?  

    

   

    

Ed Flow  

    

A&P w/IA  

    

Flight Engineer  

    

US DHS CBP Air and Marine  

    

'46 Cessna 140  

    

Thatcher CX4 #177 in work.   

    

RV-8 tail still in work.   

  

    

   

    

Do Not Archive  

    

   

  



 

         

  

It's only a deal if it's where you want to go. Find your travel deal here.  

   	  Quote: 	
		    http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV-List 	
0 	  Quote: 	
		   	
1 	  Quote: 	
		   	
2 	  Quote: 	
		   	
3 	  Quote: 	
		   	
4 	  Quote: 	
		   	
5 	  Quote: 	
		   	
6 	  Quote: 	
		   	
7 	  Quote: 	
		   	
8 	  Quote: 	
		   	
9

  

        [quote][b]

_________________
Tim Bryan
RV-6 Flying
N616TB

jvanlaak(at)aol.com
Guest

Posted: Thu Sep 04, 2008 3:55 pm Post subject: A&P Standard

I feel the need to say something here.

 

 I have been a pilot for 38 years, and A&P for over 30, built 2 airplanes, rebuilt 3 others, including engineering multiple mods for field approval.

 

 I have owned 31 airplanes, including many experimentals and 5 RVs, doing the annual condition inspection on all of the experimentals and working with an AI for most of the annuals on the certificated ones.  I have also done condition inspections for friends on their airplanes for free, often finding things that they needed to fix like fuel lines routed too close to battery terminals (a common problem on RV-4's with the battery between the pedals).

 

 Despite the rant from rick, I am not an amateur or an apprentice.  My day job is managing aerospace programs for NASA and I have hands on experience from ultralights to the Shuttle.  But since I do not make my living with my A&P I do not need to aggravation and liability exposure of the AI ticket.  I choose to limit my FAA rating to the A&P.

 

 Signing the books of any airplane is an adventure.  It is also a choice.  If the A&P or AI is not comfortable with the condition of the airplane they should not sign.  But I can also tell you that some of the worst airplanes I have seen belonged to mechanics and inspectors.  I went to buy an airplane owned by a senior inspector for American Airlines one time and was horrified by its condition. 20I would not even fly it let alone buy it despite its "fresh annual."

 

 But just as a lousy AI can be dangerous, a good conscientious builder can be the best maintainer you will ever find.

 

 Rick, my boy, you have shot your credibility with me.

 

   

 

   

 

 --

rickpegser(at)yahoo.com
Guest

Posted: Thu Sep 04, 2008 5:36 pm Post subject: A&P Standard

Tim



 i don't know what you do for NASA but if you don't turn wrenches or supervise those that do, your a+p is void. engineering does not count. while with my i/a i would not expect to walk up to the shuttle and declare it ready for flight. i happen to know that the aircraft i work on have a better then 1/50 flight success rate. and i also know that if the engine manufacturer told me it would not work i would not fly.



   since the NASA safety record and procedures resulted in the saying " need another seven astronauts" again and again. i would leave this alone. your shitty in house quality control has caused to loss of two shuttles, both of which could have been saved with a proper safety review. in my opinion these were criminal acts, that should have been prosecuted. if you can show me a nasa manager in jail, and then you can tell me how good your quality is. i can show you a/i's that are in jail, for screwing up but i guess if you work for nasa it does not count.



rick

--- On Thu, 9/4/08, jvanlaak(at)aol.com <jvanlaak(at)aol.com> wrote:



[quote] From: jvanlaak(at)aol.com <jvanlaak(at)aol.com>

 Subject: Re: A&P Standard

 To: rv-list(at)matronics.com

 Date: Thursday, September 4, 2008, 4:53 PM

 I feel the need to say something here.

 

 I have been a pilot for 38 years, and A&P for over 30,

 built 2 airplanes, rebuilt 3 others, including engineering

 multiple mods for field approval.

 

 I have owned 31 airplanes, including many experimentals and

 5 RVs, doing the annual condition inspection on all of the

 experimentals and working with an AI for most of the annuals

 on the certificated ones.Â  I have also done condition

 inspections for friends on their airplanes for free, often

 finding things that they needed to fix like fuel lines

 routed too close to battery terminals (a common problem on

 RV-4's with the battery between the pedals).

 

 Despite the rant from rick, I am not an amateur or an

 apprentice.Â  My day job is managing aerospace programs for

 NASA and I have hands on experience from ultralights to the

 Shuttle.Â  But since I do not make my living with my A&P

 I do not need to aggravation and liability exposure of the

 AI ticket.Â  I choose to limit my FAA rating to the A&P.

 

 Signing the books of any airplane is an adventure.Â  It is

 also a choice.Â  If the A&P or AI is not comfortable

 with the condition of the airplane they should not sign.Â 

 But I can also tell you that some of the worst airplanes I

 have seen belonged to mechanics and inspectors.Â  I went to

 buy an airplane owned by a senior inspector for American

 Airlines one time and was horrified by its condition.Â  I

 would not even fly it let alone buy it despite its

 "fresh annual."

 

 B

 ut just as a lousy AI can be dangerous, a good

 conscientious builder can be the best maintainer you will

 ever find.

 

 Rick, my boy, you have shot your credibility with me.

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 --

timb

Joined: 16 Apr 2008
Posts: 77
Location: Frankston, Texas

Posted: Thu Sep 04, 2008 6:17 pm Post subject: A&P Standard

Wow Rick, you need to leave me out of this.  I don't work for NASA and I have nothing bad to say about them, you or anyone else.(well maybe there is someone but not on this list )  I am not an AI nor an A&P and tomorrow I will go fly my RV just to get off this computer.  Y'all have a nice day too.

Do Not Archive this dribble.



Tim Bryan

RV-6 Flying

N616TB over 100 hours now



[quote] --

_________________
Tim Bryan
RV-6 Flying
N616TB

jsflyrv(at)verizon.net
Guest

Posted: Thu Sep 04, 2008 6:47 pm Post subject: A&P Standard

Vinnfizz(at)aol.com wrote:

"For the Experimental world an Annual Condition inspection is required 

and must be done by at least an A&P. (an IA is not required) using 

the same scope and detail as the items listed in FAR 43 Appendix D items 

as a minimum."



I may be misunderstanding what you wrote but a condition inspection is 

not required to be done by at least and A&P the person who holds the 

repairman's certificate

for that particular airplane my do the inspection.



do not archive



Jerry

Kellym

Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 1705
Location: Sun Lakes AZ

Posted: Thu Sep 04, 2008 7:08 pm Post subject: A&P Standard

No problem with your suggestions. But until you have all of your 

certificates at risk, don't tell an A&P it isn't an issue. We have to 

live with whatever happens to the aircraft from the time of inspection 

until the next inspection. With homebuilts we have no way of knowing 

what is done to the plane the minute after we sign it off.

At least with a certified aircraft we know anything done has to follow 

the regs and be done by authorized individuals.  I'm all for OBAM 

airplanes, have one under construction for myself...yes, it is an RV.



Bob wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		  

 Guys, this is really not an issue.  It seems more like an excuse to 

 get rid of homebuilts.



 Bob

 RV6 "Wicked Witch of the West"

_________________
Kelly McMullen
A&P/IA, EAA Tech Counselor # 5286
KCHD

Kellym

Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 1705
Location: Sun Lakes AZ

Posted: Thu Sep 04, 2008 7:16 pm Post subject: A&P Standard

Also zero requirement to comply with service bulletins, unless they are 

incorporated into an AD.

Remember, owner can refuse to do service bulletins, can tell you to sign 

the inspection as unairworthy if you insist, and you give a list of 

discrepancies. The owner himself can dismiss everyone you cite as 

service bulletin not complied with, and get any old A&P to repair 

anything else and return the aircraft to service.

It IS after all, only an inspection. Repair is up to the owner.

Kelly

A&P/IA



RICHARD MILLER wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		   



 ed

 under part 91 we are not requiired to use the manufactures inspection.

 rick

_________________
Kelly McMullen
A&P/IA, EAA Tech Counselor # 5286
KCHD

Kellym

Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 1705
Location: Sun Lakes AZ

Posted: Thu Sep 04, 2008 7:22 pm Post subject: A&P Standard

Well, then you should know there is no such rating of  AI. It is 

Inspection Authorization, or IA. Everyone is different. I hold my plane 

to a standard that I don't want any other A&P to find fault with. 

Doesn't mean it is perfect, but it is airworthy. After all, I fly myself 

and my family in it, behind the engine that I assembled and signed off. 

Just as you find in certified aircraft, there are huge variations in 

quality and maintenance between aircraft, perhaps larger in homebuilt 

aircraft...from fantastic museum piece, to accident waiting to happen.

KM

A&P/IA



jvanlaak(at)aol.com wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		   I feel the need to say something here.



 I

 Despite the rant from rick, I am not an amateur or an apprentice.  My 

 day job is managing aerospace programs for NASA and I have hands on 

 experience from ultralights to the Shuttle.  But since I do not make 

 my living with my A&P I do not need to aggravation and liability 

 exposure of the AI ticket.  I choose to limit my FAA rating to the A&P.



 Signing the books of any airplane is an adventure.  It is also a 

 choice.  If the A&P or AI is not comfortable with the condition of the 

 airplane they should not sign.  But I can also tell you that some of 

 the worst airplanes I have seen belonged to mechanics and inspectors.  

 I went to buy an airplane owned by a senior inspector for American 

 Airlines one time and was horrified by its condition. 20I would not 

 even fly it let alone buy it despite its "fresh annual."



 But just as a lousy AI can be dangerous, a good conscientious builder 

 can be the best maintainer you will ever find.

 *

 *

_________________
Kelly McMullen
A&P/IA, EAA Tech Counselor # 5286
KCHD

Vinnfizz(at)aol.com
Guest

Posted: Thu Sep 04, 2008 7:57 pm Post subject: A&P Standard

In a message dated 9/4/2008 6:36:16 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,  rickpegser(at)yahoo.com writes:

  	  Quote: 	
		  -->    RV-List message posted by: RICHARD MILLER    <rickpegser(at)yahoo.com>



ed

under part 91 we are not required to    use the manufactures inspection.

rick



	
  

 Rick,

  

 I don't agree with that statement!

 

 

 Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations is pretty specific here. Part 91 Sec  91.409 says aircraft (read all aircraft under part 91) must have undergone  an annual inspection in accordance with part 43 of this  chapter within the preceding 12 calendar  months. That means all of 43. That means specifically 43.16 is applicable.  Therefore an inspection or other maintenance specified in an Airworthiness  Limitations section of a manufacturer's maintenance manual or Instructions for  Continued Airworthiness, IS Mandatory!  

  

 Here are the sections quoted, underline, italics,bold, emphasis mine.

  

  	  Quote: 	
		  

   

Federal    Aviation Regulation



Sec. 91.409



                             Part 91 GENERAL OPERATING AND FLIGHT RULES

            Subpart E--Maintenance, Preventive Maintenance, and          Alterations                



Sec.    91.409



Inspections.

(a) Except as provided in paragraph (c)    of this section, no person may operate an    aircraft unless, within the preceding 12 calendar months, it    has had--

(1) An annual inspection in accordance with part    43 of this chapter and has been approved for return to    service by a person authorized by Sec. 43.7 of this  chapter; 	
  

  	  Quote: 	
		  

Sec.    43.16



Airworthiness Limitations.



Each person performing    an inspection or other maintenance specified in an    Airworthiness Limitations section of a manufacturer's maintenance manual or    Instructions for Continued Airworthiness shall perform the    inspection or other maintenance in accordance with that section, or in    accordance with operations specifications approved by the Administrator under    part 121 or 135, or an inspection program approved under Sec.    91.409(e).

(e) Large airplanes (to which part 125 is    not applicable), turbojet multiengine airplanes, turbopropeller-powered    multiengine airplanes, and turbine-powered    rotorcraft.



	


It's only a deal if it's where you want to go. Find your travel deal here.

  [quote][b]

Vinnfizz(at)aol.com
Guest

Posted: Thu Sep 04, 2008 8:25 pm Post subject: A&P Standard

In a message dated 9/4/2008 10:49:11 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,  jsflyrv(at)verizon.net writes:

 

I may be misunderstanding what you wrote but a condition inspection  is 

not required to be done by at least and A&P the person who holds the  

repairman's certificate

for that particular airplane my do the  inspection.



do not archive



Jerry



 Jerry you are correct there,  

  

 I purposely left out that part as we were discussing an A&P on Part 91  aircraft, if the Builder/Manufacturer of an Experimental aircraft has been  issued a Repairman Certificate for that aircraft he is also authorized to  perform the annual Condition Inspection for Experimental aircraft. If you didn't  build it or apply for the Repairman Certificate the inspection has to be  performed by at least an A&P.

  

 Ed

  

  In a message dated 9/4/2008 10:49:11 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,  jsflyrv(at)verizon.net writes:

  	  Quote: 	
		  -->    RV-List message posted by: Jerry Springer    <jsflyrv(at)verizon.net>



Vinnfizz(at)aol.com wrote:

"For the    Experimental world an Annual Condition inspection is required 

and must be    done by at least an A&P. (an IA is not required) using 

the same scope    and detail as the items listed in FAR 43 Appendix D items 

as a    minimum."



	




It's only a deal if it's where you want to go. Find your travel deal here.

jsflyrv(at)verizon.net
Guest

Posted: Thu Sep 04, 2008 8:56 pm Post subject: A&P Standard

Once again you left out part of the regs that say



"c) Paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section do not apply to--

[(1) An aircraft that carries a special flight permit, a current 

experimental certificate, or a light-sport or provisional airworthiness 

certificate;]"



Vinnfizz(at)aol.com wrote:



 	  Quote: 	
		    

  

 In a message dated 9/4/2008 6:36:16 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, 

 rickpegser(at)yahoo.com writes:



     



     ed

     under part 91 we are not required to use the manufactures inspection.

     rick



  

 Rick,

  

 I don't agree with that statement!



  

 Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations is pretty specific here. Part 91 

 Sec 91.409 says aircraft (read all aircraft under part 91) must have 

 undergone an annual inspection in accordance with part 43 of this 

 chapter within the preceding 12 calendar months. That means all of 43. 

 That means specifically 43.16 is applicable. Therefore an inspection 

 or other maintenance specified in an Airworthiness Limitations section 

 of a manufacturer's maintenance manual or Instructions for Continued 

 Airworthiness, IS Mandatory!

  

 Here are the sections quoted, underline, italics,bold, emphasis mine.

  



     Federal Aviation Regulation

     Hide details for Sec. 91.409Sec. 91.409



     Part 91 GENERAL OPERATING AND FLIGHT RULES

     Subpart E--Maintenance, Preventive Maintenance, and Alterations 	

     Sec. 91.409



     Inspections.

     (a) Except as provided in paragraph (c) of this section, no person

     may operate an aircraft unless, within the preceding 12 calendar

     months, it has had--

     (1) An annual inspection in accordance with part 43 of this

     chapter and has been approved for return to service by a person

     authorized by Sec. 43.7 of this chapter;



  

     Sec. 43.16



     Airworthiness Limitations.



     Each person performing an inspection or other maintenance

     specified in an Airworthiness Limitations section of a

     manufacturer's maintenance manual or Instructions for Continued

     Airworthiness shall perform the inspection or other maintenance in

     accordance with that section, or in accordance with operations

     specifications approved by the Administrator under part 121 or

     135, or an inspection program approved under Sec. 91.409(e).

     (e) Large airplanes (to which part 125 is not applicable),

     turbojet multiengine airplanes, turbopropeller-powered multiengine

     airplanes, and turbine-powered rotorcraft.





 ------------------------------------------------------------------------

 It's only a deal if it's where you want to go. Find your travel deal 

 here <http://information.travel.aol.com/deals?ncid=aoltrv00050000000047>.

bicyclop(at)pacbell.net
Guest

Posted: Thu Sep 04, 2008 10:07 pm Post subject: A&P Standard

The standard for a condition inspection of an experimental, amateur 

built aircraft is :

 

"I certify that this aircraft has been inspected in accordance with the 

scope and detail of Part 43, appendix D and found to be in a condition 

for safe flight."



If an A&P or better does the inspection, and is not comfortable with 

non-aviation parts/hardware, and/or doesn't think that it is in a 

condition for safe flight, he should provide the owner with a list of 

discrepancies or withdraw from the process. If not willing to sign the 

log, in my opinion, he shouldn't charge for the inspection.



Pax,



Ed Holyoke

Vinnfizz(at)aol.com
Guest

Posted: Thu Sep 04, 2008 10:24 pm Post subject: A&P Standard

EXACTLY The Standard Ed Holyoke!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  

  In a message dated 9/5/2008 2:08:26 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,  bicyclop(at)pacbell.net writes:

  	  Quote: 	
		  -->    RV-List message posted by: Ed Holyoke <bicyclop(at)pacbell.net>



The    standard for a condition inspection of an experimental, amateur 

built    aircraft is :



"I certify that this aircraft has been inspected in    accordance with the 

scope and detail of Part 43, appendix D and found to    be in a condition 

for safe flight."



If an A&P or better does    the inspection, and is not comfortable with 

non-aviation parts/hardware,    and/or doesn't think that it is in a 

condition for safe flight, he should    provide the owner with a list of 

discrepancies or withdraw from the    process. If not willing to sign the 

log, in my opinion, he shouldn't    charge for the inspection.



Pax,



Ed Holyoke



Do Not  es  y       -->                 - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS  nbsp;               - List Contribution Web Site  ;                             =========================



	




It's only a deal if it's where you want to go. Find your travel deal here.

  [quote][b]

bo124rs(at)hotmail.com
Guest

Posted: Fri Sep 05, 2008 3:53 am Post subject: A&P Standard

> Date: Thu C 4 Sep 2008 20:21:48 -0700

 	  Quote: 	
		   From: kellym(at)aviating.com

 Just as you find in certified aircraft C there are huge variations in 
	


 	  Quote: 	
		   quality and maintenance between aircraft C perhaps larger in homebuilt 

 aircraft... 


	


Since this as deteriorated into nothing more than a chest beating self serving thread now C I'll gladly take a ride in 9 out of 10 homebuilts over 9 out 10 40 year old pieces of certified junk IA's routinely sign off.  When the guy taxied the ratty C180 jump plane in Black Magic this past Memorial Day weekend.....he paced back and forth on the ramp repeating C "why couldn't I have run into a %$#&#(at)$^% 150 C 152 or 172......."



Sorry but I have seen way too many certified birds recently signed off I would not taxi across the ramp.......



Boy C this response didn't serve any purpose at all did it:-)



Dana Overall  

Richmond C KY i39 

RV-7 slider "Black Magic"  Flying..well sorta C useta C kinda

Barrett Precision O 360 A1A

Hartzell C2YR-1BFP/F7497-2 

http://rvflying.tripod.com/blackmagic.jpg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MMi05-WU2D0#GU5U2spHI_4

http://rvflying.tripod.com 

do not archive 

Stay up to date on your PC C the Web C and your mobile phone with Windows Live. See Now  [quote][b]

n395v

Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 450

Posted: Fri Sep 05, 2008 4:52 am Post subject: Re: A&P Standard

 	  rickpegser(at)yahoo.com wrote: 	
		  Tim



 i don't know what you do for NASA but if you don't turn wrenches or supervise those that do, your a+p is void. engineering does not count. your shitty in house quality control has caused to loss of two shuttles, if you can show me a nasa manager in jail, and then you can tell me how good your quality is. i can show you a/i's that are in jail, for screwing up but i guess if you work for nasa it does not count.



rick 

 -- 	




Rick,



Where you born an asshole or is this a newly acquired skill?



Are you a certified asshole or an experimental asshole?



Actually it doesn't matter for it is certain you are an asshole the type irrelevant.



The quality of the people at NASA have put men on the moon and given us much of the technology that today makes our lives much better.



They had some accidents along the way the 2 of which you mention probably had more to do with politics and political appointees than with quality control, NASA engineers or A&Ps. The folks at NASA are some of the the brightest most dedicated people in this country. Who the fuck are you to question them you low life little piece of shit.



You would make an excellent adviser for OBAMA he seems to like to spout nonsense and bullshit without concern for facts or truth.



do not archive

thunderstorm.gif

Description:

Filesize:

126.09 KB

Viewed:

277 Time(s)

_________________
Milt

Last edited by n395v on Fri Sep 05, 2008 6:39 am; edited 1 time in total

Bret Smith

Joined: 09 Jan 2006
Posts: 178
Location: Mineral Bluff, GA

Posted: Fri Sep 05, 2008 5:06 am Post subject: A&P Standard

Dana,

 In light of your  experience, venting will always be allowed...

  

 Hope you feel better  now.

  

 Bret Smith

 RV-9A N16BL

 Blue Ridge, Ga

 www.FlightInnovations.com

  



   From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com  [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dana  Overall

Sent: Friday, September 05, 2008 7:53 AM

To:  rv-list(at)matronics.com

Subject: RE: A&P  Standard

 

 	  Quote: 	
		   Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2008 20:21:48 -0700

 From:  kellym(at)aviating.com

Just as you find in certified aircraft, there are huge  variations in 
	


 	  Quote: 	
		   quality and maintenance between aircraft, perhaps larger  in homebuilt 

 aircraft... 


	


Since this as deteriorated into  nothing more than a chest beating self serving thread now, I'll gladly take a  ride in 9 out of 10 homebuilts over 9 out 10 40 year old pieces of certified  junk IA's routinely sign off.  When the guy taxied the ratty C180 jump  plane in Black Magic this past Memorial Day weekend.....he paced back and forth  on the ramp repeating, "why couldn't I have run into a %$#&#(at)$^% 150, 152 or  172......."



Sorry but I have seen way too many certified birds recently  signed off I would not taxi across the ramp.......



Boy, this response  didn't serve any purpose at all did it:-)



Dana Overall 

Richmond, KY  i39 

RV-7 slider "Black Magic" Flying..well sorta, useta, kinda

Barrett  Precision O 360 A1A

Hartzell C2YR-1BFP/F7497-2  

http://rvflying.tripod.com/blackmagic.jpg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MMi05-WU2D0#GU5U2spHI_4

http://rvflying.tripod.com  

do not archive 



  Stay up to date on your PC, the Web, and your mobile phone with Windows Live. See Now [quote]



href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV-List

href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com

href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c

[b]

_________________
Bret Smith
RV-9A (Emp)

Display posts from previous:

	Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> RV-List	All times are GMT - 8 Hours Goto page 1, 2 Next
Page 1 of 2

Jump to:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum