Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 12:59 AM - Re: Re: VHF Transmitting Noise (Garlick, Bill (W.D.))
2. 06:27 AM - IFR GPS requirements ()
3. 08:38 AM - Changing Prop & FSDO ()
4. 09:03 AM - Re: Changing Prop & FSDO ()
Message 1
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: VHF Transmitting Noise |
Ralph,
Thanks for your suggestion, I'll certainly try that...it's worth
investigating as the noise seems to be in time with my transmissions
rather than a regular mechanical interference. I remember seeing the
S-tone adjustment hole during installation but I didn't pay too much
attention to it at the time. (My biggest concern then was would the
radio and intercom actually work after my wiring efforts)
Regards
Bill
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-avionics-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-avionics-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of jetboy
Sent: Friday, January 18, 2008 7:38 AM
Subject: Avionics-List: Re: VHF Transmitting Noise
Bill,
Another thing to check is that the sidetone produced by the IC 200
is not adding to any sidetone provided by the PS intercom.
There might be instructions about this on the PS engineering site.
The IC 200 can be withdrawn from its tray, on the top cover there will
be an adjustment hole marked "S-tone" which you can reset all the way
back or fwd as the case may be, to prevent the radio putting a sample of
your voice into the earphones during transmission. I expect the intercom
already does this for you, so you dont require it twice.
Ralph
--------
Ralph - CH701 / 2200a
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=158970#158970
Message 2
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | IFR GPS requirements |
1/18/2008
Hello Glen, You are absolutely correct and I apologize for that moment of
weakness when I wrote to just avoid the ignorant bureaucrat.
If we don't (politely) confront these people who are misusing their
position, either out of ignorance or ego, we will suffer further abuses down
the line.
'OC' Says: "The best investment we can make is the effort to gather and
understand knowledge."
--------------------------------------------------
From: "glen matejcek" <aerobubba@earthlink.net>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: RE: IFR GPS requirements
Hi Bill et al-
Re: >Hello Bill, Avoid that poor soul -- he has not been around long
enough or
>cared enough to learn that type certificated aircraft and amateur built
>experimental aircraft are treated very differently in the FAA's paperwork
>system.
While I greatly appreciate and highly regard and respect the source of that
comment, I couldn't disagree more. If this inspector has run 50
unnecessary 337's through the system, he has cost a lot of people a lot of
money, spread misinformation across the system, and will no doubt cause
other improperly educated or motivated inspectors to take the
'conservative' (ignorant) route at our collective expense. In other words,
there has been a gross misuse of governmental power. These kinds of topics
have gone to DC and back via OSH, and we have the tools to correct the
problem you are facing.
My personal experience with an amateur built rule hose-up was to be very
(politely) clear with the person involved about the nature and basis for
our disconnect, and then call OSH with the details. Within 24 hours they
had achieved understanding with the head of the directorate involved, and
within another 24 the fed involved had been re-educated. That ended the
problem for me, and, presumably, everyone who came along after.
Also, the feds now have a program to handle customer service issues in
house. As I understand it, it's the equivalent of 'let me speak to your
supervisor', although I don't recall the precise terminology. Mike, can
you fill us in?
While I don't advocate getting into hostile conflicts with The Man, I
strongly urge you (and anyone else having bogus reg interpretation issues)
to fight the good fight with the resources we have developed and paid for
through our EAA dues and those gate fees at OSH we are all unhappy about.
Heck, Brian got a law in Jacksonville repealed with a little help from his
friends. What's one confused inspector?
glen matejcek
aerobubba@earthlink.net
Message 3
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Changing Prop & FSDO |
1/18/2008
Hello Ron, You wrote:
1) "Another thing that the FSDO told me, even when an experimental aircraft
is sold and there is a new owner, along with the FAA registration records
update, the new owner needs to get a new Airworthiness Certificate with the
himself as the owner (the original builder info stays the same). He
mentioned that very few owners of experimental aircraft that they bought
from pervious owners know this,......"
I would venture that very few subsequent owners of amateur built
experimental aircraft do not know of this requirement because it is not
true.
2) ",,,,,,,,,, plus the FAA has this requirement too deeply hidden in the
regulations."
No matter how deeply hidden in the regulations this requirement may be it
has to be written down. I would dearly love for you to contact this gent and
find out just exactly where it is written so that we can read it for
ourselves. The FAA is not in the business of having secret regulations.
Many thanks.
'OC' Says: "The best investment we can make is the effort to gather and
understand knowledge."
--------------------------------------------------
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ronko" <ronko1@peoplepc.com>
Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2008 11:52 AM
Subject: Re: Changing Prop & FSDO
Thanks for your response.
I called the local FSDO in West Chicago, Illinois, and they gave me the same
instructions that you outlined. Interesting set of responses from the
group.
Another thing that the FSDO told me, even when an experimental aircraft is
sold and there is a new owner, along with the FAA registration records
update, the new owner needs to get a new Airworthiness Certificate with the
himself as the owner (the original builder info stays the same). He
mentioned that very few owners of experimental aircraft that they bought
from pervious owners know this, plus the FAA has this requirement too deeply
hidden in the regulations. The guy that I talked to at the FSDO told me my
situation was not a problem. With the new prop process, I will get both
requirements met.
Thanks again for your feedback.
Best regards,
Ron
Message 4
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Changing Prop & FSDO |
I'd call Okla City before I'd make any such move - oh yes, and get that
in writing. Deeply hidden doesn't cut the cheese.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-avionics-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-avionics-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
bakerocb@cox.net
Sent: Friday, January 18, 2008 11:35 AM
Subject: Avionics-List: Changing Prop & FSDO
1/18/2008
Hello Ron, You wrote:
1) "Another thing that the FSDO told me, even when an experimental
aircraft is sold and there is a new owner, along with the FAA
registration records update, the new owner needs to get a new
Airworthiness Certificate with the
himself as the owner (the original builder info stays the same). He
mentioned that very few owners of experimental aircraft that they bought
from pervious owners know this,......"
I would venture that very few subsequent owners of amateur built
experimental aircraft do not know of this requirement because it is not
true.
2) ",,,,,,,,,, plus the FAA has this requirement too deeply hidden in
the regulations."
No matter how deeply hidden in the regulations this requirement may be
it has to be written down. I would dearly love for you to contact this
gent and find out just exactly where it is written so that we can read
it for ourselves. The FAA is not in the business of having secret
regulations.
Many thanks.
'OC' Says: "The best investment we can make is the effort to gather and
understand knowledge."
--------------------------------------------------
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ronko" <ronko1@peoplepc.com>
Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2008 11:52 AM
Subject: Re: Changing Prop & FSDO
Thanks for your response.
I called the local FSDO in West Chicago, Illinois, and they gave me the
same instructions that you outlined. Interesting set of responses from
the group.
Another thing that the FSDO told me, even when an experimental aircraft
is sold and there is a new owner, along with the FAA registration
records update, the new owner needs to get a new Airworthiness
Certificate with the himself as the owner (the original builder info
stays the same). He mentioned that very few owners of experimental
aircraft that they bought from pervious owners know this, plus the FAA
has this requirement too deeply hidden in the regulations. The guy that
I talked to at the FSDO told me my situation was not a problem. With the
new prop process, I will get both requirements met.
Thanks again for your feedback.
Best regards,
Ron
Other Matronics Email List Services
These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.
-- Please support this service by making your Contribution today! --
|