Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 06:26 AM - Re: owner performed maintenanceowner performed maintenanceowner per (Catz631@aol.com)
2. 07:13 AM - Re: 582 gasket set on Ebay (Mark Napier (napierm))
3. 07:14 AM - Re: Kreem Problem Again (Jack L Bell)
4. 08:50 AM - Air intake tube vanes and EGT's (Lynn Matteson)
5. 10:44 AM - Re: 582 stuck-still (JetPilot)
6. 11:52 AM - Re: FW: Re: owner performed maintenance (Lowell FITT)
7. 11:57 AM - Re: 582 stuck-still (Tom Jones)
8. 12:45 PM - Re: FW: Re: owner performed maintenance (Bob Brennan)
9. 01:12 PM - Re: owner performed maintenanceowner performed maintenanceowner per (Bob Brennan)
10. 01:12 PM - Re: 582 stuck-still (dave)
11. 06:06 PM - Re: Air intake tube vanes and EGT's (Tex Mantell)
12. 07:21 PM - Re: Air intake tube vanes and EGT's (Lynn Matteson)
13. 07:55 PM - Re: FW: Re: owner performed maintenance (Lowell FITT)
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: owner performed maintenanceowner performed maintenanceowner |
per
Bob,
I apologize for using the word license vs airworthness certificate. This
is similar to renaming the artificial horizon instrument to an attitude gyro
(AI) why? because someone did not like the name. Last night I saw on the
news that they renamed the Sears tower in Chicago (it will still be the Sears
tower in most peoples minds) I have a friend of mine that goes bonkers when
I call a "conditional inspection " an annual. So what he knows what I am
talking about. What we are talking about is splitting hairs. Old terms are hard
to get rid of (especially if you have too much coffee or beer depending on
the time of day)
In any case experimental amateur built certificates and SLSA/ESLA
certificates are different.With the experimental cert I can do all of my maint
as
previously mentioned. Part 43 does not apply.
Dick Maddux
Pensacola,Fl
**************Can love help you live longer? Find out now.
(http://personals.aol.com/articles/2009/02/18/longer-lives-through-relationships/?ncid=emlweu
slove00000001)
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: | Re: 582 gasket set on Ebay |
The aftermarket gaskets are OK. I ran them with no problems. The only
ones I didn't use are the large crankshaft seals. The ones from Rotax
are much better.
To save over $50 these are the same as the ones on ebay and are what I
ran:
http://www.mfgsupply.com/m/c/711194.html
You still wind up buying a couple of odd seals from Rotax but this kit
will save you at least $150.
Also, if you just need to do a top end this one is a great deal:
http://www.mfgsupply.com/m/c/712194.html
Also, for the odd o-ring buy them from:
www.amseal.com
The vast majority of the o-rings are just buna-N and the only reason
they are so high is that they come through Rotax distribution. For
instance, there are over $70 worth of o-rings in the starter mount
alone. Most of these you can get from Amseal except of a couple of
strange ones for much less. And these o-rings need to be there, fresh
and the 1mm clearance set or the starter mount will break.
FWIW,
Mark Napier
Time: 09:16:43 AM PST US
Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: 582 gasket set on Ebay
From: "akflyer" <akflyer_2000@yahoo.com>
I have been using them with no issues.. 300 hrs on one engine and about
50 on each
of the other 2. just DO NOT use the pistons that he sells. They are
junk.
Learned this the hard way when we had one engine partial failure, and a
total
failure in mine (I made the runway with a 20 knot tailwind and about 1'
to
spare). In both cases the rings collapsed and resulted in 0
compression. Darn
thing does not run too well that way..
--------
DO NOT ARCHIVE
Leonard Perry aka SNAKE
Soldotna AK
Avid "C" / Mk IV
582 IVO IFA
Full Lotus 1450
#1 snake oil salesman since 1-22-2009
hander outer of humorless darwin awards
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=253351#253351
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: | Re: Kreem Problem Again |
The normal nitril gloves do give up quickly- I picked up a pair
of butyl rubber gloves at Grainger's, which work well.
Then, when refreshing my memory on Polyfiber (reading the
manual), I noted that they called out using latex gloves,
which actually last long enough to polytak and toss.. and
work.
I don't know why I didn't try them before, but I'm using them
now!
-Jack
ex kitfox I owner
avid MK IV jabiru 22ax01 (flying)
avid catalina (50% finished)
> Time: 05:20:14 AM PST US
> From: "Dave G" <occom@ns.sympatico.ca>
> Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Kreem Problem Again
>
> The regular nitril gloves we all use ;-) do not hold up to MEK. They'll
> make it for a minute or two. Buy Neoprene gloves, they can take it for
> at least an hour. Sensitivity varies, when I first encountered MEK I was
> doing polyfiber and had no real issues, but later on my eyes burned and
> itched for a few days. Now I can't be around the fumes for much more
> than a minute before the irritation starts
>
> I stopped using Polyfiber and switched to Stewarts systems. Short
> learning curve but it truly is wonderful stuff, no environmental or
> health concerns at all.
>
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: | Air intake tube vanes and EGT's |
Fifteen months after I first built vanes into my fiberglass air
intake tube, I finally tried something different, and got success.
When I first installed the vanes into my existing homebuilt
fiberglass 90-degree intake tube, I didn't notice any improvement. I
had been fighting a high #4 cylinder EGT (1405-1425 degrees F) for
quite a while, and it seemed that no amount of rotating the carb
would change that. I had tried swapping the EGT probes but that
didn't prove anything. So today I decided to try rotating the tube so
that the vanes were at a different position relative to the carb.
This finally made the difference. Before, #4 was always the hottest
at 110 to 126 degrees hotter than #3 at 2940- 2960 rpm. Then I
decided to try...again...to rotate the carb bottom towards the hot
(left) side. I had done this in the past, but it never seemed to help
enough. Then a few days ago, I rotated it as much as the throttle
mount bracket would allow before it hit the motor mount. This got the
difference down to 45-63 degrees, with #4 still being the hottest.
But today I rotated the vaned intake tube, and man, what a
difference! Now, #3 is the hottest at 19-55 degrees hotter than #4.
The highest I now see #4 is 1318, and the highest I see #3 is 1356.
These numbers were taken at various throttle settings, around 3400'
MSL, and on 56-60 degrees OAT at altitude.
I don't know why I didn't try the tube rotation as relative to the
carb before. Right after I installed the vanes into the tube, I guess
I just thought that if it didn't change things dramatically the very
first time I attached it, nothing was changed by installing the
vanes. It just goes to show that you shouldn't give up without at
least trying something a little different. Now I will try rotating
the carb back a little bit, and see if I can get the #3 and #4 closer
together. The exhaust gas temp spread is now
between 85 -132 depending on throttle position.
Lynn Matteson
Kitfox IV Speedster, taildragger
Jabiru 2200, #2062, 705.6 hrs
Sensenich 62"x46" Wood prop
Electroair direct-fire ignition system
Status: flying
Message 5
| 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: | Re: 582 stuck-still |
Cecil,
I don't buy for a second that bearings would seize the engine in the manner you
describe. I would tear down the top end first, you will probably find your
problem there.
Mike
--------
"NO FEAR" - If you have no fear you did not go as fast as you could
have !!!
Kolb MK-III Xtra, 912-S
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=253508#253508
Message 6
| 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: | Re: owner performed maintenance |
I guess I am a bit confused here.- Is the yearly inspection for an ELSA c
alled an annual condition inspection?- Is an ELSA Repairman Certificate t
he same as an Experimental Repairman Certificate?- What is specified in t
he log book entry after an inspection in both cases.
-
My take on the maintenance issue, and this has been consistent since I firs
t began my first build in 1993 is that anyone can do maintenance on a homeb
uilt. The only licensed person specified is for the log book entry after a
required-inspection. An example"- I hold a repairman certificate and am
laid up with a broken leg. My neighbor who owns a J3 comes over and using
my check list inspects my airplane. I am satisfied with his inspection and
sign the log book beginning with the standard text, "I certify that this ai
rcraft has been inspected according to...". Some one tell me where I have v
iolated the FARs.
-
Or in another situation I am a non builder owner of-a Kitfox and do an an
nual inspection according to the builder's check list. I then have my neigh
bor who is an A&P make the indorsement in the log book and he writes, "I ce
rtify that this aircraft has been inspected according to...".- Where have
I violated the FARs.
-
Opinions in responses are great, but I respectfully claim the privelage of
ignoring them.- If someone can give an authoritative response, either wit
h specific reference to an FAR - unambiguous - or a personal experience wit
h an FAA representative, you just might be able to get me to at least consi
der other possibiliities.
-
Lowell
--- On Wed, 7/15/09, Bob Brennan <matronics@bob.brennan.name> wrote:
From: Bob Brennan <matronics@bob.brennan.name>
Subject: FW: Kitfox-List: Re: owner performed maintenance
e>
Jim,
Sorry but it is confusing to the list to say "you can do anything except th
e
annual Condition Inspection." There are specific things you can do which
have already been listed in this thread. Specifically anything that will
cause the Annual Condition Inspection to fail are things you should not do,
and technically can not do.
As a certified repairman and inspector for my own airplane I am aware of
what I should and should not do to it, and can and cannot do to it, for
instance rebuild the engine without further training. An A&P inspector has
the responsibility to tell kit builders what they can and cannot do, and
should and should not have done to an airplane they did not build.
Better to stick with the list of 31 things you *can* do than announce to th
e
list that you can do "anything", don't you think?
Bob Brennan - N717GB
ELSA Repairman, inspection rated
1991 UK Model 2 ELSA Kitfox taildragger
Rotax 582 with 3 blade GSC prop
Wrightsville Pa
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jim Feldmann
Sent: 15 July 2009 9:09 pm
Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: owner performed maintenance
There seems to be some confusion here between the rules covering ELSA
aircraft and Experimental, Amateur-Built aircraft.- With regard to the
latter; here is a quote from the EAA website:
I am going to buy a used homebuilt, what work can I perform myself?
FAR Part 43 specifically states that the rules of that part do not apply to
experimental, amateur-built aircraft. Therefore, any work (not just
maintenance) on an experimental aircraft can be performed virtually by
anyone regardless of credentials. (This does not apply to the condition
inspection). Let common sense be your guide as to what maintenance you
conduct yourself.
Guy is right.- If you buy an airplane registered as an "Experimental,
Amateur-Built" you can do anything except the annual Condition Inspection.
--------
Jim Feldmann, 3rd owner
1994 Kitfox IV Speedster / 912
Working on my Sport Pilot Certificate
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=253262#253262
le, List Admin.
Message 7
| 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: | Re: 582 stuck-still |
It could also be something came loose in the mag end or in the gear box. It seems
by your description that something must not have been assembled correctly,
not tightened or left out at the factory.
I had a chain saw that would lock up when trying to start it occasionally. It
would run fine when it started though. I finally took it apart and found there
was no circlip to hold the wrist pin in the piston. The wrist pin would catch
on the transfer port in the cylinder.
Another time I had one of the original Sea Doos with a single cylinder Rotax engine.
One of the screws that holds the magnets in the magneto backed out and
caught the outer mag housing and locked it up.
--------
Tom Jones
Classic IV
503 Rotax, 72 inch Two blade Warp
Ellensburg, WA
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=253520#253520
Message 8
| 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: | Re: owner performed maintenance |
Lowell,
I can answer the ELSA questions with authority, the EAB answers are my
opinion from my experiences and research into becoming an ELSA Repairman.
> Is the yearly inspection for an ELSA called an annual condition
inspection?
Yes
> Is an ELSA Repairman Certificate the same as an Experimental Repairman
Certificate?
Yes, with the exceptions that the Rating states "Repairman Light Sport
Aircraft" and the Limitation: Inspection section specifies a certificated
ELSA aircraft, owned by the certificate holder.
> What is specified in the log book entry after an inspection in both cases
The same wording for both ""I certify that this aircraft has been inspected
on [insert date] in accordance with the scope and detail of appendix D to
part 43, and was found to be in a condition for safe operation." "
<start opinion>
In both of your cases below the licensed Repairman is signing the logbook
legally and is solely responsible for the truth of the statement he/she is
assigning his/her certificate number to. If you trust your neighbor's work
and you sign the logbook it is legal. If you have an A&P friend who trusts
your work and signs your logbook it is legal. The only thing that is not
legal is if the logbook is signed by someone without the proper
certification.
On discussing this very thing with my DAR friend the whole thing boils down
to the certificated person who puts his/her certificate number in the
logbook sincerely believes, by whatever method, that the aircraft "was found
to be in a condition for safe operation". If that same airplane falls apart
the next day in mid-air due to something that should have been picked up by
the simplest inspection then I suspect the Inspector's "ass is grass", and
the FAA will not want to hear "but I trusted my neighbor with the J3 Cub".
The neighbor will not risk liability, and the inspection was legal.
<end opinion>
Authority for ELSA limitations quoted:
www.sportpilot.info/sp/ELSA_Operating_Limitations.doc
Bob Brennan - N717GB
ELSA Repairman, inspection rated
1991 UK Model 2 ELSA Kitfox taildragger
Rotax 582 with 3 blade GSC prop
Wrightsville Pa
_____
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Lowell FITT
Sent: 17 July 2009 2:47 pm
Subject: Re: FW: Kitfox-List: Re: owner performed maintenance
I guess I am a bit confused here. Is the yearly inspection for an ELSA
called an annual condition inspection? Is an ELSA Repairman Certificate the
same as an Experimental Repairman Certificate? What is specified in the log
book entry after an inspection in both cases.
My take on the maintenance issue, and this has been consistent since I first
began my first build in 1993 is that anyone can do maintenance on a
homebuilt. The only licensed person specified is for the log book entry
after a required inspection. An example" I hold a repairman certificate and
am laid up with a broken leg. My neighbor who owns a J3 comes over and using
my check list inspects my airplane. I am satisfied with his inspection and
sign the log book beginning with the standard text, "I certify that this
aircraft has been inspected according to...". Some one tell me where I have
violated the FARs.
Or in another situation I am a non builder owner of a Kitfox and do an
annual inspection according to the builder's check list. I then have my
neighbor who is an A&P make the indorsement in the log book and he writes,
"I certify that this aircraft has been inspected according to...". Where
have I violated the FARs.
Opinions in responses are great, but I respectfully claim the privelage of
ignoring them. If someone can give an authoritative response, either with
specific reference to an FAR - unambiguous - or a personal experience with
an FAA representative, you just might be able to get me to at least consider
other possibiliities.
Lowell
--- On Wed, 7/15/09, Bob Brennan <matronics@bob.brennan.name> wrote:
From: Bob Brennan <matronics@bob.brennan.name>
Subject: FW: Kitfox-List: Re: owner performed maintenance
<http://us.mc824.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=matronics@bob.brennan.name> >
Jim,
Sorry but it is confusing to the list to say "you can do anything except the
annual Condition Inspection." There are specific things you can do which
have already been listed in this thread. Specifically anything that will
cause the Annual Condition Inspection to fail are things you should not do,
and technically can not do.
As a certified repairman and inspector for my own airplane I am aware of
what I should and should not do to it, and can and cannot do to it, for
instance rebuild the engine without further training. An A&P inspector has
the responsibility to tell kit builders what they can and cannot do, and
should and should not have done to an airplane they did not build.
Better to stick with the list of 31 things you *can* do than announce to the
list that you can do "anything", don't you think?
Bob Brennan - N717GB
ELSA Repairman, inspection rated
1991 UK Model 2 ELSA Kitfox taildragger
Rotax 582 with 3 blade GSC prop
Wrightsville Pa
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
<http://us.mc824.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-kitfox-list-server@matro
nics.com>
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
<http://us.mc824.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-kitfox-list-server@matro
nics.com> ] On Behalf Of Jim Feldmann
Sent: 15 July 2009 9:09 pm
<http://us.mc824.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=kitfox-list@matronics.com>
Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: owner performed maintenance
<http://us.mc824.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=feldesign@earthlink.net> >
There seems to be some confusion here between the rules covering ELSA
aircraft and Experimental, Amateur-Built aircraft. With regard to the
latter; here is a quote from the EAA website:
I am going to buy a used homebuilt, what work can I perform myself?
FAR Part 43 specifically states that the rules of that part do not apply to
experimental, amateur-built aircraft. Therefore, any work (not just
maintenance) on an experimental aircraft can be performed virtually by
anyone regardless of credentials. (This does not apply to the condition
inspection). Let common sense be your guide as to what maintenance you
conduct yourself.
Guy is right. If you buy an airplane registered as an "Experimental,
Amateur-Built" you can do anything except the annual Condition Inspection.
--------
Jim Feldmann, 3rd owner
1994 Kitfox IV Speedster / 912
Working on my Sport Pilot Certificate
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=253share, and
<http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=253262#253262> much much
onics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-List" target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/N
- MATRONICS sp; -Matt Dralle, L.com/contribution" ======
Message 9
| 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: | owner performed maintenanceowner performed maintenanceowner |
per
Dick,
I'll do you one better and apologise for making you think you needed to
apologise!
Due to the confusion expressed by some readers here I thought it best to
clarify the SLSA/ELSA issue (or at least attempt to) as well as the use of
the work "license" in place of "certificate", to prevent further confusion.
A lot of it is semantics yes, but I think most of the misunderstandings on
these postings come from poor choice (not you!) of words and
[sic]missspelings.
And since I'm already on your bad list (kidding) I will add my correction to
your last statement "experimental amateur built certificates and SLSA/ESLA
certificates are different. With the experimental cert I can do all of my
maint as previously mentioned". EAB and ELSA aircraft are the same with
respect to the maintenance and Annual/Condition Inspection - the
owner/builder can do it all if he/she has a Repairman's Certificate. The
difference is how to get an RC - with an EAB you only need to be the builder
and "demonstrate proficiency to an FAA representative", usually your DAR
when you are getting your AC. With an ELSA you only need to be the owner and
earn your RC through an FAA approved 16 hour course.
SLSA is entirely different to Experimental category aircraft and is
(nearly?) identical to STC (Standard Type Certified) aircraft in
restrictions as to what you can and cannot do.
Bob Brennan - N717GB
ELSA Repairman, inspection rated
1991 UK Model 2 ELSA Kitfox taildragger
Rotax 582 with 3 blade GSC prop
Wrightsville Pa
_____
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Catz631@aol.com
Sent: 17 July 2009 9:15 am
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: owner performed maintenanceowner performed
maintenanceowner per
Bob,
I apologize for using the word license vs airworthness certificate. This
is similar to renaming the artificial horizon instrument to an attitude gyro
(AI) why? because someone did not like the name. Last night I saw on the
news that they renamed the Sears tower in Chicago (it will still be the
Sears tower in most peoples minds) I have a friend of mine that goes bonkers
when I call a "conditional inspection " an annual. So what he knows what I
am talking about. What we are talking about is splitting hairs. Old terms
are hard to get rid of (especially if you have too much coffee or beer
depending on the time of day)
In any case experimental amateur built certificates and SLSA/ESLA
certificates are different.With the experimental cert I can do all of my
maint as previously mentioned. Part 43 does not apply.
Dick Maddux
Pensacola,Fl
_____
Can love help you live longer? Find
<http://personals.aol.com/articles/2009/02/18/longer-lives-through-relations
hips/?ncid=emlweuslove00000001> out now.
Message 10
| 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: | Re: 582 stuck-still |
If the gearbox got lube in it ?
--------
Rotax Dealer, Ontario Canada
http://www.cfisher.com/
Awesome *New Forum *
http://rotaxaircraft.com/forum/
Realtime Kitfox movies to separate the internet chatter from the truth
http://www.youtube.com/profile_videos?user=kitfoxflyer
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=253530#253530
Message 11
| 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: | Re: Air intake tube vanes and EGT's |
Lynn, are you talking about vanes you installed in the air duct from the
airfilter to the carb, and if so do you have a picture?
Message 12
| 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: | Re: Air intake tube vanes and EGT's |
Sure do, Tex....here it is. I also have pictures of building the
vanes. The gist of it is, I cut the tube down the vertical middle,
then using two separate sheets of fiberglass, I built the vanes
inside the tube, then fiberglassed the tube halves back together.
Lynn Matteson
Kitfox IV Speedster, taildragger
Jabiru 2200, #2062, 706.2 hrs
Sensenich 62"x46" Wood prop
Electroair direct-fire ignition system
Status: flying
On Jul 17, 2009, at 9:00 PM, Tex Mantell wrote:
> <wb2ssj@frontiernet.net>
>
> Lynn, are you talking about vanes you installed in the air duct
> from the airfilter to the carb, and if so do you have a picture?
>
>
Message 13
| 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: | Re: owner performed maintenance |
Thanks Bob,=C2- I think your understanding pretty much parallels mine.=C2
- I think the whole thing revolves around a measure of trust and common s
ense.
=C2-
The guy across the street has a Mooney.=C2- He commutes to the Bay Area i
n it and also is the holder of an ATP certificate that he acquired for conv
enience and economics.=C2- I wouldn't trust him to do an annual on my Kit
fox.=C2- Nor for that matter the FBO on the field nor the Stearman expert
up the valley.=C2-=C2- I just have a problem thinking that their train
ing and experience transfers to my Kitfox.
=C2-
Further, I have friends that do not actually perform a formal inspection.
=C2- With the continual maintenance and "under the hood" work they do on
their airplanes, they feel they have=C2-a pretty good feel for the condit
ion of the airplane and sign off the log book as required.=C2- I suspect
the annual inspection has it's most value with the owner or renter that onl
y knows how to add oil, prime and crank as far as the mechanics of the airp
lane is concerned.=C2- I recall the Citabria I checked out in needing a 2
0 year overdue BFR.=C2- On the pre-flight check list was this step -=C2
-open the oil filler door, check the oil level and add oil if necessary a
nd check for any loose or frayed wires in the engine compartmene.=C2- I h
ad to laugh out loud as the view from the door opening showed the filler ne
ck and a=C2-dark void surrounging it.=C2- But true to the instructions,
I checked.=C2- I doubt the owner of any experimental airplane is that ig
norant of what is under the hood.
=C2-
Lowell
--- On Fri, 7/17/09, Bob Brennan <matronics@bob.brennan.name> wrote:
From: Bob Brennan <matronics@bob.brennan.name>
Subject: RE: FW: Kitfox-List: Re: owner performed maintenance
Lowell,
=C2-
I can answer the ELSA questions with authority, the=C2-EAB answers are my
opinion from my experiences and research into becoming an ELSA Repairman.
=C2-
> Is the yearly inspection for an ELSA called an annual condition inspectio
n?
Yes
=C2-
> Is an ELSA Repairman Certificate the same as an Experimental Repairman Ce
rtificate?
Yes, with the exceptions that the Rating states "Repairman Light Sport Airc
raft" and the Limitation: Inspection section specifies a certificated ELSA
aircraft, owned by the certificate holder.
=C2-
> What is specified in the log book entry after an inspection in both cases
The same wording for both "=9CI certify that this aircraft has been i
nspected on [insert date] in accordance with the scope and detail of append
ix D to part 43, and was found to be in a condition for safe operation.
=9D "
=C2-
<start opinion>
In both of your cases below the licensed Repairman is signing the logbook l
egally and is solely responsible for the truth of the statement he/she is a
ssigning his/her certificate number to. If you trust your neighbor's work a
nd you sign the logbook it is legal. If you have an A&P friend who trusts y
our work and signs your logbook it is legal. The only thing that is not leg
al is if the logbook is signed by someone without the proper certification.
=C2-
On discussing this very thing with my DAR friend the whole thing boils down
to the certificated person who puts his/her certificate number in the logb
ook sincerely believes, by whatever method, that the aircraft "was found to
be in a condition for safe operation". If that same airplane falls apart t
he next day in mid-air due to something that should have been picked up by
the simplest inspection then I suspect the Inspector's "ass is grass", and
the FAA will not want to hear "but I trusted my neighbor with the J3 Cub".
The neighbor will not risk liability, and the inspection was legal.
<end opinion>
=C2-
Authority for ELSA limitations quoted: www.sportpilot.info/sp/ELSA_Operatin
g_Limitations.doc
=C2-
Bob Brennan - N717GB
ELSA Repairman, inspection rated
1991 UK Model 2 ELSA Kitfox taildragger
Rotax 582 with 3 blade GSC prop
Wrightsville Pa
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-serv
er@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Lowell FITT
Sent: 17 July 2009 2:47 pm
Subject: Re: FW: Kitfox-List: Re: owner performed maintenance
I guess I am a bit confused here.=C2- Is the yearly inspection for an ELS
A called an annual condition inspection?=C2- Is an ELSA Repairman Certifi
cate the same as an Experimental Repairman Certificate?=C2- What is speci
fied in the log book entry after an inspection in both cases.
=C2-
My take on the maintenance issue, and this has been consistent since I firs
t began my first build in 1993 is that anyone can do maintenance on a homeb
uilt. The only licensed person specified is for the log book entry after a
required=C2-inspection. An example"=C2- I hold a repairman certificate
and am laid up with a broken leg. My neighbor who owns a J3 comes over and
using my check list inspects my airplane. I am satisfied with his inspectio
n and sign the log book beginning with the standard text, "I certify that t
his aircraft has been inspected according to...". Some one tell me where I
have violated the FARs.
=C2-
Or in another situation I am a non builder owner of=C2-a Kitfox and do an
annual inspection according to the builder's check list. I then have my ne
ighbor who is an A&P make the indorsement in the log book and he writes, "I
certify that this aircraft has been inspected according to...".=C2- Wher
e have I violated the FARs.
=C2-
Opinions in responses are great, but I respectfully claim the privelage of
ignoring them.=C2- If someone can give an authoritative response, either
with specific reference to an FAR - unambiguous - or a personal experience
with an FAA representative, you just might be able to get me to at least co
nsider other possibiliities.
=C2-
Lowell
--- On Wed, 7/15/09, Bob Brennan <matronics@bob.brennan.name> wrote:
From: Bob Brennan <matronics@bob.brennan.name>
Subject: FW: Kitfox-List: Re: owner performed maintenance
e>
Jim,
Sorry but it is confusing to the list to say "you can do anything except th
e
annual Condition Inspection." There are specific things you can do which
have already been listed in this thread. Specifically anything that will
cause the Annual Condition Inspection to fail are things you should not do,
and technically can not do.
As a certified repairman and inspector for my own airplane I am aware of
what I should and should not do to it, and can and cannot do to it, for
instance rebuild the engine without further training. An A&P inspector has
the responsibility to tell kit builders what they can and cannot do, and
should and should not have done to an airplane they did not build.
Better to stick with the list of 31 things you *can* do than announce to th
e
list that you can do "anything", don't you think?
Bob Brennan - N717GB
ELSA Repairman, inspection rated
1991 UK Model 2 ELSA Kitfox taildragger
Rotax 582 with 3 blade GSC prop
Wrightsville Pa
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jim Feldmann
Sent: 15 July 2009 9:09 pm
Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: owner performed maintenance
There seems to be some confusion here between the rules covering ELSA
aircraft and Experimental, Amateur-Built aircraft.=C2- With regard to the
latter; here is a quote from the EAA website:
I am going to buy a used homebuilt, what work can I perform myself?
FAR Part 43 specifically states that the rules of that part do not apply to
experimental, amateur-built aircraft. Therefore, any work (not just
maintenance) on an experimental aircraft can be performed virtually by
anyone regardless of credentials. (This does not apply to the condition
inspection). Let common sense be your guide as to what maintenance you
conduct yourself.
Guy is right.=C2- If you buy an airplane registered as an "Experimental,
Amateur-Built" you can do anything except the annual Condition Inspection.
--------
Jim Feldmann, 3rd owner
1994 Kitfox IV Speedster / 912
Working on my Sport Pilot Certificate
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=253share, and much much onics
.com/Navigator?Kitfox-List" target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/N=
=C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2-=C2-=C2-- MATRONICS sp;
=C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- -Matt Dralle, L.co
m/contribution" ======
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-List">http://www.matronhr
ef="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
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! --
|