Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 10:18 AM - I-phones and Bluetooth (Strasnuts)
2. 10:47 AM - Re: I-phones and Bluetooth (g.combs)
3. 10:51 AM - Re: Re: airworthiness inspection (John Ackerman)
4. 11:34 AM - Re: Re: airworthiness inspection (DLM)
5. 12:02 PM - 100LL- the battle has started (Bobby J. Hughes)
6. 02:24 PM - Re: Re: airworthiness inspection (John Ackerman)
7. 03:04 PM - Re: Re: airworthiness inspection (DLM)
8. 04:21 PM - Re: Re: airworthiness inspection (John Cox)
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: | I-phones and Bluetooth |
Just thought I would let everyone know if your Bluetooth audio panel or anything
else for that matter doesn't sync to your new Iphone it is most likely the
software in the unit is outdated. Apparently Apple doesn't have any protocol
with the software changes and the effects it has on external devices. We have
all experienced this with the charging jacks! My iphone 3GS would not link up
to my PS9000 so I tried it in Scott's plane with the new PS8000BT. It worked
flawless in Scott's. I called PS Engineering and they stated it is because
Apple is the only company that has no protocol for software upgrades. All other
blue tooth phones should work great but if you have a new iphone that doesn't,
you need to return your audio panel back to PS Engineering for a free update.
He said there is a good chance the new Iphone 5's will have the same problem
so be advised.
--------
40936
RV-10 SB N801VR Flying
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=339572#339572
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: I-phones and Bluetooth |
I had the same issue with my ps 9000
And sent it back 2 weeks ago. Works great as of now with the IPhone
Geoff Combs
Sent from my iPhone Geoff
On May 11, 2011, at 1:14 PM, "Strasnuts" <sean@braunandco.com> wrote:
>
> Just thought I would let everyone know if your Bluetooth audio panel or anything
else for that matter doesn't sync to your new Iphone it is most likely the
software in the unit is outdated. Apparently Apple doesn't have any protocol
with the software changes and the effects it has on external devices. We have
all experienced this with the charging jacks! My iphone 3GS would not link
up to my PS9000 so I tried it in Scott's plane with the new PS8000BT. It worked
flawless in Scott's. I called PS Engineering and they stated it is because
Apple is the only company that has no protocol for software upgrades. All other
blue tooth phones should work great but if you have a new iphone that doesn't,
you need to return your audio panel back to PS Engineering for a free update.
He said there is a good chance the new Iphone 5's will have the same problem
so be advised.
>
> --------
> 40936
> RV-10 SB N801VR Flying
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=339572#339572
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
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: airworthiness inspection |
Here's another 2 cents worth.
I wanted to have all the experienced eyes I could get look over my 10 before flight.
A couple of those sets of eyes were friends who were airworthiness inspectors
from the local FSDO. These guys looked at the plane individually, at least
once for more than three hours, and one person looked at it at several stages
of construction. They did this at no charge, and on their own time. Believe
me, it was really appreciated. Even though there was not an awful lot found,
I still got really good suggestions and in-depth discussions.
We discussed whether to have one of the FAA airworthiness inspectors do the inspection,
and decided instead to employ Gary Towner, an uncommonly highly regarded
(by everyone I talked to, and that was a least a dozen folks who should know)
DAR. That was a really good call. Although the main function of the inspection
is to get the paperwork all straight, (what can I say? It's not a perfect
world) Gary did an excellent physical inspection of the airplane, and was in
no hurry to get it over with. By the way - when one of the FSDO folks wanted
his own RV inspected, guess who got the job? Yep, Gary did.
The way the system works is that the overall cost of having DARs do the actual
inspections and the FSDO guys look over their shoulders occasionally is much less
than having the FSDO guys do the actual inspections. It cost me personally
four hundred more bucks this way than if the FAA did the inspection "for free",
but frankly, it was worth it to me. It also cost the rest of you poor taxpayers
a lot less than the direct and overhead costs of employing the additional
inspectors that would be required.
IIRC, one of us posted that he had both a DAR and an airworthiness inspector from
the FAA at his inspection. The function of the FAA guys (as far as airworthiness
inspections goes) is to make sure that the DARs do an inspection that meets
the FAA's standards. This means they witness inspections being done from
time to time.It works the same way with airman certification - the job is almost
always done by a Designated Pilot Examiner, sometimes with an FAA Operations
Inspector looking over his/her shoulder. Not a bad system at all.
John Ackerman
On May 10, 2011, at 8:12 PM, Michael Kraus wrote:
>
> FAA in Detroit (YIP) drove 46 miles to do the airworthiness inspection last Monday
for my RV-10.... But I have been working with them since last Fall. Just
like everything else, takes proper planning.
>
> Look for my first flight soon....
> -Mike Kraus
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On May 10, 2011, at 9:46 PM, "Eric_Kallio" <scout019@msn.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> My airport is 16 miles from the FSDO. They flat out said they couldn't do it.
I even fly with a pilot in the Guard that worked for the FAA full time and even
he couldn't get them out there. We are not their target audience. Paint Delta
on the side of your plane though, and see how fast they show up.
>>
>> Eric
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Read this topic online here:
>>
>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=339507#339507
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
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: | Re: airworthiness inspection |
in the interest of full disclosure, I believe that John has a relative
working at the FSDO. I have not expected service from the FSDO and am not
disappointed.
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Ackerman" <johnag5b@cableone.net>
Sent: Wednesday, May 11, 2011 10:48 AM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Re: airworthiness inspection
>
> Here's another 2 cents worth.
>
> I wanted to have all the experienced eyes I could get look over my 10
> before flight. A couple of those sets of eyes were friends who were
> airworthiness inspectors from the local FSDO. These guys looked at the
> plane individually, at least once for more than three hours, and one
> person looked at it at several stages of construction. They did this at no
> charge, and on their own time. Believe me, it was really appreciated. Even
> though there was not an awful lot found, I still got really good
> suggestions and in-depth discussions.
>
> We discussed whether to have one of the FAA airworthiness inspectors do
> the inspection, and decided instead to employ Gary Towner, an uncommonly
> highly regarded (by everyone I talked to, and that was a least a dozen
> folks who should know) DAR. That was a really good call. Although the main
> function of the inspection is to get the paperwork all straight, (what can
> I say? It's not a perfect world) Gary did an excellent physical inspection
> of the airplane, and was in no hurry to get it over with. By the way -
> when one of the FSDO folks wanted his own RV inspected, guess who got the
> job? Yep, Gary did.
>
> The way the system works is that the overall cost of having DARs do the
> actual inspections and the FSDO guys look over their shoulders
> occasionally is much less than having the FSDO guys do the actual
> inspections. It cost me personally four hundred more bucks this way than
> if the FAA did the inspection "for free", but frankly, it was worth it to
> me. It also cost the rest of you poor taxpayers a lot less than the direct
> and overhead costs of employing the additional inspectors that would be
> required.
>
> IIRC, one of us posted that he had both a DAR and an airworthiness
> inspector from the FAA at his inspection. The function of the FAA guys (as
> far as airworthiness inspections goes) is to make sure that the DARs do an
> inspection that meets the FAA's standards. This means they witness
> inspections being done from time to time.It works the same way with airman
> certification - the job is almost always done by a Designated Pilot
> Examiner, sometimes with an FAA Operations Inspector looking over his/her
> shoulder. Not a bad system at all.
>
> John Ackerman
>
>
> On May 10, 2011, at 8:12 PM, Michael Kraus wrote:
>
>> <n223rv@wolflakeairport.net>
>>
>> FAA in Detroit (YIP) drove 46 miles to do the airworthiness inspection
>> last Monday for my RV-10.... But I have been working with them since
>> last Fall. Just like everything else, takes proper planning.
>>
>> Look for my first flight soon....
>> -Mike Kraus
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> On May 10, 2011, at 9:46 PM, "Eric_Kallio" <scout019@msn.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> My airport is 16 miles from the FSDO. They flat out said they couldn't
>>> do it. I even fly with a pilot in the Guard that worked for the FAA full
>>> time and even he couldn't get them out there. We are not their target
>>> audience. Paint Delta on the side of your plane though, and see how fast
>>> they show up.
>>>
>>> Eric
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Read this topic online here:
>>>
>>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=339507#339507
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
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: | 100LL- the battle has started |
http://www.avweb.com/avwebbiz/news/California_Suit_Targets_100LL_204631-
1.html
Bobby Hughes
N416AS
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: airworthiness inspection |
Dave I don't think "full disclosure" is an issue here, but lest there be any confusion,
you are 100% correct. I tried to make it obvious that two of the sets
of eyes were those of folks who work at the FSDO although those two were acting
strictly as my personal friends and on their own time.
The way that I came to know those particular two friends (my relative) is as totally
irrelevant as is the way that I came to know you (this list). What is relevant
is that after trying very hard to get all the competent review I could,
I still found considerable merit in hiring a really good DAR, specifically Gary
Towner, to do the inspection. BTW, thanks for being one of the helpful sets
of eyes.
DLM wrote:
> I have not expected service from the FSDO and am not disappointed.
For my part, I have not asked for nor have I received any services from the FSDO,
and hope I never have to. :-) Out.
John Ackerman
On May 11, 2011, at 11:30 AM, DLM wrote:
>
> in the interest of full disclosure, I believe that John has a relative working
at the FSDO. I have not expected service from the FSDO and am not disappointed.
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "John Ackerman" <johnag5b@cableone.net>
> To: <rv10-list@matronics.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, May 11, 2011 10:48 AM
> Subject: Re: RV10-List: Re: airworthiness inspection
>
>
>>
>> Here's another 2 cents worth.
>>
>> I wanted to have all the experienced eyes I could get look over my 10 before
flight. A couple of those sets of eyes were friends who were airworthiness inspectors
from the local FSDO. These guys looked at the plane individually, at
least once for more than three hours, and one person looked at it at several stages
of construction. They did this at no charge, and on their own time. Believe
me, it was really appreciated. Even though there was not an awful lot found,
I still got really good suggestions and in-depth discussions.
>>
>> We discussed whether to have one of the FAA airworthiness inspectors do the
inspection, and decided instead to employ Gary Towner, an uncommonly highly regarded
(by everyone I talked to, and that was a least a dozen folks who should
know) DAR. That was a really good call. Although the main function of the inspection
is to get the paperwork all straight, (what can I say? It's not a perfect
world) Gary did an excellent physical inspection of the airplane, and was
in no hurry to get it over with. By the way - when one of the FSDO folks wanted
his own RV inspected, guess who got the job? Yep, Gary did.
>>
>> The way the system works is that the overall cost of having DARs do the actual
inspections and the FSDO guys look over their shoulders occasionally is much
less than having the FSDO guys do the actual inspections. It cost me personally
four hundred more bucks this way than if the FAA did the inspection "for free",
but frankly, it was worth it to me. It also cost the rest of you poor taxpayers
a lot less than the direct and overhead costs of employing the additional
inspectors that would be required.
>>
>> IIRC, one of us posted that he had both a DAR and an airworthiness inspector
from the FAA at his inspection. The function of the FAA guys (as far as airworthiness
inspections goes) is to make sure that the DARs do an inspection that
meets the FAA's standards. This means they witness inspections being done from
time to time.It works the same way with airman certification - the job is almost
always done by a Designated Pilot Examiner, sometimes with an FAA Operations
Inspector looking over his/her shoulder. Not a bad system at all.
>>
>> John Ackerman
>>
>>
>>
>> On May 10, 2011, at 8:12 PM, Michael Kraus wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> FAA in Detroit (YIP) drove 46 miles to do the airworthiness inspection last
Monday for my RV-10.... But I have been working with them since last Fall.
Just like everything else, takes proper planning.
>>>
>>> Look for my first flight soon....
>>> -Mike Kraus
>>>
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>
>>> On May 10, 2011, at 9:46 PM, "Eric_Kallio" <scout019@msn.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> My airport is 16 miles from the FSDO. They flat out said they couldn't do
it. I even fly with a pilot in the Guard that worked for the FAA full time and
even he couldn't get them out there. We are not their target audience. Paint
Delta on the side of your plane though, and see how fast they show up.
>>>>
>>>> Eric
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Read this topic online here:
>>>>
>>>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=339507#339507
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
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: airworthiness inspection |
I have no problem using the DAR system; the last time I got a free service
from the FAA was when they provided CFI/II rides in 1970s. Many reviews make
the first flight unremarkable.
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Ackerman" <johnag5b@cableone.net>
Sent: Wednesday, May 11, 2011 2:19 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Re: airworthiness inspection
>
> Dave I don't think "full disclosure" is an issue here, but lest there be
> any confusion, you are 100% correct. I tried to make it obvious that two
> of the sets of eyes were those of folks who work at the FSDO although
> those two were acting strictly as my personal friends and on their own
> time.
> The way that I came to know those particular two friends (my relative) is
> as totally irrelevant as is the way that I came to know you (this list).
> What is relevant is that after trying very hard to get all the competent
> review I could, I still found considerable merit in hiring a really good
> DAR, specifically Gary Towner, to do the inspection. BTW, thanks for being
> one of the helpful sets of eyes.
>
> DLM wrote:
>> I have not expected service from the FSDO and am not disappointed.
>
> For my part, I have not asked for nor have I received any services from
> the FSDO, and hope I never have to. :-) Out.
>
> John Ackerman
>
>
> On May 11, 2011, at 11:30 AM, DLM wrote:
>
>>
>> in the interest of full disclosure, I believe that John has a relative
>> working at the FSDO. I have not expected service from the FSDO and am not
>> disappointed.
>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "John Ackerman"
>> <johnag5b@cableone.net>
>> To: <rv10-list@matronics.com>
>> Sent: Wednesday, May 11, 2011 10:48 AM
>> Subject: Re: RV10-List: Re: airworthiness inspection
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Here's another 2 cents worth.
>>>
>>> I wanted to have all the experienced eyes I could get look over my 10
>>> before flight. A couple of those sets of eyes were friends who were
>>> airworthiness inspectors from the local FSDO. These guys looked at the
>>> plane individually, at least once for more than three hours, and one
>>> person looked at it at several stages of construction. They did this at
>>> no charge, and on their own time. Believe me, it was really appreciated.
>>> Even though there was not an awful lot found, I still got really good
>>> suggestions and in-depth discussions.
>>>
>>> We discussed whether to have one of the FAA airworthiness inspectors do
>>> the inspection, and decided instead to employ Gary Towner, an uncommonly
>>> highly regarded (by everyone I talked to, and that was a least a dozen
>>> folks who should know) DAR. That was a really good call. Although the
>>> main function of the inspection is to get the paperwork all straight,
>>> (what can I say? It's not a perfect world) Gary did an excellent
>>> physical inspection of the airplane, and was in no hurry to get it over
>>> with. By the way - when one of the FSDO folks wanted his own RV
>>> inspected, guess who got the job? Yep, Gary did.
>>>
>>> The way the system works is that the overall cost of having DARs do the
>>> actual inspections and the FSDO guys look over their shoulders
>>> occasionally is much less than having the FSDO guys do the actual
>>> inspections. It cost me personally four hundred more bucks this way than
>>> if the FAA did the inspection "for free", but frankly, it was worth it
>>> to me. It also cost the rest of you poor taxpayers a lot less than the
>>> direct and overhead costs of employing the additional inspectors that
>>> would be required.
>>>
>>> IIRC, one of us posted that he had both a DAR and an airworthiness
>>> inspector from the FAA at his inspection. The function of the FAA guys
>>> (as far as airworthiness inspections goes) is to make sure that the DARs
>>> do an inspection that meets the FAA's standards. This means they witness
>>> inspections being done from time to time.It works the same way with
>>> airman certification - the job is almost always done by a Designated
>>> Pilot Examiner, sometimes with an FAA Operations Inspector looking over
>>> his/her shoulder. Not a bad system at all.
>>>
>>> John Ackerman
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On May 10, 2011, at 8:12 PM, Michael Kraus wrote:
>>>
>>>> <n223rv@wolflakeairport.net>
>>>>
>>>> FAA in Detroit (YIP) drove 46 miles to do the airworthiness inspection
>>>> last Monday for my RV-10.... But I have been working with them since
>>>> last Fall. Just like everything else, takes proper planning.
>>>>
>>>> Look for my first flight soon....
>>>> -Mike Kraus
>>>>
>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>
>>>> On May 10, 2011, at 9:46 PM, "Eric_Kallio" <scout019@msn.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> My airport is 16 miles from the FSDO. They flat out said they couldn't
>>>>> do it. I even fly with a pilot in the Guard that worked for the FAA
>>>>> full time and even he couldn't get them out there. We are not their
>>>>> target audience. Paint Delta on the side of your plane though, and see
>>>>> how fast they show up.
>>>>>
>>>>> Eric
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Read this topic online here:
>>>>>
>>>>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=339507#339507
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
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: airworthiness inspection |
John you should be commended in your effort to find a conscientious and
accurate DAR inspection. I could site too many who for a fee will
"flash review" the paperwork and sign "Good to Go". A great DAR leaves
you feeling good about the process and a meaningful road to travel on
the Phase 1 (& beyond). A great DAR knows the aircraft he is signing
(in this case the RV-10), let's you now some of the Gotcha's and imparts
wisdom he/she acquired on their path to the authorization.
I have always been impressed when a builder asks his peers to do a once
over before the DAR arrival. As a former DPE, I know all too well the
role of the FAA bringing a second set of eyes in reviewing the work of a
Designee. May all your flights be memorable, your learning continue and
each landing uneventful for you insurance policy.
Many applicants have a less than accurate idea of what is to be
accomplished during a DAR Airworthiness authorization. Some think the
DAR is going to find every last build issue which might lead to a future
incident/accident. Not so, I was always on my best behavior during a
FSDO review. I could name for you patterns even with the RV-10 which can
be missed. The pressure was on the DPE to issue the license unless the
applicant clearly missed the intend of the review. A great DAR leaves
you with what your next Conditional Inspection should be looking for.
This list posts many of those issues which deserve attention before they
become a statistic. Most builders just built it the way it was designed
and go no further. You have done it one better.
John Cox, #40600
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of John Ackerman
Sent: Wednesday, May 11, 2011 2:20 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Re: airworthiness inspection
Dave I don't think "full disclosure" is an issue here, but lest there
be any confusion, you are 100% correct. I tried to make it obvious that
two of the sets of eyes were those of folks who work at the FSDO
although those two were acting strictly as my personal friends and on
their own time.
The way that I came to know those particular two friends (my relative)
is as totally irrelevant as is the way that I came to know you (this
list). What is relevant is that after trying very hard to get all the
competent review I could, I still found considerable merit in hiring a
really good DAR, specifically Gary Towner, to do the inspection. BTW,
thanks for being one of the helpful sets of eyes.
DLM wrote:
> I have not expected service from the FSDO and am not disappointed.
For my part, I have not asked for nor have I received any services from
the FSDO, and hope I never have to. :-) Out.
John Ackerman
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! --
|