Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 04:23 AM - Re: Re: Yak-List Digest: Re: OL's and SAC's (A. Dennis Savarese)
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: Yak-List Digest: Re: OL's and SAC's |
Barry,
No problem. I have them (senior moments) far more often than I would
like to.
If AFS 800 would have thought before they issued the letter eliminating
the proficiency area for NEW OL's, they could have easily included a
paragraph in the letter saying something like, "This letter, when
carried in the aircraft, removes the proficiency area stated in the
aircraft's Operating Limitations." But no, they had to create more
paperwork for the local FSDO's for aircraft with existing OL's. The
only way the proficiency area is removed from existing OL's is to have
them reissued by the FSDO. To my way of thinking, that's pretty
shortsighted.
Dennis
----- Original Message -----
From: Barry Hancock
To: yak-list@matronics.com
Sent: Monday, September 08, 2008 8:19 PM
Subject: Yak-List: Re: Yak-List Digest: Re: OL's and SAC's
Dennis,
Senior moment....I stand corrected. What I was referring to was the
elimination of the requirement to notify the geographically responsible
FSDO for maintenance flights outside the proficiency area....that was
paragraph 46 in the old 8130-2. In 8130-2f the paragraphs are all
changed.
Thanks for bringing this up and correcting it Dennis. In my slip up I
was confusing the movement that created AFS-800 and *intent* of EAAWB,
CJAA, and others to get the re-issuance of OL's done away with as
opposed to what has actually been made official.....measure twice, hit
the send button once...my bad.
That being said, there is nothing in any of the new OL's that we've
had reissued for customers to remove the range restriction (all through
our local FSDO) that states a requirement to have them reissued when the
aircraft is relocated. But as you said, it's up to the discretion of
you local FSDO.
Cheers,
Barry
On Sep 7, 2008, at 11:59 PM, Yak-List Digest Server wrote:
Barry,
With all due respect, I don't believe the Memorandum eliminates the
requirement for reissuance of operating limitations when the
aircraft is
relocated. It only eliminates the requirement for the appropriate
paragraph 161 b, (31), (32), (33) or (34), each of which referred to
proficiency area limitations.
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! --
|