Matronics Email Lists :: View topic - Do AD's really apply?

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

Do AD's really apply?
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3 Next

Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> RV-List

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author Message

rickpegser(at)yahoo.com
Guest

Posted: Wed Mar 26, 2008 3:41 pm Post subject: Do AD's really apply?

hi all:

     Reference extensive mod/repairs that might require a fly off, look at your operating limitations there should be something about a five hour fly off requirement to determine the latest aircraft performance numbers. this would apply to any and all mods that fall under the major alteration of part 43 appendix ?b i think. that will effect aircraft handling or flight characteristics. just as a flight test report is required on a certified aircraft.

   

  rick



  [quote][b]

gyoung

Joined: 09 Jan 2006
Posts: 211
Location: Republic of Texas

Posted: Wed Mar 26, 2008 4:28 pm Post subject: Do AD's really apply?

Your choice - you don't  have to create a log even for certified aircraft. But if you need (or want)   to review AD compliance like certified aircraft must on every annual or  for a sale or for those fretting that they can't just toss the notice without  "doing" something then this is a simple thing to do. For a certified plane your  IA is going to pull a list of all applicable AD's for your airframe, engine,  prop and accessories. It can be huge with tons of stuff that doesn't really  apply to your specific airplane. You can pay him to evaluate each to see if  it really requires action and then, if it does, dig through your logs and  find the compliance entry - or you can create a log the first time and save him  some time and yourself some money on subsequent reviews. Certainly less impact  for experimentals but it's optional for either.

  

 Regards,

Greg Young

  



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

Sent: Wednesday, March 26, 2008 5:12    PM

To: rv-list(at)matronics.com

Subject: Re: RE: Do    AD's really apply?

   

      In a message dated 3/26/2008 11:47:51 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,    gyoung(at)cs-sol.com writes:

    	  Quote: 	
		  To make it easy to review      ADs from year to year you can

keep an AD log and just show "N/A" and a      brief reason why not such as

"component not installed". Not required but      a real convenience.

	


   

   If you "don't" have something in the first place why address it at all    rather than writing it down before the fact. 'Kinda sounds like walking into a    store, not seeing what you like then getting a receipt on the way out for    $0.00 to prove to anyone who asks that you didn't buy anything.

    

   Jim



[b]

Kellym

Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 1706
Location: Sun Lakes AZ

Posted: Wed Mar 26, 2008 4:39 pm Post subject: Do AD's really apply?

You can take a clue from what I will do on my certified Mooney with the 

same engine. I will note in my AD compliance records N/A, fuel servo 

overhauled outside applicable dates. In your case I'd say N/A, Precision 

FI servo not installed.

KM

A&P/IA

EAA Tech Counselor



Bob wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		  

 I received an AD in the mail last night for my IO-360 in my RV.  This 

 is in spite of the fact that the aircraft registration states my 

 engine is unknown.  How does the FAA know??!!



 The AD requires me to inspect and or replace parts as needed on a 

 Bendix fuel servo.  Since I have an Airflow Performance servo, I 

 figure this AD does not apply.  But on the other hand, technically 

 there is no such thing as an IO-360 with an Airflow Performance servo, 

 that would be an uncertified engine and we all know that the Lycoming 

 IO-360 is a certified engine. The data plate on my engine says it is a 

 Lycoming IO-360, therefore I must comply with the AD even though it is 

 not possible.



 Now maybe some A&P IA with a law degree can explain what type of 

 Logbook entry I should make.  I would never want some A&P IA to ever 

 think I was unsafe just because I fly an experimental and cut corners 

 on an incorrect Logbook entry!



 Of course all of these issues would go away if the FAA just made all 

 experimental aircraft meet all certified aircraft standards!

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

mrobert569(at)hotmail.com
Guest

Posted: Wed Mar 26, 2008 5:51 pm Post subject: Do AD's really apply?

I will reiterate........The FAA will not hold you liable for not complying with an AD.  Whether it is smart or not to not comply is another matter.

 For a logbook entry here the log entry would go something like this:

 3/26/2008  206.7TT  AD2008-1-2(sample) found to be exempt due to Bendix Fuel seervo not being installed.  Airflow Performance fuel servo is installed.  Sign it, Print your name below that and add the word "Owner" or put the word "Repairman" and then your repairman number.

 Thats it.

 Mike Robertson

 Das Fed

 > Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2008 10:44:32 -0600

 	  Quote: 	
		   To: rv-list(at)matronics.com

 From: panamared5(at)brier.net

 Subject: Re: RE: Do AD's really apply?

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

 At 08:52 AM 3/25/08, you wrote:

 >I was one

 >of those that thought AD's don't apply to experimentals. Wow. I'm glad I

 >learned the truth of the matter.

 I received an AD in the mail last night for my IO-360 in my RV. This 

 is in spite of the fact that the aircraft registration states my 

 engine is unknown. How does the FAA know??!!

 The AD requires me to inspect and or replace parts as needed on a 

 Bendix fuel servo. Since I have an Airflow Performance servo, I 

 figure this AD does not apply. But on the other hand, technically 

 there is no such thing as an IO-360 with an Airflow Performance 

 servo, that would be an uncertified engine and we all know that the 

 Lycoming IO-360 is a certified engine. The data plate on my engine 

 says it is a Lycoming IO-360, therefore I must comply with the AD 

 even though it is not possible.

 Now maybe some A&P IA with a law degree can explain what type of 

 Logbook entry I should make. I would never want some A&P IA to ever 

 think I was unsafe just because I fly an experimental and cut corners 

 on an incorrect Logbook entry!

 Of course all of these issues would go away if the FAA just made all 

 experimental aircraft meet all certified aircraft standards!

 Bob

 RV6 "Wicked Wi=======

Test your Star IQ Play now!  [quote][b]

T.gummo(at)verizon.net
Guest

Posted: Wed Mar 26, 2008 7:26 pm Post subject: Do AD's really apply?

Looks like Precision Airmotive LLC RSA-5, RSA-10  are included in the new AD#2008-06-51, I just received today.

  

 Tom Gummo

Apple Valley, CA

Harmon  Rocket-II

  

 do not archive

  

 http://mysite.verizon.net/t.gummo/index.html



 [quote]   ---

gyoung

Joined: 09 Jan 2006
Posts: 211
Location: Republic of Texas

Posted: Wed Mar 26, 2008 7:37 pm Post subject: Do AD's really apply?

There's gotta be something going on behind the scenes (political maybe?).

The printed copy I got didn't have an N-number like they normally do and I

saw a screen crawler on Fox News referencing it. Something like "safety

alert affects thousands of general aviation piston aircraft." I've never

seen a GA AD make the news like that. If something is up politically you

know it can't be good for us.



Regards,

Greg Young

 



[quote] --

rocketbob(at)gmail.com
Guest

Posted: Thu Mar 27, 2008 6:26 am Post subject: Do AD's really apply?

On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 9:47 PM, Mike Robertson <mrobert569(at)hotmail.com (mrobert569(at)hotmail.com)> wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		       I will reiterate........The FAA will not hold you liable for not complying with an AD.  Whether it is smart or not to not comply is another matter.



	




Mike, don't take this the wrong way but unless its in writing on FAA letterhead from my district FSDO where I operate from and it states exactly what you say that its OK to not comply with AD's in experimentals, I can't say I would ever believe your statement.  Its because the FAR 39, as it is written today, is very clear, and there is nothing in the FAR's that exempts experimentals.  Your district may take the correct position of not enforcing AD's on garage builts and I wholeheartedly applaud that but knowing that FSDO's are nothing but a loose confederation of fiefdoms, what gets interpreted one way in one district gets interpreted differently in another.  Heck I know of FSDO offices that don't want anything to do with small airplanes.

 

Regards,

Bob Japundza

RV-6 flying F1 under const.



  [quote][b]

mrobert569(at)hotmail.com
Guest

Posted: Thu Mar 27, 2008 9:15 am Post subject: Do AD's really apply?

Bob,

  

 Actually this stand that it is not enforcable, as of today, is in writing.  It is from a report to the Aircraft Certification Management Team date April 28-30, 1998.  This report has not be revised or redone since and is still valid.  That said, it doesn't mean it couldn't change tomorrow.  The actual statement is to be found on page two of the report under the summary of conclusions, paragraph 1.

  

 The reason I bring this up is exactly what you are talking about, which is local choice of trying to enforce an AD.  The Eastern region tried to make AD appicable in 2003.  When this Memo reached Washington AD, they Eastern Region was forced to retract their Memo.  This is also supported by an article that can be found in the FAA news magazine May/June 1999 issue.  

  

 A couple of years ago, right after FAR 39 changed the wording, I checked with our HQ in DC to check and see if the wording change now included Experimentals.  The answer was that yes, they apply, but are still not enforcable and that the Report from April 1998 was still the definitive/ruling document.  

  

 Again, I am not trying to get into whether or not complying with an AD is the intelligent thing to do, rather I am just addressing the legal issue.

  

 Mike Robertson

 Das Fed





  	  Quote: 	
		    Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2008 10:22:25 -0400

From: rocketbob(at)gmail.com

To: rv-list(at)matronics.com

Subject: Re: RE: Do AD's really apply?

 On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 9:47 PM, Mike Robertson <mrobert569(at)hotmail.com (mrobert569(at)hotmail.com)> wrote:

  	  Quote: 	
		   I will reiterate........The FAA will not hold you liable for not complying with an AD.  Whether it is smart or not to not comply is another matter.



	




Mike, don't take this the wrong way but unless its in writing on FAA letterhead from my district FSDO where I operate from and it states exactly what you say that its OK to not comply with AD's in experimentals, I can't say I would ever believe your statement.  Its because the FAR 39, as it is written today, is very clear, and there is nothing in the FAR's that exempts experimentals.  Your district may take the correct position of not enforcing AD's on garage builts and I wholeheartedly applaud that but knowing that FSDO's are nothing but a loose confederation of fiefdoms, what gets interpreted one way in one district gets interpreted differently in another.  Heck I know of FSDO offices that don't want anything to do with small airplanes.



Regards,

Bob Japundza

RV-6 flying F1 under const.



 	  Quote: 	
		  



t=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV-List

p://forums.matronics.com

blank>http://www.matronics.com/contribution



	
	
Test your Star IQ Play now!  [quote][b]

JFLEISC(at)aol.com
Guest

Posted: Thu Mar 27, 2008 2:00 pm Post subject: Do AD's really apply?

In a message dated 3/26/2008 7:42:40 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,  khorton01(at)rogers.com writes:

  	  Quote: 	
		     Yes, an airworthiness directive applies to each product identified in    the airworthiness directive, even if an individual product has been changed by    modifying, altering, or repairing it in the area addressed by the    airworthiness directive.

	


 

 The Bendix servo hasn't been 'changed, modified, altered, or repaired', its  not now and never was there. Does this mean that an AD applies to "Joe's"  aircraft even if the part in question was installed on "John's" aircraft?

  

 Jim



Create a Home Theater Like the Pros. Watch the video on AOL Home.

  [quote][b]

JFLEISC(at)aol.com
Guest

Posted: Thu Mar 27, 2008 2:13 pm Post subject: Do AD's really apply?

In a message dated 3/27/2008 1:17:42 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,  mrobert569(at)hotmail.com writes:

  	  Quote: 	
		  A couple of years ago, right after FAR 39 changed the    wording, I checked with our HQ in DC to check and see if the wording    change now included Experimentals.  The answer was that yes, they    apply, but are still not enforcable and that the Report from April 1998 was    still the definitive/ruling document.  

 

Again, I am not    trying to get into whether or not complying with an AD is the intelligent    thing to do, rather I am just addressing the legal issue.

 

Mike    Robertson

Das Fed

	


 

 That, I will agree with.

  

 Jim



Create a Home Theater Like the Pros. Watch the video on AOL Home.

  [quote][b]

Kellym

Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 1706
Location: Sun Lakes AZ

Posted: Thu Mar 27, 2008 2:13 pm Post subject: Do AD's really apply?

It only applies if the aircraft in question has the appliance in 

question installed, and has been serviced during the time interval 

identified in the AD. If the appliance is normally included in that 

model engine, it might be reasonable to note in the AD records that said 

aircraft is not equipped with a Bendix/Precision servo. Otherwise, 

ignore it as not-applicable to your aircraft.

Many AD's are issued citing a number of brands of aircraft that MIGHT 

have had appliance in question, and in those cases it saves time to have 

a note that said appliance is absent, so that the next A&P looking at 

the aircraft doesn't have to research it again.

But there is no need to note any AD applying to say a Continental engine 

if you have a Lycoming, or vice versa.



JFLEISC(at)aol.com wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		   In a message dated 3/26/2008 7:42:40 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, 

 khorton01(at)rogers.com writes:



     Yes, an airworthiness directive applies to each product identified

     in the airworthiness directive, even if an individual product has

     been changed by modifying, altering, or repairing it in the area

     addressed by the airworthiness directive.



 The Bendix servo hasn't been 'changed, modified, altered, or 

 repaired', its not now and never was there. Does this mean that an AD 

 applies to "Joe's" aircraft even if the part in question was installed 

 on "John's" aircraft?

  

 Jim



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

 Create a Home Theater Like the Pros. Watch the video on AOL Home 

 <http://home.aol.com/diy/home-improvement-eric-stromer?video=15&ncid=aolhom00030000000001>.

 *

 *

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

pitts_pilot(at)bellsouth.
Guest

Posted: Thu Mar 27, 2008 2:24 pm Post subject: Do AD's really apply?

JFLEISC(at)aol.com (JFLEISC(at)aol.com) wrote:

  	  Quote: 	
		                 In a message dated 3/26/2008 7:42:40 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, khorton01(at)rogers.com (khorton01(at)rogers.com) writes:

    	  Quote: 	
		       Yes, an airworthiness directive applies to each product identified in the airworthiness directive, even if an individual product has been changed by modifying, altering, or repairing it in the area addressed by the airworthiness directive.

     	
   

   The Bendix servo hasn't been 'changed, modified, altered, or repaired', its not now and never was there. Does this mean that an AD applies to "Joe's" aircraft even if the part in question was installed on "John's" aircraft?

   	
 The answer is no.  However, that's starting to border on the stupid question area.  This is starting to get scary here.  Folks don't want to log work they did on an AD, folks don't want to have to comply with an AD, and there's folks that, aparently, can't even read an AD.  What's going on here????

 Linn

 do not archive.

 [quote]    

   Jim

   

   

   

      Create a Home Theater Like the Pros. Watch the video on AOL Home.

    	  Quote: 	
		  

	
 [b]

n8zg(at)mchsi.com
Guest

Posted: Thu Mar 27, 2008 2:47 pm Post subject: Do AD's really apply?

You READ those things?

 It's all I can do to stay awake thru the header  info...

  

 neal



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

Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2008 6:22 PM

To:  rv-list(at)matronics.com

Subject: Re: RE: Do AD's really  apply?

 

JFLEISC(at)aol.com (JFLEISC(at)aol.com) wrote:

  	  Quote: 	
		           In a message dated 3/26/2008 7:42:40 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, khorton01(at)rogers.com (khorton01(at)rogers.com) writes:

    	  Quote: 	
		       Yes, an airworthiness directive applies to each      product identified in the airworthiness directive, even if an individual      product has been changed by modifying, altering, or repairing it in the area      addressed by the airworthiness    directive.

	


   The Bendix servo hasn't been 'changed, modified, altered, or repaired',    its not now and never was there. Does this mean that an AD applies    to "Joe's" aircraft even if the part in question was installed on    "John's" aircraft?

	
The answer is no.  However,  that's starting to border on the stupid question area.  This is starting to  get scary here.  Folks don't want to log work they did on an AD, folks  don't want to have to comply with an AD, and there's folks that, aparently,  can't even read an AD.  What's going on here????

Linn

do not  archive.

 [quote]    

[b]

JFLEISC(at)aol.com
Guest

Posted: Thu Mar 27, 2008 3:45 pm Post subject: Do AD's really apply?

In a message dated 3/27/2008 6:15:56 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,  kellym(at)aviating.com writes:

  	  Quote: 	
		  It only    applies if the aircraft in question has the appliance in 

question    installed, and has been serviced during the time interval 

identified in    the AD. If the appliance is normally included in that 

model engine, it    might be reasonable to note in the AD records that said 

aircraft is not    equipped with a Bendix/Precision servo. Otherwise, 

ignore it as    not-applicable to your aircraft.

	


 

 What is 'normal' on an experimental aircraft? Sounds rather subjective to  me. 

  

 Jim



Create a Home Theater Like the Pros. Watch the video on AOL Home.

  [quote][b]

Kellym

Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 1706
Location: Sun Lakes AZ

Posted: Thu Mar 27, 2008 4:03 pm Post subject: Do AD's really apply?

You really, really, only have to read as far as the applicability 

paragraph to decide whether to read further. And many times you only 

have to read the title. AD Airbus xyz framus....................you are 

done, unless you called your contraption an Airbus.



Neal George wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		   You READ those things?

 It's all I can do to stay awake thru the header info...

  

 neal



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

 *From:* owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com 

 [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com] *On Behalf Of *linn Walters

 *Sent:* Thursday, March 27, 2008 6:22 PM

 *To:* rv-list(at)matronics.com

 *Subject:* Re: RE: Do AD's really apply?

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

Kellym

Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 1706
Location: Sun Lakes AZ

Posted: Thu Mar 27, 2008 4:11 pm Post subject: Do AD's really apply?

Sheesh,

 Use just a hair of common sense. If you have a Lyc IO360A1A, then you might want to note that your experimental doesn't have the referenced fuel servo, because every one with a Lycoming dataplate originally came with said servo.  That is what I meant by normal.......in its certified version, not in your special, experimental that you may have persuaded the DAR had a certified engine so you could only do a 25 hour flyoff instead of 40, even though he didn't notice you had changed the servo and the mags.   

 JFLEISC(at)aol.com (JFLEISC(at)aol.com) wrote: [quote]               In a message dated 3/27/2008 6:15:56 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, kellym(at)aviating.com (kellym(at)aviating.com) writes:

    	  Quote: 	
		  It only applies if the aircraft in question has the appliance in 

 question installed, and has been serviced during the time interval 

 identified in the AD. If the appliance is normally included in that 

 model engine, it might be reasonable to note in the AD records that said 

 aircraft is not equipped with a Bendix/Precision servo. Otherwise, 

 ignore it as not-applicable to your aircraft.

     	
   

   What is 'normal' on an experimental aircraft? Sounds rather subjective to me. 

    

   Jim

   

   

   

      Create a Home Theater Like the Pros. Watch the video on AOL Home.

    	  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/contribution



	
 [b]

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

gmcjetpilot

Joined: 04 Nov 2006
Posts: 170

Posted: Fri Mar 28, 2008 12:56 pm Post subject: Do AD's really apply?

Just a follow up, on AD's on experimental aircraft, No, No, No, No.

EXPERIMENTAL means something.

  

We are NOT Part 23 aircraft, with type certificates or specifications.

If there is a controversy take the ID off the part and put your own ID on it. 

  If an individual DAR or FAA wants to impose their OPINION, Will or judgment 

fine but it is not based or supported on LEGAL FAR's pertaining to Amateur Built 

Aircraft. 

  

I have a Hartzell built from used parts. The blades where out of thickness tolerance 

at one station by 2 thousands, they were "scraped" for certified aircraft use. Perfectly 

fine on an experimental. (PS I called hartzell and told them the dimension and they 

said it was fine; they said they have to put a limit on it some where. There was plenty 

of margin left at current thickness. However a big nick and blending may be too 

much?)

  

GA planes have TYPE  CERTIFICATES and must comply or have compliance with 

the type specifications for everything. Experimentals HAVE no type specification of 

parts or installations, thus they are call experimental. Again consult EAA web site 

and or their legal dept.

  

LOOK comply with all AD's that can't hurt but FIGHT the FAA and the Gov 

adding willy nilly requirements that are not in the FAR's. Lets not bend over 

and give in so easy. Support the EAA they are the only ones watching for 

us RV'ers and fellow homebuilt builders and owners. The AOPA will not do it.

   

  Bottom TYPE Cert Spec parts ARE NO LONGER when mounted on an 

experimental plane. They become de facto experimental parts since there 

is no TYPE CERT installation for installing that part in an experimental 

installation. 

   

  However some argue if the engine is type cert and prop type cert 

it MUST comply with AD's?  No as I said take the data label off the 

engine and put your own on it, "SKY SCOOTER 2000 EXP ENGINE".

Some inspectors demand you remove the data tag off the engine, even 

if it meets all AD's. Inconsistent? YEP. Don't bend over.



        Be a better friend, newshound, and   [quote][b]

rocketbob(at)gmail.com
Guest

Posted: Fri Mar 28, 2008 1:37 pm Post subject: Do AD's really apply?

On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 4:52 PM,  <gmcjetpilot(at)yahoo.com (gmcjetpilot(at)yahoo.com)> wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		   Just a follow up, on AD's on experimental aircraft, No, No, No, No.

EXPERIMENTAL means something.

  

We are NOT Part 23 aircraft, with type certificates or specifications.

If there is a controversy take the ID off the part and put your own ID on it. 

   If an individual DAR or FAA wants to impose their OPINION, Will or judgment 

fine but it is not based or supported on LEGAL FAR's pertaining to Amateur Built 

Aircraft.

	


Ok. 

 



Cite the FAR that says AD's only apply to type certificated aircraft.  No references to EAA's site, no personal opinion, just show us where it says experimentals are exempt from AD's.  Lets see how well your argument hypothetically would hold up in court.

 

Regards,

Bob Japundza

RV-6 flying F1 under const.



  [quote][b]

JFLEISC(at)aol.com
Guest

Posted: Fri Mar 28, 2008 2:46 pm Post subject: Do AD's really apply?

In a message dated 3/27/2008 8:13:01 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,  kellym(at)aviating.com writes:

  	  Quote: 	
		  Use just    a hair of common sense. If you have a Lyc IO360A1A, then you might want to    note that your experimental doesn't have the referenced fuel servo, because    every one with a Lycoming dataplate originally came with said servo.     That is what I meant by normal.......in its certified version, not in your    special, experimental that you may have persuaded the DAR had a certified    engine so you could only do a 25 hour flyoff instead of 40, even though he    didn't notice you had changed the servo and the mags.  

	


 

 So...If someone flys off the 40hrs (as one would with, say, an  ex-automotive engine) are you saying 'ADs don't apply'?

  

 Jim



Create a Home Theater Like the Pros. Watch the video on AOL Home.

  [quote][b]

gmcjetpilot

Joined: 04 Nov 2006
Posts: 170

Posted: Sat Mar 29, 2008 2:04 pm Post subject: Do AD's really apply?

Bob:

If you are a EAA member. Log In and use the search 

for two  letters AD. The first item will be, "Airworthiness 

Directives & Amateur Built Aircraft." Click on that and 

read. If you are not a member I'll send it to you.

   

   

  Bob there is an air of prove it, I dare you; I don't 

believe you? I don't like your tone. I am trying to 

teach you, but if you are not listening, OK fine have 

a nice day. I don't care to fight or convince you.

   

  First its not hypothetical it's a FACT. The EAA 

works with the FAA lawyers and are going to 

Oklahoma and DC all the time. If you don't believe 

them fine. I have not put up any "opinion", it is legal 

fact that some how has blown your fuse. I am 

OK if you disagree, but you have no facts to support 

your opinion or refute.

   

  The prove it part? To  prove a negative is like saying 

prove dogs can't talk. The only regulation you need to 

meet is in the front of your experimental aircraft's log 

book and there are no comments about AD's or any 

other part of the FAR's except the ones noted.

   

  Bob, prove AD's must be complied with. You can't. I have 

read all the regs and talked to the lawyers on this matter, 

have you?

   

  Second there is no legal precedence, no lawsuits or 

rulings from a judge. If you are foreseeing lawsuits 

and violations you better comply with all your AD's 

to be conservative. 

   

  QUOTE:

  THIS AIRCRAFT IS AMATEUR BUILT AND

DOES NOT COMPLY WITH THE FEDERAL

SAFETY REGULATIONS FOR STANDARD 

AIRCRAFT

   

  Questions?

  Your protest or challenge is prima facie ridiculous. No 

proof is needed. Prove it to yourself. Part 23, 39, 43  

and so on don't APPLY! Next you will tell me I 

  need a A&P to work on my RV.

   

  I gave you the references and you should do your own 

research and evaluation. I can't do it for you. You will 

never believe me. I did the leg work and called the 

EAA and read the Regs.  If nothing I said makes sense 

to you or rings a cord of truth, I'm not going to 

convince you. No hard feelings. Fly safe.

   

  The idea of less or no government nanny state hand 

holding, especially aviation, blows people away and 

they can't deal with it.

   

  There is no mechanism to MAKE amateur built 

experimental planes comply with AD's, except urban 

legend and a few FAA/DAR's CYA'ing because it 

can't hurt and gives them the feeling of job security. 

  To be fair, I have been in that position and have not 

want to sign something off,  certification documents, 

analysis or a part 121 flight plan.

   

  Now you tell me how AD's work? You can't. There is 

no link to experimental. The Gov is busy trying to 

change that, as if other things where not more 

important.

   

  Individual news letters from individual FSDO's don't 

mean squat; often they are wrong and become a 

source of controversy. One FSDO in the middle of no 

where wrote a news letter and said AD's apply many 

many yrs ago and it floats around. It is wrong. This is 

where the EAA lawyers talking to the FAA lawyers 

come in. This is not a debate or controversy, its a fact.  

Believe what you want, I am OK with that.

   

  I'm not saying you should disregard any or all AD's 

out of hand. However if the Ref EAA article is not 

  good enough for you (I assume you are a member) 

  and talk to legal  they will tell you all the references 

  and reasons. You apparently don't have trust in my 

  comments. That is OK, you should research it. Make 

  yourself happy, all the best.

 

George

 

 

      >From: "Bob J." <rocketbob(at)gmail.com (rocketbob(at)gmail.com)> 

      >Subject: Re: Re: Do AD's really apply? 

  

 	  Quote: 	
		  Cite the FAR that says AD's only apply to type

certificated aircraft. No references to EAA's site, no 

personal opinion, just show us where it says 

experimentals are exempt from AD's. Lets see how 

well your argument hypothetically would hold up in 

court. 

 
	


 	  Quote: 	
		  Regards, 

Bob Japundza 

RV-6 flying F1 under const.


	




  ">Blockbuster Total Access for one month at no cost.  [quote][b]

Display posts from previous:

	Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> RV-List	All times are GMT - 8 Hours Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3 Next
Page 2 of 3

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