A&P Rates

[Bell206]

Would you lose a significant number of customers if the cost was $1300 vs $1200?

We can quibble about the numbers, but the basic process is sound.

You simply see dollars, when it’s actually an hours game as in billable hours. Specifically billable hours per month. That’s the point you miss. If mechanics billed for every hour of work performed for that $1200 annual, it would cost $2000+. But you as an owner won’t pay for that time spent looking up limits on your spar dent because you believe that time is part of the annual inspection process. This is where aviation mx deviates from normal business issues.

Would you lose a significant number of customers if the cost was $1300 vs $1200? If you're my mechanic and tell me the annual is going up by $100, well, don't do that every year,

Define significant. For some, losing 2 customers in the same month would throw off the work flow for the rest of the year. And yes owners have left for less than $100 difference. So why not a raise every year? In some markets, it requires a yearly or less increase. I had to increase my hourly rate every year by $1.50/hr for 3 years straight just to keep up with my insurance costs. I lost a total of 4 customers in the 3 years to someone with a lower rate. As did others and they continue to see the shift.

Another point I've seen is people complaining it's going to take too long to get work done. From an economics standpoint that is a classic sign that prices are too low.

Really? Most of the delays I see are waiting on parts if still talking about annuals. Have no clue how that converts to cheap rates. In my experience, the cheaper the rate, the quicker the annual is finished.

Between paying a little more and having the plane down for 2 months, it's costing me a lot more to pay for a broken airplane I can't fly than paying a shop a little more to fix it.

Perhaps once you purchase your own aircraft and arrange the maintenance we can pick up on this discussion as your comment above makes no sense to me and other mechanics I’ve shown it to. The only aircraft we had consistently stick around for 2 months was lack of payment by the owner or waiting on parts which had zero to do with the rate we charged.

 

[Tarheelpilot]

So eloquent.

Thank you.

 

[denverpilot]

Can shops raise the rate they pay AP's, it depends on a lot of factors. And those factors aren't always in the shop owners control.

https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media...ber/pilot/savvy-maintenance-mechanic-shortage

As noted in my detailed response to the silly idea that owners won't spend money...

I damn well would pay a shop MUCH more of it if they had the resources not to make me wait two months to replace a gascolator gasket or even start diagnosing the problem.

The shops here seem to know it isn't about money. They can't find bodies even if they pay more -- for whatever reason. They probably have better insight to why than owners do, but my checkbook is in hand and available.

There's a reason Busch is signing people up in droves. Not sure it's a good one but frankly having his people riding the butts of a shop that's three months behind DOES help.

It's not the correct long term solution to the problem shops have getting bodies who like wrenching on 60s and 70s tech products... but as someone willing to happy pay for it, I sure don't know what is.

And since the assertions that owners won't spend money on things was aimed at ALL GA and not just our subset flying ancient "classics"... The money and shop time and techs seems fine for those buying single engine turboprop modern toys. They also appear to bump literally everyone else off of ANY shop schedule.

Me standing with an open checkbook willing to buy a few hours of Cessna wrenching at $90/he versus the guy willing to open his checkbook to rebuild a turbine. We are both more than willing to spend money but guess who's going on tomorrow's calendar? Ha.

I'm fully aware my airplane is viewed as the ghetto beater car of the mechanic's world. I'd want to work on the pretty TBM or Pilatus over my 70s spam can if I were a fresh A&P, too. Can't really blame the kids for wanting that. They probably thought the job sounded glamorous from the A&P school brochure.

A very good friend and late to switch careers A&P lady we have known since we were kids went into helicopter pseudo-military and government bird mx straight outta A&P school. Nifty aircraft, new fancy avionics, interesting electronic payloads... Can't blame her a bit. She won't be turning wrenches on Cessnas and Pipers ever. Wouldn't matter how much the GA shop offered her.

 

[Bell206]

I know of no owners who won't.

Good for you. In the past 3 months I looked at 11 airplanes and 3 helicopters for two separate brokers. All were flying. 3 of the airplanes were walkaways and 2 were suspect but workable. All due to lack of owner oversight. That’s almost 50% of this example. As you were saying....

The original assertion was pilots won't spend MONEY on proper MAINTENANCE.

You switched it to two new assertions -- that owners don't DO enough INSPECTIONS and MAINTENANCE.

Perhaps reread my post. I stated: “suffers from a lack of proper maintenance and inspection.” For someone who complains about moving goalposts, changing people words is a bit more. Don’t you think? And in case you missed it lack of proper mx and inspection equates to owners don’t spend the money.

And apparently this happened in the "late 90s".

No it started in the 90s and continues today. This is about the same time getting an IA became a multiple choice test. Make the IA test a FSDO administered oral and practical test again and this problem will auto correct itself.


As for the rest of your post, its your normal gibberish. So I’ll leave you to it except for this one part…

So ... If I'm wrong I'm fine with that but I'll continue to assert the ORIGINAL statement about owners not willimg to pay up is false for everywhere in the real world and not the fake internet world where people claim they got $200 annuals.

So all the PoA members who admitted to and championed 20 min/$200 annuals, hangar fairies, and not making maintenance entries are all liars? Doubtful, since I think one of them owned the airplane I looked at last month.

 

[Timbeck2]

I'm fully aware my airplane is viewed as the ghetto beater car of the mechanic's world. I'd want to work on the pretty TBM or Pilatus over my 70s spam can if I were a fresh A&P, too. Can't really blame the kids for wanting that. They probably thought the job sounded glamorous from the A&P school brochure.

I’d work on an old Piper Cherokee any day and twice on Sunday over a shiny Mooney or a Cessna 210. Those planes are 5 pounds of chit in a 2 pound sock. Just because it’s shiny and new doesn’t make it easy.

 

[denverpilot]

So all the PoA members who admitted to and championed 20 min/$200 annuals, hangar fairies, and not making maintenance entries are all liars? Doubtful, since I think one of them owned the airplane I looked at last month.

Most of them. And again the internet BS is NOT the majority of the working GA fleet. Not by a long shot. Or even indicative of any big trend in owners.

Know how many of us bother posting "did regular maintenance, paid a bunch as always, airplane in good shape" online, compared to the number of ass hats who brag about their $200 annual? Easily 100:1.

Vast majority of owners and operators don't have time for internet BS.

As far as your correction on proper msintenace goes, duly noted. As you mentioned FAA can fix that multiple ways at any time they feel like it. It ain't owners unwilling to spend money. We spend money and get what the local shop gives us.

Most of us TRY to check that our mechsnics do comparable work and have good references but beyond that, the original assertion is aimed at the wrong crowd. I truly can't control my mechanic other than asking a few questions and reading his FAA approved sign off in my little book.*

*Those of us who wrench on other things have an advantage here but the guy who has never seen the oil cap on his car has nothing to base his opinion of his mechanic on other than rumors and trusting the logbook and FAA really.

If y'all have a mechanic quality problem claimimg the entire list of people above who knew the local shop rate by heart shows it isn't a money problem. The majority are shelling out cash a'plenty for whatever quality we can get. AOG means we have three options at my home field. Most have one. Maybe two. Always been that way. 70s thru present.

If FAA started stocking the one available shop with bad mechanics in 1995ish, again something must still be fixing it because you still haven't shown any link to airplanes falling out of the sky and it's literally the exact same airplanes on the ramp here at the clubs that they had in 1991.

Club name changed five times. Same fleet. Still flying. Still being accepted by thousands of PICs who's butt is on the line while the (good or bad) mechanic is safely on the ground. No significant uptick in pilots walking back in with the keys saying it's broken. About the same as always. Dispatch rate still sucks but it hasn't changed much.

I got suckered into running all the books for a non profit club back then. Saw the cancellations and all the checks. Hadn't changed any at all. Owner of the place I did the advanced rantings in had the same schedule problems and same checks and was flying stuff that was built in the 70s and 80s like everybody else. Wrote a check for cash for a new Lycoming and waited there months for it.

Ability to pay isn't the real problem. Or a handful of $200 annuals. That's just not what the pilot community does as a whole. We write checks and assume the mechanic did their job and the FAA watches them occasionally.

If you're seeing mechsnics not doing their jobs, we would have little visibility into that until our airplanes fall from the sky in droves... Which isn't happening.

 

[bflynn]

You simply see dollars, when it’s actually an hours game as in billable hours. Specifically billable hours per month. That’s the point you miss. If mechanics billed for every hour of work performed for that $1200 annual, it would cost $2000+. But you as an owner won’t pay for that time spent looking up limits on your spar dent because you believe that time is part of the annual inspection process. This is where aviation mx deviates from normal business issues.

Define significant. For some, losing 2 customers in the same month would throw off the work flow for the rest of the year. And yes owners have left for less than $100 difference. So why not a raise every year? In some markets, it requires a yearly or less increase. I had to increase my hourly rate every year by $1.50/hr for 3 years straight just to keep up with my insurance costs. I lost a total of 4 customers in the 3 years to someone with a lower rate. As did others and they continue to see the shift.

Really? Most of the delays I see are waiting on parts if still talking about annuals. Have no clue how that converts to cheap rates. In my experience, the cheaper the rate, the quicker the annual is finished.

Perhaps once you purchase your own aircraft and arrange the maintenance we can pick up on this discussion as your comment above makes no sense to me and other mechanics I’ve shown it to. The only aircraft we had consistently stick around for 2 months was lack of payment by the owner or waiting on parts which had zero to do with the rate we charged.

I'm not missing hours/dollars. I work all the time using fixed bid and hourly rates. My customers won't pay for extra time either and even when I'm working hourly, we don't bill every hour incurred, your effective rate is always less than the quoted. This isn't unique to your business, there are tens or hundreds of thousand of businesses that work under those constraints.. But it doesn't change the core idea, this is just quibbling over numbers. You don't want to raise it by $5? Ok, how about 4? You're getting hung up on the math of the hypothetical example.

If a customer leaves over $100, then that guy was a skinflint anyway and the way the market is right now, you'll replace them pretty quickly. As someone said above, AOPA did that article about this and notes that the fear of losing a customer isn't justified unless you're just barely hanging on. But barely hanging on isn't consistent with people waiting months to get things fixed and there being a mechanic shortage.

If you have more work than you can do, then you want to choose the most profitable / highest paying jobs. When your backlog is several months deep, you're not charging enough and you're leaving money on the table with every transaction. Like I said, that is economics 101.

When you're waiting on parts - you switch and do different work. Obviously there's a limit to that, but if every job you have is on work stoppage due to parts, that is either really unusual or you need better suppliers. Why does that become "cheaper rates"? Yes, if you stretch out work AND you have someone putting time against a job without making progress (why would that be allowed?) then you're driving your effective rate down.

Planes cost money even when they're sitting. The owner is still paying for monthly expenses like hangars and insurance even when the plane isn't flying The expenses would be paid anyway, but you can't fly the plane. I'd rather go to someone that charges $5 more per hour...or if you prefer, "quoted hour"...and has a good mechanic to get the work done. An extra $100 is a hour of flying time and while I'd rather have the hour, I'd also rather have an airplane to fly.

The more you talk, the more I'm convinced that there's nothing special about the finances of aviation maintenance businesses.

 

[Bell206]

If you're seeing mechsnics [and owners] not doing their jobs, we would have little visibility into that until our airplanes fall from the sky in droves... Which isn't happening.

You nailed it right there. However, the problem with your end result is that aircraft are not that fragile and can continue to fly even under extreme abuse. Now will those abused aircraft eventually "fall from the sky in droves." Sure, but 99% of the time something small breaks before something catastrophic fails. What I have been seeing, that you havent, is more neglect and small issues that were never that prevelent in years past. Things that would not pass even the most basic annual criteria.

As to your use of "most owners," "vast majority of owners," "100:1 ," etc. I have no clue where you get that. For reference, I review on average a couple dozen different flying aircraft each year with the past several years easily doubling that with the current used market explosion. With each aircraft comes interaction with the owner and in some cases the mx provider. Based on this cross section I put the percentage at 40 to 50% of owners do not put aircraft maintenance as a priority. So it begs the question, how do you arrive at your "majority" comments?

While you might not believe a fellow pilot/owner would do something so low as not to maintain their aircraft because you wouldnt or those close to you, it happens. But unless you actually follow the paper trail and compare it to the aircraft you would never know.

 

[Bell206]

The more you talk, the more I'm convinced that there's nothing special about the finances of aviation maintenance businesses

And here I was convinced you didnt quite understand the aircraft mx business. Given you have no direct experience with it perhaps I should have explained it better. All aircraft mx providers are not the same and operate on different requirements, business or otherwise. So perhaps some history. Prior to 2000, 50% of private GA maintenance was provided by small, independent, mom & pop shops. The remainder was provided by a collection of CRS shops, FBO shops, club shops, etc. It's the latter that fits more to your idea of a mx provider given their structured environment. The former was completely different given its unstructured environment which is what my comments reflect and does not fit your idea of the business.

By 2000, 25% of the small, independent shops were gone. Permanently. You'll also find the legendary, IT professional, Mike Busch, appeared on the aviation mx scene in the same time frame due to this void in aircraft mx. It was also the same time that the FAA changed the IA qualifications to "assist" with the perceived void. So now instead of a narrow group of disciplined IAs any person who had an A&P for 3 years, spoke English, and could pass a multiple choice test could get an IA. At first the quality was there but the fringes were starting to fray. However, by 2008 and the market crash you could get an annual signed for $50 and a 337 signed for $75 sight unseen which was pushed by owners and accepted by those who put a quick buck over integrity. And it has never gone away.

Fast forward to today and now the remaining 25% of independent shops are declining at an accelerated pace. But since GA aviation never really rebounded after 1995 for various reasons, the existing structured shops, the remaining small shops, and the $200 crowd have handled the load. Unfortunately, with each APIA that retires or independent shop closes, there is a further overload on the remaining shops and APIAs. Increasing the rates will not create more shop space in the short term, just as cramming 100s of people through A&P school will not relieve the shortage of qualified and experienced APIAs at the independent shop level. Aside from how actual billable hours work in aviation mx, aviation experience trumps that part. And it is the lack of experience at the independent level that affects the billable hours which in turn affects the scheduling into the shop. Which in turn leaves a prime hunting field for the $200 APIAs. Your right about one thing, most owners do not want their aircraft down for mx for an extended time. Unfortunately, the trend now is instead of paying more like you recommend, more are paying less to get it flying again.

Whether you want to believe this short summary or not is of no concern. I've had customers, to include upstanding business leaders, give me the same lecture on business principals over the years of how I could streamline this process. As you, none believed me when I said it was different at the independent level, especially in a one man shop. That is until they saw how it worked. But until you fix the 20 minute/$200 annual option and generate more interest in GA aviation in current generations, it will continue down this slippery slope regardless how much you want to pay. It is what it is.

 

[denverpilot]

You nailed it right there. However, the problem with your end result is that aircraft are not that fragile and can continue to fly even under extreme abuse. Now will those abused aircraft eventually "fall from the sky in droves." Sure, but 99% of the time something small breaks before something catastrophic fails. What I have been seeing, that you havent, is more neglect and small issues that were never that prevelent in years past. Things that would not pass even the most basic annual criteria.

As to your use of "most owners," "vast majority of owners," "100:1 ," etc. I have no clue where you get that. For reference, I review on average a couple dozen different flying aircraft each year with the past several years easily doubling that with the current used market explosion. With each aircraft comes interaction with the owner and in some cases the mx provider. Based on this cross section I put the percentage at 40 to 50% of owners do not put aircraft maintenance as a priority. So it begs the question, how do you arrive at your "majority" comments?

While you might not believe a fellow pilot/owner would do something so low as not to maintain their aircraft because you wouldnt or those close to you, it happens. But unless you actually follow the paper trail and compare it to the aircraft you would never know.

So to summarize, you don't like what your peers have been signing off since 1995, FAA hasn't stopped them, 99% of it doesn't lead to catastrophic failure...

... And you jumped my ass responding to BS that pilots won't spend money.

Got it. Lol.

Don't want it passing inspections tell FAA and peers to quit signing it off. I can't control that with my checkbook in a market where it takes two months to get a gasket replaced.

I have no leverage and neither does anyone else quite willing to pay.

Expecting that I do is asinine.

I'm glad you're out there stopping stuff but it's still not an indication of an owner problem. If it is don't sign and push it out on the ramp. Theyll pay it.

It's not like we really have a choice. Not AOG. If I know something is coming up I can move it elsewhere but not if it broke. I'm using and paying whoever is on the field 99% of the time.

If they're signing off junk and FAA isn't stopping them there's no control of that via checkbook.

We even alternate who does inspections from time to time. Some say that's wrong because one good place knows the aircraft. Others say everyplace even good ones miss specific things. Our experience has been the latter.

From a supposedly "standardized" inspection. Which is pretty much utter BS. But that provcess hasnt changed for 30 years.

So we are in agreement. The process sucks, but you asserted we needed more inspections (no) and owners should do more (fine, ground it until they do). The original post said pilots need to spend more money (already willing, ground the airplane and theyll pay... Or theyll whine to FAA and FAA will back the grounding if it's actually legit...)

Main point is still against the initial post. I can pay $5/hr or $500/hr. I'm paying it because I need someone with a magic piece of paper to replace a $3 gasket. Not because replacimg a $3 gasket is hard.

Mechanics have the magic pen. We can't force them to sign. Hell we can't even get on their schedules.

For such a dire perceived problem the fleet sure is flying. Ground em if we are all gonna die soon. That's the entire point of the magic pen isn't it? It isn't the pilots signing the logbook. If new rules for signing are needed publish some. It's been decades.

 

[Southpaw]

Just got my 62 year old 172 back from annual. I did drive the 190+ miles to his place of business to help and observe.
I did all the inspection plate removal, seat removal and gofer "hand me"stuff.
Billing Time , 11 hours @ $100. Fixed a loose oil temp gauge back plate and riveted a loose carb heat bushing. Also a bushing in the nose column support . A great learning experience for me. The compressions were 76/80,78/80,77/80,76/80,78/80,76/80. 9254.2 hours in service ,1573.2 SMOH.
Oil change with filter cut and examined . ELT battery changed.
I'm pretty happy with how well maintained this aircraft has been over the years .
This was my second annual with no major squawks .
The AI also flew his aircraft over to pick up mine and returned it . I'm assuming the total hours billing also included his flight time.
Total bill $1219.00

 

[Racerx]

So are regular APIA's not a fan of Mike Busch? I take what he has to say with a grain of salt personally.

Had this thought earlier today on the labor shortage. First, it's not just the ultra niche GA mechanic. It's hard to find a welder, or even a guy to sweep the damn floors. And that's true with the whole skilled labor force. Why I didn't buy the extended unemployment thing but that's a different argument. But with all the push towards STEM, could there be a way to get a couple kids; obviously under the supervision of an AP to help with annuals? Maybe I was the oddball in school working on the racecars every night, but if I could have gotten credit for pulling an interior and inspection covers off I'd have been all over it. I know one program they had kids build I thought it was an RV12. My problem both then and now is my airport no longer has an on site shop. I actually don't know what's in the "fbo" hangar right now. It's crazy to look at Google earth from 20 years ago at that airport. Almost 30 planes tied down outside. Today it's down to 3. Two havent moved in those 20 years and one is a warrior that I saw having some sort of maintenance done in another hangar a couple weeks ago. In those years theyve only built I think 10 t-hangars, so it's not like everything outside is now inside. Some hangars have guys running non aviation businesses out of. Not sure where all the planes went to. The reduction in planes coincides with the maintenance guy retiring. They also had a small flight school that ceased as well.

As far as billable hours. In our welding job shop, if we average 6 billable hours per guy per day, were doing good. And we're swamped. There's just a lot of unbillable time. And that doesn't include my own time bidding jobs or the office manager scheduling and billing jobs. 60 unbillable hours a week. I try not to think about that.

 

[bflynn]

And here I was convinced you didnt quite understand the aircraft mx business. Given you have no direct experience with it perhaps I should have explained it better. All aircraft mx providers are not the same and operate on different requirements, business or otherwise. So perhaps some history. Prior to 2000, 50% of private GA maintenance was provided by small, independent, mom & pop shops. The remainder was provided by a collection of CRS shops, FBO shops, club shops, etc. It's the latter that fits more to your idea of a mx provider given their structured environment. The former was completely different given its unstructured environment which is what my comments reflect and does not fit your idea of the business.

That's weird. It about exactly opposite the history how I work. Originally it was all big professional groups, but over time it diversified and is now pretty much 50/50 of professional companies and mom and pop shops. Regardless, both are working with the same customer base and operating under the same basic rules.

Now, if you're in the independent crowd, then the whole issue of hiring another person isn't relevant, so I agree the commentary about the difficulty of hiring a mechanic is not relevant; it's only businesses which have employees who have that issue. And certainly smaller businesses are running leaner and are in the danger zone for business survival.

I'm not sure why you seem so adamant to insist that aviation maintenance is a completely different business from everyone else in the world. How much experience do you have with other businesses and other business structures? Customers are the same throughout the world, they have the same irrational demands at times, there are disagreements over the scope of the work to be done and assumptions about authorizations to do the work. It's up to the business to clarify all that, but that still isn't entirely relevant to the concept of hiring new employees or raising salaries for employees, which as the topic that I was commenting on.

As I said, I'm more and more convinced that there's not really anything special about it. I've also worked as that independent person, selling my services a week or two at a time to customers. I even had hyper competitive people trying to do things on the cheap when they didn't know what they're doing, doing a job for the equivalent of less than minimum wage. I actually loved finding those people's customers because inevitably I would make bank fixing the problems the cheap guy created. Otherwise, I didn't worry about them, they were creating more work than they took from me. Of course, that is a different role than what was being discussed, so if you're moving the goal posts or even playing on a different field, I can certainly understand why you claim the underlying drivers are different.

My direct experience with maintenance is limited. I've only done a few things beyond oil changes, spark plugs and tires. We changed a strut on a 152, had to pull and replace a spinner, and I can vividly remember cursing small spaces when changing out a turn indicator - all under supervision of course. I don't pretend to know all the ins and outs of the marketing for your services, but that isn't the issue that we were discussing.

The things that drive your business have parallels in other businesses and what an aviation maintenance business has to go through is not really different than what other businesses have to go through. It's not my business but it reminds me most closely of what my heating & AC guy faces. His govt regulations are a little weaker, there are multiple competitors who don't really follow those regulations and he is constantly having to struggle with not getting undercut on bids. He is slowly getting squeezed out, but because he's good and get recommendations, he can keep working. It's a tough market, but the laws of economics, the methods of finance, the rules of customer service still apply. You still have not given me any reason to believe you're unique.

It's not a position I'd like to be in, although I am playing around with the idea of becoming an A&P in retirement; I enjoy reading documents and requirements, turning wrenches, and keeping planes flying, even if the small spaces and stuck screws still keep us all humble. Maybe I'll be that guy doing $200 annuals as a service because I want to see people keep on flying. As long as I'm doing the work correctly, there wouldn't be anything legitimate you could complain about other than I'm not interested in making a living doing the work. Probably not, because why leave money on the table, but you never know.

 

[Bell206]

How do you think owner-assisted annuals/maintenance fit into this picture?

In my opinion, they make the best customers as they have skin in the game. And wanted to be involved. This was the exact reason I dropped ad hoc work and went basically all owner assist for about 10 years. But you can up your game to possibly convince your future APIA to go owner-assist. Read up on the available maintenance guidance. And if possible, find a place where you can work on your plane away from the APIA's shop. A number of mechanics don't do owner-assist simply because they have no room in their shop as it tends to slow down the flow. It was a requirement for me as well. Good luck.

 

[Bell206]

So to summarize, you don't like what your peers owners have been signing allowed to be signed off since 1995, FAA hasn't stopped them, 99% of it doesn't lead to catastrophic failure...... And you jumped my ass responding to BS that pilots/owners won't spend money.

FTFY. Yes. That's the one point you and others consistently fail to realize. The owner has carte blanche and not the mechanic. They are the maintenance gatekeeper: it starts with the owner and finishes with the owner; the mechanic only fills the void in between. All the aviation laws and rules put the onus on owners. Period. Even the FAA can't alter what an owner does in some niche cases. So until your peers stop taking the cheap route, i.e., don't spend money, the problem will only get worse. And from what I've seen in the past year, I predict we'll be seeing more posts on PoA of $10,000+ first annuals on new purchases which have only one cause. Cheap owners.

If new rules for signing are needed publish some.

And that will only happen if you owners get together enmasse and push for them like the primary non-commercial category. Then your problems will be solved. Simple. Then again most owners will probably find something to whine about with that as well.

 

[Bell206]

So are regular APIA's not a fan of Mike Busch?

If repackaging existing free maintenance information and guidance, implying it is your ideas, and selling it to the pilot/owner community at a profit is indicative of maintenance experience probably not. But can't fault the guy for wanting to make a buck.

it's not just the ultra niche GA mechanic.

For what I've been told by the individuals I help toward getting A&Ps, their comments are/were a majority of their friends were looking for careers where they don't work outside, travel a lot or get dirty which takes out just about most trades.

 

[Racerx]

For what I've been told by the individuals I help toward getting A&Ps, their comments are/were a majority of their friends were looking for careers where they don't work outside, travel a lot or get dirty which takes out just about most trades.

Cuz that all sounds like...work?

 

[Kenny Phillips]

I suspect that's because while they're charging $100/hr, the mechanic is getting an average of about $30. 70% is quite a house fee.

Sometimes the "house" is rather expensive to maintain.

 

[EdFred]

Cuz that all sounds like...work?

And it's not a tiktok worthy job.

 

[bflynn]

Sometimes the "house" is rather expensive to maintain.

Sure. And good workers are cheap.

 

[bradg33]

In my opinion, they make the best customers as they have skin in the game. And wanted to be involved. This was the exact reason I dropped ad hoc work and went basically all owner assist for about 10 years. But you can up your game to possibly convince your future APIA to go owner-assist. Read up on the available maintenance guidance. And if possible, find a place where you can work on your plane away from the APIA's shop. A number of mechanics don't do owner-assist simply because they have no room in their shop as it tends to slow down the flow. It was a requirement for me as well. Good luck.

I think a lot of A&Ps don't like owner-assist because a lot of owners don't know which end of the screwdriver to use (nor do they really care to learn)...

My A&P doesn't "advertise" that he's open to owner-assisted maintenance, but once he's comfortable that the owner actually knows what he's doing, he's happy to have the help. I've got a pretty unique airplane and I know more about the aircraft itself and its quirks than he does. He, of course, knows a whole lot more about how to accomplish certain tasks and about the general things on the airplane (think rod end play, cable tensions, etc.). It took some time, but now that he's convinced I know what I'm doing and can be trusted to turn a wrench, we've established a really good working relationship in terms of owner-assisted work. It saves me money, lets me learn more about the airplane, and puts some fairly easy cash in his pocket (it helps that I don't complain about his rates, don't question his invoices and pay promptly). But there's a lot of up-front work to develop the level of trust necessary to make owner-assisted worth the A&Ps time, otherwise, as you note, it just takes LONGER because the A&P has to constantly remind the owner of things like "righty-tighty, lefty-loosey."

 

[Doc Holliday]

Many years ago an A&P/IA friend decided to let a guy "assist" in annualing the owners "new to him" Piper Aztec.

So he told him to go over to his hanger and remove all of the exterior inspection panels, and asked him if he needed any help. "Of course not" replied the owner and on his way he went.

Couple of hours later the IA showed up to check on how the owner was coming along, only to find out the owner used a power drill motor with a phillips apex tip as his screwdriver. This hapless guy ended up rounding off about half of the screw heads, which resulted in the IA spending a few hours drilling out the screws.

My friend never let another owner assist unless it was in his shop after that.

 

[Kristin]

So are regular APIA's not a fan of Mike Busch? I take what he has to say with a grain of salt personally.

My only problem with Mike Busch is that he applies theory and his more limited experience too broadly. It took a decade or more before he was willing to acknowledge that the CHT parameters he had been preaching based on his big bore Continental experience didn't apply to the Lycomings. One also has to keep in mind that Mike has never worked on a shop floor and never punched the time clock. I admire his ability at self-promotion and I don't begrudge him his success. However, I would not be pleased to get a call from him questioning my airworthiness decisions. Fortunately, it probably won't happen as I stay in my niche which has no overlap with Mike's experience.

 

[Rcmutz]

I think a lot of A&Ps don't like owner-assist because a lot of owners don't know which end of the screwdriver to use (nor do they really care to learn)...

My A&P doesn't "advertise" that he's open to owner-assisted maintenance, but once he's comfortable that the owner actually knows what he's doing, he's happy to have the help. I've got a pretty unique airplane and I know more about the aircraft itself and its quirks than he does. He, of course, knows a whole lot more about how to accomplish certain tasks and about the general things on the airplane (think rod end play, cable tensions, etc.). It took some time, but now that he's convinced I know what I'm doing and can be trusted to turn a wrench, we've established a really good working relationship in terms of owner-assisted work. It saves me money, lets me learn more about the airplane, and puts some fairly easy cash in his pocket (it helps that I don't complain about his rates, don't question his invoices and pay promptly). But there's a lot of up-front work to develop the level of trust necessary to make owner-assisted worth the A&Ps time, otherwise, as you note, it just takes LONGER because the A&P has to constantly remind the owner of things like "righty-tighty, lefty-loosey."

Sounds like the same relationship I have with my AnP. That is why I am willing to deal with the logistics of taking it to him with the 1.5 hr drive by my wife to pick me up.

 

[denverpilot]

FTFY. Yes. That's the one point you and others consistently fail to realize. The owner has carte blanche and not the mechanic. They are the maintenance gatekeeper: it starts with the owner and finishes with the owner; the mechanic only fills the void in between. All the aviation laws and rules put the onus on owners. Period. Even the FAA can't alter what an owner does in some niche cases. So until your peers stop taking the cheap route, i.e., don't spend money, the problem will only get worse. And from what I've seen in the past year, I predict we'll be seeing more posts on PoA of $10,000+ first annuals on new purchases which have only one cause. Cheap owners.

And that will only happen if you owners get together enmasse and push for them like the primary non-commercial category. Then your problems will be solved. Simple. Then again most owners will probably find something to whine about with that as well.

No. The mechanics can ground whatever isn't airworthy. If it isn't airworthy stop signing. If you're finding non airworthy things, report the guy who signed.

The money takes care of itself then. If it can't be flown we owners pay. Super simple.

If FAA won't regulate properly, that's also not a new thing.

 

[denverpilot]

If repackaging existing free maintenance information and guidance, implying it is your ideas, and selling it to the pilot/owner community at a profit is indicative of maintenance experience probably not. But can't fault the guy for wanting to make a buck.

You just groused that your peers are signing off on things they shouldn't. Perhaps repackaging known things and managing them is what owners actually need?

We can't tell if we got a doofus when we end up AOG 1000 miles from home. But we can sick some guy on them to manage them.

 

[Bell206]

I think a lot of A&Ps don't like owner-assist because a lot of owners don't know which end of the screwdriver to use (nor do they really care to learn)...

Some of us who did owner-assisted wouldn’t take on those types of owners. I had several criteria the owner needed to agree to in writing with the understanding if they strayed from that agreement I was done. In my case, it worked well as I only had a couple owners try to work the system.

 

[Bell206]

No. The mechanics can ground whatever isn't airworthy. If it isn't airworthy stop signing. If you're finding non airworthy things, report the guy who signed.

Well if you don’t want to accept it’s the owners who look for this type of work and its the “have-pen-will-travel” APIAs who simply provide them with that requested service, so be it. But its no different than a pilot looking for an AME to pencil-whip his medical. In both cases its the pilot/owner who goes looking not the other way around. As to reporting the extreme stuff, I do, but I report the owner as its his regulatory responsibility to maintain the aircraft in airworthy condition which usually catches the APIA as collateral damage.

Perhaps repackaging known things and managing them is what owners actually need?

Hey, if you need MB to CYA your regulated owner duties have at it. But I’ve converted a number of owners back to the mainstream after a MB addiction. It’s not that difficult for most once you show them the guidance on being an owner.

 

[Bell206]

I'm not sure why you seem so adamant to insist that aviation maintenance is a completely different business from everyone else in the world.

Customers are the same throughout the world,

Lets try this tack. I don’t know what you do but maybe this might help explain. How many of your customers have regulatory authority over what initial direction you take to perform your work, to determine the final workscope of your work, how and where you record such work, and when you’re done, your customer has to perform the final task for your work to be considered complete?

How much experience do you have with other businesses and other business structures?

Plenty. I have 2 LLCs, 1 aviation and 1 non-aviation. I tried to make my millions on the non- side through various ventures like retail/wholesale, transportation, video poker. Did better on the aviation side with compounding interest.

 

[JAWS]

No. The mechanics can ground whatever isn't airworthy.

Nope. If you are contracted to replace the left main tire and the right aileron is missing, that is none of your business. You fulfill your contract, do the work that was asked of you fully and properly, and move on. The owner is solely responsible for the airworthiness of his machine between annuals. During an annual, then the IA and owner together get to hold the wet paper bag of responsibility, at least to a certain extent. How long does the ink take to dry?

 

[denverpilot]

Nope. If you are contracted to replace the left main tire and the right aileron is missing, that is none of your business. You fulfill your contract, do the work that was asked of you fully and properly, and move on. The owner is solely responsible for the airworthiness of his machine between annuals. During an annual, then the IA and owner together get to hold the wet paper bag of responsibility, at least to a certain extent. How long does the ink take to dry?

Fine but clearly what the above person is grousing about was "$200 annuals" and claimed to be seeing the results of those, not a one off during a year that can be stopped easily sometime in the next 11 months by the person with the magic pen and their overseers.

 

[denverpilot]

Well if you don’t want to accept it’s the owners who look for this type of work and its the “have-pen-will-travel” APIAs who simply provide them with that requested service, so be it. But its no different than a pilot looking for an AME to pencil-whip his medical. In both cases its the pilot/owner who goes looking not the other way around. As to reporting the extreme stuff, I do, but I report the owner as its his regulatory responsibility to maintain the aircraft in airworthy condition which usually catches the APIA as collateral damage.

Hey, if you need MB to CYA your regulated owner duties have at it. But I’ve converted a number of owners back to the mainstream after a MB addiction. It’s not that difficult for most once you show them the guidance on being an owner.

The "guidance on being an owner"? What like trusting the A&P hired for $90+ an hour knows what they're doing and the bad ones are properly regulated by the regulatory agency response?

What ARE you babbling about? Your assertion continues to be the owner's fault the mechanics are out there that continue to get away with crap you don't like.

Go after them. It ain't my checkbook's fault they exist and don't do whatever written job the regulatory agency tells them to do and doesn't toss the bad ones.

If you have evidence they do this so much why are they still practicing the trade? Get em tossed.

As far as your magic wisdom for owners goes, instead of being vague about it just post it. It'll become a nice sticky post at the top of the mechanical section if it's that good. Why not? Is it a big specisl secret? If MB can write articles, so can the brilliant folk who say he's wrong but don't write.

(A tiny handful have written anything in public in 30 years. Go for it. Be the hero of all us dumb owners. You resort to personal insults about my writing all the time anyway, so step up. Let's see the articles.)

Most of us here are readers or we wouldn't be here. I've read MB, and Deakin, and Lord knows who else -- and I'm still not a mechanic or a regulator of mechanics.

I'd love to read all about your secret sauce you say you share with owners.

Plenty of us not doing these mystical $200 annuals who'd pretty much do whatever our mechanics recommend. Judging by the flat fact that it's been the EXACT same aircraft in the local rental fleet for *** 30 years *** and none are falling out of the sky or appear to be "missing ailerons" or anything like that...

It would be hard to ignore the evidence present right here on the ramp that says they're reasonably maintained.

If they're not figure out who's signing them off as airworthy and get em canned. You claim to have the hard evidence of a widespread problem.

I'm still seeing pilots run out of gas and fly into weather many orders of magnitude more often than mechanical fatals. That's the numbers.

If you have other numbers, show em. I'm serious. We'd all love to see em.

(** Even in the big push FAA did thru DPEs a few years back to catch airworthiness items I never saw an aircraft that wasn't actually mechanically airworthy. Just a whole bunch of dumb or missing log entries by mechanics who can't seem to figure out how to print themselves cheat sheets or stickers or something like many CFIs do these days. It's pretty hard to jack up a pre-printed sticker with the proper legalese on it. Somewhat off topic but I've noticed the organized shops use em and/or some software system that generates them and they're legible, easy to read, legally correct, and not a joke of a mess that some mechs scribble illegibly in our books occasionally. And no I'm not giving CFIs a pass on this particular side nit-pick either... Some of the worst garbage in my pilot log is by one particular local CFI I learned not to hire again, long long ago. I was young and didn't know any better.)

Most of us who can afford airplanes didn't get there by not providing legible documentation of what we built or did for our customers in our day jobs. But we also stay in our lane. I'm not a mechanic and not trying to be. I ask them to fix things and recommend things and definitely expect they aren't pencil whipping anything, but if they were, how the hell would I know? I'm working at my job while the airplane is in the shop. I ask for a face to face summary (or my co-owner does) and a written list of work and whatever proper legsl log entries are required by the paper pushers who ... According to you anyway... Can't get these pencil mechanics under control.

I can think of a few nasty ways to get that accomplished if they really wanted to. Again not my job and not my swim lane. Easiest way to get rid of the few owners who do hunt for bad mechanics is to dump the bad mechanics, right? If they don't exist it's hard to hire them.

Anyway looking forward to your articles. I'll read em. Probably won't get me more options on the home field that aren't two to three months backed up, but it'll be a nice bedtime story...

 

[denverpilot]

Hey, if you need MB to CYA your regulated owner duties have at it. But I’ve converted a number of owners back to the mainstream after a MB addiction. It’s not that difficult for most once you show them the guidance on being an owner.

P.S. I wanted to make it clear that nobody said anything at all about "CYA". More like let the mechanics talk to each other and somebody manage the dumb one someone might run into 1000 miles from home.

I'm probably stuck in the hotel doing MY job making money to pay both of em. I'm not going to waste time attempting to do theirs.

Hell, I just realized you claim you're better at it than he is. Can we subscribe to have you manage the unknown good or bad mech we got stuck with in Podunk when the airplane broke on a fuel stop?

If you're that good, do it. Seriously. Ol' Mike could use some competition.

If not you maybe someone else who knows your secret sauce will start up a competing service?

So... Might as well toss it out there.

(And to be clear -- I've been truly AOG away from home four times in in three decades and the random mechanics who did the fixes seem to have done them just fine, including log entries.

One couldn't get parts and I had to rental car home and come back a week later when work allowed but the work was fine. Another did a great job, offered options, and gsve advice on where to get custom metalwork done that is extremely hard to find, that we passed on to the local shop. The third I wasn't the owner but he talked to the Podunk shop and dropped a check immediately after I called him without question. The fourth was just a tire acting up and easily handled.

It's always been FAR harder to get scheduled at home than abroad... And apparently I've managed to easily avoid all these bad mechanics you claim are ruining things...

So... Shrug... I've certainly got no complaints about the mechs we've used other than the aforementioned hideous log entries... And don't want to give the impression I buy into your "sky is falling" story...

They seem to take my money and fix the airplane, just fine...)

 

[Bell206]

What ARE you babbling about?

LOL. Coming from the HBIC himself, should I feel honored? LOL.

The "guidance on being an owner"? What like trusting the A&P hired for $90+ an hour knows what they're doing and the bad ones are properly regulated by the regulatory agency response?

That’s part of it. But whether you trust the mechanic or not you still have the final responsibility per the existing FAA guidance. I’ve stated this a number of times along with the references. It is what it is.

Your assertion continues to be the owner's fault the mechanics are out there that continue to get away with crap you don't like.

No. My assertion continues to be there are owners who request and pay mechanics to sign off improper maintenance. You’re continually stuck on it's all done without the owners knowledge. You’re wrong. This type work is done with intent by the owner. Improper work performed by APIAs without the owners knowledge for whatever reason is a separate topic which usually manifests itself in different ways.

It ain't my checkbook's fault they exist

Without your check book they wouldn’t exist.

As far as your magic wisdom for owners goes, instead of being vague about it just post it. It'll become a nice sticky post at the top of the mechanical section if it's that good. Why not? Is it a big specisl secret?

I already share it with every post I make. No sticky post needed. As to it being “magic wisdom” or a “secret sauce” it’s not by any means. This stuff has been out in the public domain and written about for ages. No secrets, no magic. You just think it is.

If MB can write articles, so can the brilliant folk who say he's wrong but don't write. (A tiny handful have written anything in public in 30 years. Go for it. Be the hero of all us dumb owners.

So having published articles makes a person’s point more authoritative for you? Regardless I have written published articles. Several on PoA know them. But I prefer to take what I have written and learned and pay it forward via posts here and a few other sites. All free of charge. But since you need a hero to become a whole owner, here’s one article quote (not mine) that supports my statement above: owners are responsible for a mechanics work. Do you believe me now?

Hell, I just realized you claim you're better at it than he is.

Seriously. Ol' Mike could use some competition.

Ha. Not hardly. I don’t even consider myself in his league. But you on the other hand, are definitely in his league and can probably give him some stout competition. You both are primarily IT gurus, you both imply to have extensive aviation knowledge, you both have an extended online presence, and you both have worked on your own aircraft. The only place MB gets you is he has an APIA so he can sign off the work on his aircraft. Sounds right up your alley.

 

[JAWS]

I did a pre-inspection inspection on a Comanche many years ago. The gear was in bad shape, bungees hard as rock, worn bushings and linkages all over, gearbox and motor never been touched in a long time. The gear alone was going to be big bucks to get airworthy again. Mr owner mentioned that he had never spent more than $500 on an annual and that he wasn't about to start. Aircraft off jacks, what work was done was certified and he was sent on his way. Too bad, because it was a nice looking plane that needed some TLC.

 

[Bob Noel]

I never spent a lot on the annual inspection. now, the maintenance that was needed each year... that's a different story.

One "annual" involved an overhauled engine, etc etc. With that one, I stopped counting when the parts hit $23,000. I worked (owner-assist) with two A&P to work off a squawk list generated by an IA known locally as Dr Death (long story).

 

[Bilal]

Anywhere between $100 - $150 (depends on the shop) here in PNW (Seattle area)

 

[denverpilot]

LOL. Coming from the HBIC himself, should I feel honored? LOL.

As always childish personal insults. And as always, I have made none.

QUOTE="Bell206, post: 3098727, member: 31758"]
That’s part of it. But whether you trust the mechanic or not you still have the final responsibility per the existing FAA guidance. I’ve stated this a number of times along with the references. It is what it is.[/QUOTE]

That was your big secret you claim to be saving people from with MB? Mmm-kay thanks for the obvious.

QUOTE="Bell206, post: 3098727, member: 31758"]
No. My assertion continues to be there are owners who request and pay mechanics to sign off improper maintenance. You’re continually stuck on it's all done without the owners knowledge. You’re wrong. This type work is done with intent by the owner. Improper work performed by APIAs without the owners knowledge for whatever reason is a separate topic which usually manifests itself in different ways.[/QUOTE]

NEGATIVE. I said two things. The owner knows exactly what the mechanic writes down, and most owners wouldnt know if that was correct or if it was done correctly.

Duh.

As you say, FAA thinks owners know more than their own trained and certified mechanics. Stupid of course. We don't.

I already share it with every post I make. No sticky post needed. As to it being “magic wisdom” or a “secret sauce” it’s not by any means. This stuff has been out in the public domain and written about for ages. No secrets, no magic. You just think it is.

Again NEGATIVE. You stated you were saving poor pilots from ol' MB regularly and didnt say how. For all I knew you were offering them diet advice for extra regularity. You didn't say.

Now that you've said it you still haven't explained how it saves anybody from anything. FAA still expects (wrongly) the untrained non-mechanic to magically know if you, MB, or any other mechanic, is blowing smoke up their butt. Or doing something wrong.

Nobody is living in their mechanic's shop 24/7. We drop the plane off, look over the written work order when presented, and say it looks reasonable from whatever our particular background is and any manufacturer instructions we can find. We aren't truly qualified by any stretch of the imagination to know if the mechanic or the inspector did it right.

Pilots rely on FAA to manage A&Ps and inspectors. Then FAA says we are magically responsible for airworthiness.

They're going to hand me a bill and a signed off logbook. I'm going to do a careful run up, test whatever was broken as best I can, look it over with whatever knowledge I can, maybe I researched it a bit in the hotel room, and I'll be along my merry way. Maybe an extra lap around the field.

If FAA thinks I know than their mechanics or wrenching on airplanes better than they do, they're delusional.

But that's not news. Why would you think it is?

So having published articles makes a person’s point more authoritative for you? Regardless I have written published articles. Several on PoA know them. But I prefer to take what I have written and learned and pay it forward via posts here and a few other sites. All free of charge. But since you need a hero to become a whole owner, here’s one article quote (not mine) that supports my statement above: owners are responsible for a mechanics work. Do you believe me now?

View attachment 97156

Never disbelieved you because it took you this long to state what you were teaching owners about in this thread. That we are PIC. We knew that already. We even teach it.

And I don't disagree with you that FAA thinks that's sane. If course in reality it isn't. But what's new with FAA? All sorts of owners know jack all about aircraft maintenance. We may pick up things over the years but we aren't mechanics.

Other than 30 years of reading that particular chunk of sky is falling from folks like yourself. Great. What do I do with that knowledge? Fly an extra lap around Podunk with an eye on the engine instruments after a long run up, is about it.

At home base I have a whopping choice of Shop Number One or Shop Number Two. Third busiest GA airport in the entire country. Two.

The reality is no matter what FAA wants, at some point I'm handing someone keys and trusting their system for managing their mechanics.

QUOTE="Bell206, post: 3098727, member: 31758"]
Ha. Not hardly. I don’t even consider myself in his league. But you on the other hand, are definitely in his league and can probably give him some stout competition. You both are primarily IT gurus, you both imply to have extensive aviation knowledge, you both have an extended online presence, and you both have worked on your own aircraft. The only place MB gets you is he has an APIA so he can sign off the work on his aircraft. Sounds right up your alley.[/QUOTE]

Mike isn't an IT guru. I've seen his website. LOL.

I don't claim anything about my knowledge. All I can prove, like anybody else, is I met the minimum FAA standard for my certificates. I don't consider my knowledge extensive at all. I definitely don't claim to be a mechanic. I can claim to be an owner for over a decade, talked to a lot of owners, and ran the books for a small club for six years. Flown around the mountains a bunch. That's about it. -- Not sure who you're thinking of that claims any special knowledge.

I have no idea what an "extended online presence" is. I hang out here and talk aviation, I'm not on any other discussion sites other than having a couple logins I never use, I certainly don't have any fancy YouTube channels or any of that, and I read the same FB groups most other folks here do. Don't run any of em, and definitely don't have an aviation website.

I've never done anything serious work on my or any other aircraft. Not sure where you got that idea. I've posted here numerous times over decades that the "owner assist annual" is a myth around here. It's big shops that are backed up for months. They don't want owners anywhere near their shop floor.

Heck I don't think I've even done everything on the owner approved list in 30 years. I teach students the mechanics are the mechanics, and the things FAA says you have to check to see if a mechanic signed off on before you can legally fly this plane... And here's some bad things to watch out for on this model... the guy over in the shop knows a hell of a lot more about them than I ever will.

That's just the kind of shops we have. They're all multiple months behind, and assembly lines inside. Nice people and all, but it's not like Podunk where yours is the only plane in the shop and there's two mechanics. They've got em packed in wingtip to wingtip and it's a big hangar.

I like reading my maintence manual and seeing what Cessna says y'all do, but if FAA thinks I can monitor all of it... Well... Clearly I can't. I can hang out places like here and get a vague insight into stuff to look for that isn't in the books, and write the check and say thanks when it's back in my hangar with proper logbook sign offs and a long detailed receipt.

That's reality, no matter what they think I'm capable of without training.

Like most owners here, we go where the fleets go. Shop One or Shop Two. It'd be big news if Shop Three showed up.

I have to tell students the system works or they'd never get in a 40 year old machine.

Oh. And some folks on the Internet will tell ya the sky is falling. They've been saying that since I was dialing into CompuServe so... You read and decide.

Definitely not an airplane mechanic. Just a guy who's seen the same ones flying fine maintained at the local mega shops for three decades.

Same airplanes I flew as a renter almost 20 years ago.

I'll let the new guy I helped get an intro flight know the anonymous internet mechanic says somewhere non-spscific that there's bad mechanics and inspectors signing off on stuff they shouldn't and I'm sure his instructor will cover that he's always PIC.

You got something useful I should pass along to him? Other than FAA will pretend he's a qualified mechanic in 40 or so flight hours? LOL.

All that drama about THAT?

And even some impresive new mythology about me.

I thought maybe you were going to bring up something we didn't all already know. Worth a shot.

I'm PIC and an owner and have to accept an airplane I didn't work on. Color me shocked at such news. Yawn.

 

[Bell206]

As always childish personal insults. And as always, I have made none.

Ha. You always crack me up. When you and others are confronted with actual personal experiences and facts you don’t like, you either go off on tangents or quit posting. If you’re insulted by being a “babbler” you need look no further than your mirror as that was your word choice. Remember?

What ARE you babbling about?

Was I supposed to be insulted by that statement?

As for the “in-charge” part I think in general PoA would also agree given the length and context of most of your posts like the last one. Hard to insult the truth. Regardless, the only thing childish in this thread is your consistent altering of my words and context to suit your narrative which does get quite old. As I’ve said before put me on ignore and sleep peacefully.

I like reading my maintence manual and seeing what Cessna says y'all do, but if FAA thinks I can monitor all of it... Well... Clearly I can't.

I think you nailed it again. Just because you personally can’t handle the required responsibility doesn’t mean everyone else is the same. Quite a few owners accept and handle that owner responsibility with minimal issues. Even your hero, Mike Busch, states being an owner comes with that regulatory responsibility and it’s the owner who manages the APIAs and not the FAA like you believe.

But given you’re so steadfast in your lack of ability to fulfill that responsibility, by your own words, perhaps it’s time for you to get out of aircraft ownership and just rent. This would relieve you of that responsibility before you set yourself up to fail. Something to think about.

Mike isn't an IT guru. I've seen his website. LOL.

Insulting your hero now? Seems to be listed as an expert and a pioneer in your field here?



Now if you want to get back on the topic of owners who seek out and pay for $200 annuals from Post #86 or so, we can. Or we can stay on this tangent. Your call.

 

[Racerx]

View attachment 97170
View attachment 97183

Talk about an ego stroke.