Aeronca champ Sitka wood side panel rot?

I’ve often had folks tell me that there are no AD’s on a particular model

aircraft. Often I know there are but finding them was difficult at times.

IIRC in the paper AD days there was also “ FRA”or similar. So you might

have to research Aeronca, Bellanca, Champion, FRA and later American

Champion. Often some were dead ends for a particular model. Aeronca

led to the L-2 and others as there were several TC’s there were owned by

still other folks. The Index helped some but not 100%.


Today I believe Univair holds most former Piper TC’s ; but not the PA-12.

FS 2003 is the current holder AFAIK.


This can be significant. The recent MD-11 crash may have more

implications for Boeing as the TC Holder rather than former holder

McDonnell- Douglas. Note I’m not offering legal opinions here.
 
Doc Holliday said:
ou seem to struggle with the FAR's quite a bit and when someone tries to correct your misinterpretation you double down.

As far as personal attacks, you seem to hold that record as well.
Click to expand...
I have yet to read any post where a decent explanation was given to correct me. Arguments from a position of authority is nothing more than someone not being able to discuss a topic any further than meaningless drivel. I've still awaiting the explanation that the part doesn't trigger a major repair (those 5 pesky words)....

My sarcasm (earned through years of military service and being an Army brat) probably is way to rough for the baby soft hides of most people. What you call an attack doesn't even register on my radar.

Here's an idea: if you think I am wrong, post on why you think its incorrect. If I don't agree, its not called doubling down, its most likely that your explanation is limp and incomplete and does nothing to explain your reasoning and then (HORRORS OF HORRORS) I post why I think its not correct. ZOMFG! How dare someone question someone! He's a big bad meanie and only wants to argue!

As for my resume I've done too many things in too many places in too many industires in too many countries to write them all down. If you're pathetic enough to look me up online (like I know some of you did already) just remember this: the dates on the certificates are the LAST issued date, not the FIRST. But you knew that, right? LOL No you didn't HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
 
pfarber said:
I have yet to read any post where a decent explanation was given to correct me. Arguments from a position of authority is nothing more than someone not being able to discuss a topic any further than meaningless drivel. I've still awaiting the explanation that the part doesn't trigger a major repair (those 5 pesky words)....
Click to expand...
It's been answered numerous times on this thread. You either (a) won't accept it, or (b) move the goalpost.

pfarber said:
My sarcasm (earned through years of military service and being an Army brat) probably is way to rough for the baby soft hides of most people. What you call an attack doesn't even register on my radar.
Click to expand...

Sarcasm or deflection?
pfarber said:
Here's an idea: if you think I am wrong, post on why you think its incorrect. If I don't agree, its not called doubling down, its most likely that your explanation is limp and incomplete and does nothing to explain your reasoning and then (HORRORS OF HORRORS) I post why I think its not correct. ZOMFG! How dare someone question someone! He's a big bad meanie and only wants to argue!
Click to expand...

It's obvious you are only seeking an argument. The constant goal post moving, the lack of comprehension of the regulations and basic lack of understanding the topic at hand, then doubling down on wrong when someone tries to point out the obvious all point in that direction. And I'm not alone in that observation.
pfarber said:
As for my resume I've done too many things in too many places in too many industires in too many countries to write them all down. If you're pathetic enough to look me up online (like I know some of you did already) just remember this: the dates on the certificates are the LAST issued date, not the FIRST. But you knew that, right? LOL No you didn't HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Click to expand...

But yet you claim all of this aviation background and knowledge, and when asked for credentials you launch into yet another inane diatribe.

I noticed you mentioned something about all the ratings and certificates (FAA) that you hold. So enlighten us.
 
pfarber said:
the dates on the certificates are the LAST issued date, not the FIRST.
Click to expand...
Except we're not talking about dates on a certificate. We're talking about your lack of knowledge equivalent to a person just out of AP school. Even a new IA fresh off their multiple choice test has more understanding than you do. So it begs the question: are you an A&P and for how long?

pfarber said:
I've still awaiting the explanation that the part doesn't trigger a major repair
Click to expand...
Asked and answered above as quoted in the FAR. Perhaps you can provide the rule that supports your claim a PMA part is not a repair when installed by riveting or welding?
 
One of the pitfalls of experience is you know things but they have

changed. An example would be would be the requirement that an IA

send the FAA Form 8320-3 to the local GADO following every

Annual Inspection. FARs may change some over time but policies

can vary with time and location.


Another “Experience Pitfall” is remembering things like torque values.

Manufacturers have updated some of these values over time. Use current

procedures.


Gotta run. Another Periodic; oops Annual Inspection, to do!
 
pfarber said:
I have yet to read any post where a decent explanation was given to correct me. Arguments from a position of authority is nothing more than someone not being able to discuss a topic any further than meaningless drivel. I've still awaiting the explanation that the part doesn't trigger a major repair (those 5 pesky words)....
Click to expand...
We have yet to see you provide a decent explanation of why you think the arguments are incorrect. You apparently are not able to discuss topics beyond meaningless drivel.
pfarber said:
Here's an idea: if you think I am wrong, post on why you think its incorrect.
Click to expand...
Great idea…too bad you’re choosing not to do so.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top