Ameri - King Corporation loses TSO

So what does that mean for those of us that have their ELTs installed in our airplanes?
 
Greg Bockelman said:
So what does that mean for those of us that have their ELTs installed in our airplanes?
Click to expand...
Right now, nothing. As the letter says, the FAA has merely "lost confidence" in them. They may issue an AD requiring anything from inspection to outright removal from service of these units.

As KGruber says, AK is a crap company making crap units.
 
Probably nothing, provided it was manufactured prior to December 28, 2015.

Of course, if the company goes tango-uniform, no further support, but how much support do you need for an ELT?
 
Well, bottom line is that if I have to replace it I will put a 406 unit in it.
 
No love lost here. My first AK 406 unit crappd put 6 months after install - it emitted a tone in the cockpit, even though it appeared to not be transmitting. Second unit was OK until I sold the plane.
 
Greg Bockelman said:
Well, bottom line is that if I have to replace it I will put a 406 unit in it.
Click to expand...
When the required equipment must be TSO'd And the company looses their TSO, how can it be legal to use it?
 
flyingron said:
Right now, nothing.
Oh yes it does, the notice says that ' after the date these are no approved. If you have one it is gone.
As the letter says, the FAA has merely "lost confidence" in them. They may issue an AD requiring anything from inspection to outright removal from service of these units.

It says a lot more than that.

As KGruber says, AK is a crap company making crap units.
Click to expand...

owners must inspect for the equipment installed and yada, yada.

Greg, yours is a lot older than the date, stand by for farther instructions. You'll hear more on this.
 
Hopefully this will kick the FAA into revising 91.207. to require some thing that works like PLBs or ??
 
We need a re write of chapter 23 ,aviation is getting costly ,when the govt. can indiscriminately change certification of equipment used in GA aircraft.
 
Tom-D said:
owners must inspect for the equipment installed and yada, yada.

Greg, yours is a lot older than the date, stand by for farther instructions. You'll hear more on this.
Click to expand...
I figured as much. But until I get some sort of official letter in the mail, I will conduct business as usual.
 
The lack of TSOA just says they can't make/sell new TSO'd items. It doesn't cancel the airworthiness of the existing ones. If the FAA wants to do that, they need an AD (which they allude might be coming in the press release on the TSO cancellation). It would depend if they determine that the existing units really don't meet the standard (and they care enough about that implication). An ELT won't crash a plane, but AK makes other things as well (such as altitude encoders).
 
They could go on pretty much business as usual after scratching the TSO off applicable stuff. Their customers might not like the new and improved non-TSO versions.
 
bnt83 said:
They could go on pretty much business as usual after scratching the TSO off applicable stuff. Their customers might not like the new and improved non-TSO versions.
Click to expand...
Actually, they can't. They likely don't have any manufacturing authority other than what was inherent in the TSOA.
 
flyingron said:
Actually, they can't. They likely don't have any manufacturing authority other than what was inherent in the TSOA.
Click to expand...

So they would also have to change the part numbers?



"All articles manufactured, sold, or distributed by Ameri-King Corporation (Corp.) for installation on type certificated products. This applies to Ameri-King Corp. parts and articles including"

They can still build and sell experimental from what I understand.
 
Stewartb said:
EX guys have more sense than to use that crap.
Click to expand...

A decade ago I witnessed how easily their ELT impact switch was damaged. It worked, just couldn't reset it again because it was broke.
 
bnt83 said:
They can still build and sell experimental from what I understand.
Click to expand...

I suppose for some parts. I think absent the TSO they don't have FCC type approval either so ELTs would be illegal.
 
Ron, just picking the flyspecs out of the pepper ...

There is practically zero equipment these days having FCC type APPROVAL. That means that you send a representative sampling of production equipment back to the FCC at Laurel Labs and THEY do the measurements and "approve" the equipment. By far the equipment these days is type ACCEPTED, which means that *I* do the tests, report the results AND the test equipment used AND the calibration cycle on the test gear ... yada, yada, yada.

Having gone down this road with half a dozen RST models, FCC acceptance and FAA "approval" in whatever form have no bearing on one another. In general, you print two sets of test data. One set gets sent to the FCC in DC and one set gets sent to the FAA in Ok City. (You also do some stuff for the FAA that the FCC doesn't require ... like shake-rattle-roll and EMI spike tests.) You get back TWO pieces of paper and just because one gets pulled at a later date does NOT necessarily mean that they both become void.

The caveat to THAT is that if the reason that the TSO was pulled is because production units are NOT meeting the original TSO tests the FCC may take another look to see if they are not meeting the TA requirement as well ... if somehow the FAA action gets the FCC's attention.

Best to you and Margy ...

Jim
 
flyingron said:
The lack of TSOA just says they can't make/sell new TSO'd items. It doesn't cancel the airworthiness of the existing ones. If the FAA wants to do that, they need an AD .
Click to expand...

Not really. the FAA has changed 91.207 before and they could again. I'm hoping they do, by deleting it all together. or they could simply say. " all pilots must wear a impact activated PLB when flying as PIC. then there would be no requirement to install one in your aircraft.
 
Interesting side note... a whistle-blower gave the FAA inside information about the situation at AmeriKing five years ago. It took them two years to get serious about the investigation, and another 3 years to do anything about it. Ahhh, gotta love that bureaucracy.
 
CT4ME said:
Interesting side note... a whistle-blower gave the FAA inside information about the situation at AmeriKing five years ago. It took them two years to get serious about the investigation, and another 3 years to do anything about it. Ahhh, gotta love that bureaucracy.
Click to expand...
Which probably guarantees that any AD will go direct to final as an "emergency" measure.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top