FAA shut down my 3M aircraft graphic film.

I am the OP. My IA was in the midst of an annual on my plane, so installing the stickers would have disabled him from signing off on airworthiness. So, I’ll wait until he’s finished with annual, signed off on it, then install the stickers anyway.

 

Thanks for the clarification, although I confess I still don't see how the stickers would have disabled him from signing off. He misrepresented the product and application to the FSDO, and is operating under incorrect assumptions. However, your reply did clear up my incorrect thinking that he had just butted his head in .. somehow I missed the fact that he was in the midst of doing an annual on your plane. My apologies for that... to you and to him.

 

Agreed.

In my case most of my work is helping a friend and I don't sign anything off in the logbooks. Can't count the number of planes I have helped the owner go from floats to wheels or wheels to floats.

I hold an A&P, not currently employed as one. The only plane that gets my signature in the logbooks is my own.

 

Thanks for the clarification.

 

It's largely about relationships. I do the same for those that don't take advantage. And kudos for paying them well.

 

Thanks for seeing my POV.

 

As an IA I would have had no problem with 3m graphics in lettering, wrap, or strips. So not sure of the confusion on an STC but Im sure theres someone on here that would love to argue for the sake of argument. STC or a supplemental Type certificate is a letter authorizing a product for use on an aircraft. A guarantee that its not going to become dislodged while in flight and wrap itself in a rudder ailerons or where ever. Every product involved in aviation comes with something to approve it for aircraft use or is pretty easy to find some type of approval from a manufacture. Personally Ive seen some pretty stupid stuff owners do with aircraft but lucky for me I dont have to recertify those ships. Its now between the owner and the FAA. To answer your question to try and obtain an engineering feild approval you have modify your aircraft in such a way that it no longer conforms to manufactures specification.

 

Very true and well written. As an IA when I signe off an annual I am stating the aircraft conforms to a) manufactures recomendations 2) has not been modified or altered to an unsafe condition and that all parts and equipment conform to some type of FAA approved standard. This is actually the first time Ive heard of any debate about 3m graphics decals for steipping and lettering. There has been some debate about full wraps as far as being able to inspect the exterior of the aircraft for loose or working rivits and corrosion. I dont work on larger transport aircraft but do know they are stripped down every so often and inspected or x-rayed and full wraps dont make much of a differance.

 

ifferance.No it means I have an Inspection Authorization endorsemnet that can be taken away by the FAA along with my A&P if I knowingly or inadvertantly sign off an aircraft that is unsafe.

 

FYI: 10 years or so ago there was a lot discussion about this topic and all "3M" decals got grouped together. Enough so the Feds came out with the pg 67 memo in the link referenced in Post 19. Afterwards it was clear to most but there were/are still some outliers on both sides. However, in this particular thread I think there's a bit more to the whole story.

 

If you're going to nit pick like that then calling him an A&P is grammatically incorrect.

 

I've re-read as well. With no knowledge, which never stops anyone on POA, could it be that some moron in the past covered a fabric covered aircraft with shrink-wrap? I Cub would not fly well with that material as a primary covering on the wings.
What the OP is applying is a graphic film. It doesn't shrink, nor does it wrap. It's an adhesive backed film designed to be applied to painted metal surfaces.

 

I dunno. Seems like he has a bad attitude to me.

 

The little yellow card that the FSDO signs for me every other year has "INSPECTION AUTHORIZATION" in great big letters at the top of it. IA is the recognized abrvtn for it.

 

Duct tape.
And it worked.

Lotsa airplanes are plastered over with globs of vinyl graphics - the airshow guys like it because it makes it easy when they change sponsors.

 

That's what I always thought, the person is an Authorized Inspector, he/she holds an Inspection Authorization.
It takes the holding of both the A and P license, loose either and the IA goes away at the same time, so it is redundant to say A&P and IA, IA says it all.

 

Remember when mom told you, "Silence is golden"? Always listen to mother or pay the price.

 

I second the motion that you need a new IA. In my 30 years of aircraft ownership, I've encountered two distinct types of mechanics. One has a common-sense attitude, and understands that more paperwork doesn't necessarily make airplanes any safer. He's constantly busy, has a long line of customers waiting, and therefore is focused on getting airplanes in and out of his shop as quickly as possible in a safe an legal manner. He doesn't go looking for problems that aren't there and only has contact with the FAA when absolutely necessary. The other kind seems to have a lot more time on his hands. He's got the FSDO on speed dial, loves to nit-pick and argue minutia. His default response is always 'no' and it's up to the owner to provide basis for approval - and even then he probably won't sign off on it. He'd make a better lawyer than a mechanic, but I guess A&P school was cheaper.

I personally look for the first type, even if it means I have to book my annual months in advance.

C.

 

Totally agree @camorton - I've met both kinds. I much prefer the common sense approach and even better if he'll let me R&R the spark plugs, oil & air filters, and remove the inspection panels and interior for him. He too has a line out the door waiting to get into his shop and I fear the day he retires.

 

I guess that I'm reading this differently than almost everyone else. I'm reading this as the IA has been doing the maintenance and annuals of this airplane. I'm guessing that there's an agreement or history that when the owner does maintenance, the IA will signoff said work after inspecting it (I had this arrangement with my old IA).

The IA sees what's going on but has no idea about the rules of this and figures it would be best to find out before the owner has spent time and money on the work. Finds out that it's not okay (whether it's accurate or not) and lets the owner know so they can stop before putting any more time into a project that the IA will not sign off.

Now the way I did with my old IA is BEFORE doing anything, I would talk to him about it. He would then advise me on any common pitfalls of the task, offer a special tool if one was necessary, and tell me to let him know when I was done so he could inspect and sign off the logbooks. One time I wanted to do something and he told me that I couldn't. Actually, he said I could, but he wouldn't signoff on it because it wasn't approved or legal.

But without hearing from the IA in this case, we'll never know for sure about the events or motivation. But that never stopped POA speculation, right?

 

finish the story: ....and then you went EAB.

At least that's my lesson learned from your anecdote. Certified mx is a unicorn-chasing racket, and a gratuitous one at that.

 

Only to those who can see unicorns. For someone who is so anti-TC aircraft why do you torture yourself every day and not move into E/AB? Even if the FAA develops an "Owner-Maintained" category you'll still have to follow all those nasty regulations. Difference being your name will be in the log vs one those "gratuitous" mechanics. Perhaps cut your losses now and go experimental before you start to see unicorns everywhere.

 

yeah I'm working on it (RV-6A). Appreciate your concern .

 

That may be your story but it ain't mine.

My decision to build an airplane has nothing to do with maintenance by A&P's or IA's. I simply wanted something that simply didn't exist in the TC world that I could afford.

 

I have an A&P license and an IA certificate. Does my A&P make me a Airframe and Powerplant? No but you would still refer to me as an A&P.

 

FYI: Technically we have a Mechanics Certificate with Airframe and Powerplant ratings and an Inspection Authorization. The term "license" went out years ago. But I firmly believe we are still mechanics in name vs aircraft maintenance technicians as most of us don't where white lab coats.

 

At least they are not calling you a "Technologist"...

 

could be worse......engineer.

 

FWIW: The funny part to the mechanic, technician, engineer titles goes back to when they were looking to split out maintenance from Part 65 to a new Part 66 with new certificates, type ratings, etc. Since most international aviation mechanics are called engineers they originally pushed for that classification. But if I recall correctly certain US professional engineer associations got involved and things didn't work out as planned so the powers to be thought "technician" was be more dignified than mechanic and pushed the AMT concept. That's where the "white lab coat" thing came out. Well in the end Part 66 was dropped for various reasons however you'll still see the AMT references used. Since most original aviation terms came from nautical terms, rumor was that the reason the US stuck to "mechanic" was that Charles Taylor (1st aviation mechanic) stated he didn't fix boats and the nautical "engineer" title didn't carry through. It was all quite comical at the time as some people really took this issue to the extreme.

 

I dont split hairs over terminology.

 

Then you're not gonna like POA. It's all these self-important yahoos do all day

 

yes.....at my age, all hairs matter.

 

Ha. Neither do I. But I guess you missed the smiley face at the end.....

 

That smiley face is subjective.

 

If I could be sure (and ONLY if I could be sure) that I could find an IA who would be willing to form this kind of relationship with me, I would immediately begin the search for a decent certified 4-cylinder retract and live happily ever after. I'd still want to build something because the experience of doing a build is a goal. But if could be sure I could find an IA like that, I'd be in the market and searching for a good plane to buy tomorrow.

 

By the time you read through some of the threads, you'll have a splitting hair ache.

 

Since this thread is out there.

Does anyone have any good products for vinyl leading edge material besides regular plotter vinyl? Looking for something that’s white that would go well on the leading edges of a fabric covered plane. I was thinking of car wrap vinyl as well but haven’t had time to experiment.

 

We apply a clear abrasion tape to the CRJ in certain areas. It would probably last a very very long time on slower aircraft.

https://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/cspages/protectiveLeading.php