paflyer
Final Approach
I wonder what would have happened if his bluff was called and you took it to a jury.
Piper airplane in-air breakups article
- Thread starter flyzone
- Start date
I wonder what would have happened if his bluff was called and you took it to a jury.
James331
Ejection Handle Pulled
- Joined
- Apr 18, 2014
- Messages
- 20,309
- Display Name
Display name:
James331
Seems with the burden of proof and all, why not just round file the letter, or connect to the net via unsecured or use the TOR?
paflyer
Final Approach
The "burden of proof" is on the part of the defendants.
James331
Ejection Handle Pulled
- Joined
- Apr 18, 2014
- Messages
- 20,309
- Display Name
Display name:
James331
So if you sue me, I need to prove I DIDNT DO IT?
Are we talking American law or Chinese law?
paflyer
Final Approach
You have to prove your allegation is true.
wanttaja
En-Route
Roundfiling doesn't work; you then lose the suit by default. Not good, having a judgement against you, even in another state.
Going anonymous works for some people, but I believe that if you're serious about wanting people to believe you, one makes a far more powerful impact by signing one's name to one's messages. In any case, it might not help...one of the features of the lawsuit was the allegation that I or my co-defendants had made certain threats, claims, etc. anonymously.
This was on Usenet, which has no "owners". POA is in a more vulnerable position, here. It's easy enough to say, "Well, if POA gets sued, they'll win", but they'll still have considerable outlay to defend themselves. Defeating the suit doesn't mean you get your expenses back. It'd take another suit, and with bankruptcies, etc. there's no guarantee you'd ever see a dime.
Finally, let me gently point out that the target of some of the vitriol regarding the Cherokee accidents is aimed at an attorney. Should he decide to sue, he *has* no legal expenses (he can do it on his own time) other than court fees.
Ron Wanttaja
No wonder the thing keeps coming apart.
James331
Ejection Handle Pulled
- Joined
- Apr 18, 2014
- Messages
- 20,309
- Display Name
Display name:
James331
That's what in saying, so the looser tries to sue you because of the meanie said something on the interwebz, the weeney trying to sue has to prove his BS case.
Also if you're never served, how can they prove anything?
cowman
Final Approach
There was a new AD the year I bought my Archer about cracks in the turnbuckle connecting the stabilator. A&P just replaced it, I believe the original AD said to use dye penetrant or something like that to look for cracks but the part was cheaper than doing all that.
I've always picked up the stabilator on every pre-flight and looked in at what portion of the mechanism I can see, it always looks the same with a light coat of grease and everything connected so I guess it's good.
I've always picked up the stabilator on every pre-flight and looked in at what portion of the mechanism I can see, it always looks the same with a light coat of grease and everything connected so I guess it's good.
Clark1961
Touchdown! Greaser!
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2008
- Messages
- 17,737
- Display Name
Display name:
Display name:
That was an interesting AD as It seemed to me that it was the result of poor inspection practices rather than any particular problem with the turnbuckles. The AD required cleaning and inspection for corrosion, cracks or broken cable strands using 10x magnification. Dye penetrant inspection is not required. Since the cable ends had to be inspected most of the cleaning work was required. Replacing the turnbuckle body seems like an interesting way to comply. Anyway as I understand it the cables and turnbuckles should be inspected during the annual anyway. Maybe other folks see it differently.
The actual text of the SB referenced by the AD:
5. Clean the turnbuckle bodies and associated cable terminals thoroughly with Methyl Ethyl Ketone (MEK) or acetone prior to inspection. The non-threaded surfaces of the turnbuckle body and cable terminals may be cleaned using Scotch-Brite™ General Purpose Green Scouring Pad 96 or 105b. NOTE: Most of the affected aircraft use control cables featuring strands made of galvanized steel. By design, the galvanized coating corrodes sacrificially, protecting the steel strands underneath. This normal corrosion process creates zinc oxide powder, which can migrate along the length of the control cable, covering the surfaces of the turnbuckle components with an inert white speckled coating. This coating, along with any other contaminants such as dirt, oil or grease, must be removed in order to properly examine the turnbuckle and cable terminals.
6. Using a 10X magnifier, a mirror and a suitable light source, carefully examine the entire surface of each turnbuckle, cable terminal, and adjacent portion of the flight control cable, inspecting for cracks, corrosion, or broken cable strands. Any evidence of cracks or cable fraying, however minute, is cause for replacement. Any evidence of corrosion that remains after accomplishing the cleaning instructions above is cause for replacement.
cowman
Final Approach
It's been a few years, I might be wrong on the dye penetrant part. I do distinctly remember him saying it was cheaper to just replace it due to cost....maybe his hours inspecting it vs cost of the part?
What I do remember is I got a couple grand knocked off the purchase price because of it and then found out it was nothing at the annual so I was pretty happy.
What I do remember is I got a couple grand knocked off the purchase price because of it and then found out it was nothing at the annual so I was pretty happy.