There is a God

[steingar]

Th FAA reviewing part 23, to facilitate light aircraft certification and safety modifications, according to EAA.

 

[Tarheel Pilot]

YAY! Let's hope this lowers the cost of LSA to something more reasonable!

100k+ for a new SLSA is NOT affordable!

 

[TMetzinger]

YAY! Let's hope this lowers the cost of LSA to something more reasonable!

100k+ for a new SLSA is NOT affordable!

LSAs are NOT part 23 aircraft, so I don't think this will make one bit of difference to that market.

But it MAY make maintenance and modifications a bit better for our aging fleet of certified airplanes.

 

[Skylane81E]

Nice!

 

[Tarheel Pilot]

LSAs are NOT part 23 aircraft, so I don't think this will make one bit of difference to that market.

But it MAY make maintenance and modifications a bit better for our aging fleet of certified airplanes.

Oh...well......I still stand by my statement.

 

[Skylane81E]

I think we can all agree that 100K for a slow, light two seater is a little much.

But even with the SLSAs there are a lot of certification hoops to jump through. I was "part" of the certification of a SLSA that was already certificated in Europe. Even with all the credit given for being certified there it took three engineers and a pilot an entire summer to get the EXPERIMENTAL placard pulled.

 

[Tarheel Pilot]

It does make one wonders whether or not the reorganization will allow certified aircraft owners to update their panels and engines, and NOT have the update be worth more than the aircraft itself.

 

[Tom-D]

Have we ever gotten any thing from the FAA that we wanted?

we ask for 1 thing and always get their lawyerized version.

 

[steingar]

I really can't see them making it any worse.

 

[Tom-D]

I really can't see them making it any worse.

Don't hold your breath, they may prove you wrong.

Remember the Airlines and the aircraft and parts manufacturers have more money to throw at this than you and I do.

 

[RotorAndWing]

I really can't see them making it any worse.

 

[kontiki]

I think this might be what the discussion is about.

http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org...s_field/small_airplanes/media/CPS_Part_23.pdf

It really made sense to me. Probably of value to someone thinking about STC work in the future, maybe as an FAA DER or DAR.

 

[Jay Honeck]

We all know the problems facing GA. We all know that many of these problems are self-inflicted by the government.

Unfortunately, there are so many things wrong with the FAA -- heck, with EVERY federal agency -- that it's nearly impossible to imagine any solutions coming from within the organization.

First off, they have NO incentive to change. What, you think we're going to fire them if they don't?

Second, they have NO incentive to actually solve any problems. "Solving" a problem actually reduces the need for them, thus reducing their power -- so why would we think the FAA is going to "fix" GA?

Third, partially because of 1 and 2, and partially because of the debt crisis, too many of these folks are into that whole "I'm getting mine now; this won't implode until after I'm dead" mind-set. There is no less malleable mind than one that is dead-set on getting whatever it can RIGHT NOW.

No, the only way the FAA is going to fix GA is by having the fix imposed on it from outside the organization. Whether that's done by a commission, a committee, or a benevolent dictator remains to be seen.

Either way, I'm not optimistic.

 

[Neal Howard]

What's really needed is a new experimental category for "antique" spamcans. Call it "Experimental-Antique" and let it apply for up to 4-seat factory planes that are over 30 years old and under 5000 lbs max gross weight. Allow owner maintenance and modifications exactly like Experimental Amateur-Built, and require only an annual "condition inspection" by a plain A&P, and lift the requirement for any mods to be TSO's/STC'ed/etc (e.g. allow you to put a Dynon EFIS into Cherokee or C172 panel). Offer a one-time, one-way trade of your "standard" airworthiness certificate for an exp-antique cert.

 

[Tom-D]

what we really need is a owner maintained catagory, that still must meet its type certificate at annual every year.

really,,,,,,,, who cares who turns the wrench.

 

[poadeleted21]

what we really need is a owner maintained catagory, that still must meet its type certificate at annual every year.

really,,,,,,,, who cares who turns the wrench.

Already got one, it's called A&P school or build your own and fly it with the 51% rule. They want some level of competence turning wrenches on planes and I think they have that part right (go to school, build your own or be supervised). I find my A&P bills to be the easiest and most reasonable bills I get to pay for my airplane. The over the $600 automotive part that can be had at NAPA for $80 is hard to swallow, even when they still say "AUTOMOTIVE" right on the dang things. They could loosen up on some of the avionics stuff too. I know the general untrained public and I bet it's far less than 1% that I'd let change the oil in my plane, I wouldn't want to buy one from them that they have "maintained".

 

[Tom-D]

Already got one, it's called A&P school or build your own and fly it with the 51% rule. They want some level of competence turning wrenches on planes and I think they have that part right (go to school, build your own or be supervised). I find my A&P bills to be the easiest and most reasonable bills I get to pay for my airplane. The over the $600 automotive part that can be had at NAPA for $80 is hard to swallow, even when they still say "AUTOMOTIVE" right on the dang things. They could loosen up on some of the avionics stuff too. I know the general untrained public and I bet it's far less than 1% that I'd let change the oil in my plane, I wouldn't want to buy one from them that they have "maintained".

You must realize that right now any one can maintain their own aircraft, it is just a matter of who returns it to service.

I mentor most of my customers thru the maintenance of their aircraft, they do the work. I inspect and return it to service.

65.81

It's really a matter of how often we IAs will see the aircraft.

a category like this would open up the possibility of those who might build from scratch to have a ready built aircraft they could maintain. many build simply for that ability.

 

[Tarheel Pilot]

You must realize that right now any one can maintain their own aircraft, it is just a matter of who returns it to service.

I mentor most of my customers thru the maintenance of their aircraft, they do the work. I inspect and return it to service.

65.81

It's really a matter of how often we IAs will see the aircraft.

a category like this would open up the possibility of those who might build from scratch to have a ready built aircraft they could maintain. many build simply for that ability.

I wonder if the Owner Maintained Category would allow you to take the shell of a certified aircraft and add in the engines and avionics yourself.

 

[poadeleted21]

You must realize that right now any one can maintain their own aircraft, it is just a matter of who returns it to service.

I mentor most of my customers thru the maintenance of their aircraft, they do the work. I inspect and return it to service.

65.81

It's really a matter of how often we IAs will see the aircraft.

a category like this would open up the possibility of those who might build from scratch to have a ready built aircraft they could maintain. many build simply for that ability.

Go outside, better yet, head to wal-mart, look around, do you want those people owning a $7,000 early 60's Cherokee that they have been wrenching on and "getting airworthy" for the past 6 months with no training or supervisions? I have a lot to complain about with owning a certified airplane my A&P isn't even on the long list.

I'm in the camp of "I like it the way it is". Build it, learn it or have someone who has look over your shoulder. I have a great A&P/IA that lets me do "about all of it" so I may be biased. He's really nice too, he looks over my shoulder every now and then and then Ive caught him a few times going back over what I did with a wrench when he thought I wasn't looking I really don't want Joe Public turning wrenches unsupervised, and if you can build 51% of a plane and fly it, I'm convinced. I would LOVE to build my own plane, an RV-10 would be perfect for me. I just don't have the $ or space at the time.

$10,000 15 year old GPS technology, I can complain about that! Lets get pumps with mogas at the airport and an STC dished out to every owner that can safely run it, the gas pump wasn't my issue when I was paying 3.00/this 6.00+ business is cutting into my flying. 300 bucks to fill up a cherokee

 

[Tom-D]

I wonder if the Owner Maintained Category would allow you to take the shell of a certified aircraft and add in the engines and avionics yourself.

AS long as it met its type design, or its properly altered condition.

 

[Tom-D]

Go outside, better yet, head to wal-mart, look around, do you want those people owning a $7,000 early 60's Cherokee that they have been wrenching on and "getting airworthy" for the past 6 months with no training or supervisions? I have a lot to complain about with owning a certified airplane my A&P isn't even on the long list.

I'm in the camp of "I like it the way it is". Build it, learn it or have someone who has look over your shoulder. I have a great A&P/IA that lets me do "about all of it" so I may be biased. He's really nice too, he looks over my shoulder every now and then and then Ive caught him a few times going back over what I did with a wrench when he thought I wasn't looking I really don't want Joe Public turning wrenches unsupervised, and if you can build 51% of a plane and fly it, I'm convinced. I would LOVE to build my own plane, an RV-10 would be perfect for me. I just don't have the $ or space at the time.

$10,000 15 year old GPS technology, I can complain about that! Lets get pumps with mogas at the airport and an STC dished out to every owner that can safely run it, the gas pump wasn't my issue when I was paying 3.00/this 6.00+ business is cutting into my flying. 300 bucks to fill up a cherokee

Stupid has its price and the stupid ones would be weeded out pretty quick. and the insurance companies would take their piece of flesh.

there are a great many people who could do a job equal to most A&Ps and fly much cheaper than they do now.

 

[Jay Honeck]

The stupid equation is a harsh one. I agree, it would sort itself out quickly.

There are so many dumb things in the FAA rules, it's hard to list just one -- but here's my latest beef: Why can I (as an owner) legally change my oil and filter -- a project that takes a knowledge of safety-wiring technique -- but it's illegal for me to put a new battery in my airplane?

Changing out the battery literally takes two minutes, and requires undoing two bolts -- but requires an A&P sign-off? WTF?

 

[poadeleted21]

Stupid has its price and the stupid ones would be weeded out pretty quick. and the insurance companies would take their piece of flesh.

there are a great many people who could do a job equal to most A&Ps and fly much cheaper than they do now.

Didn't I see it on here? "Stupid kills, but not enough to help". I agree, but if you open it up to everyone, well that's everyone, not the great many you speak of so, how do we sort them out?

 

[Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe]

Go outside, better yet, head to wal-mart, look around, do you want those people owning a $7,000 early 60's Cherokee that they have been wrenching on and "getting airworthy" for the past 6 months with no training or supervisions?

I guess that explains why older aircraft are falling out of the sky all over Canada.

Or perhaps not.

I'm in the camp of "I like it the way it is". Build it, learn it or have someone who has look over your shoulder. I have a great A&P/IA that lets me do "about all of it" so I may be biased. He's really nice too, he looks over my shoulder every now and then and then Ive caught him a few times going back over what I did with a wrench when he thought I wasn't looking I really don't want Joe Public turning wrenches unsupervised, and if you can build 51% of a plane and fly it, I'm convinced. I would LOVE to build my own plane, an RV-10 would be perfect for me. I just don't have the $ or space at the time.

Why build when you can buy? There are alot of used E-AB aircraft on the market. Like the one I bought (and maintain).

Lets get pumps with mogas at the airport and an STC dished out to every owner that can safely run it, the gas pump wasn't my issue when I was paying 3.00/this 6.00+ business is cutting into my flying. 300 bucks to fill up a cherokee

STC? Don't need no steenken STC...

 

[Tom-D]

Didn't I see it on here? "Stupid kills, but not enough to help". I agree, but if you open it up to everyone, well that's everyone, not the great many you speak of so, how do we sort them out?

Limit it to owners, hopefully they will be rich/smart enough to buy, eliminating the stupid ones.

modifying a 50 buck truck, and hurting some one doesn't feel the same as modifying an aircraft and falling thru some bodies roof.

the thinking happens on a different level.

 

[PilotAlan]

...head to wal-mart, look around, do you want those people owning a $7,000 early 60's Cherokee that they have been wrenching on and "getting airworthy" for the past 6 months with no training or supervisions?

Many of the people you look down at at WalMart can repair damn near anything mechanical. Not the WalMart in the middle of the city, but the WalMart in the country.
My nephew has been repairing farm equipment for 20 years (he's 30 now), and could easily keep a Cherokee or 172 running right.

...if you open it up to everyone, well that's everyone, not the great many you speak of so, how do we sort them out?

It's not everyone. It's those who have the knowledge, intelligence, and determination to complete a private pilot's license or higher.

If it's unsafe for a PPL to fix the rock-simple systems in a 1966 Cherokee, but perfectly OK for anyone with a pulse to install a lift on their Chevy and drive head on with folks on a two lane road with 24" of clearance and closure rates over 120mph.

 

[Bob Noel]

Changing out the battery literally takes two minutes, and requires undoing two bolts -- but requires an A&P sign-off? WTF?

um, huh? Since when?

(off to check the list of allowable maintenance actions....)

edit: yep, "24) Replacing and servicing batteries." is in the list of preventative maintenance actions that the owner/operator may performa and approve for return to service.

 

[RotorAndWing]

The stupid equation is a harsh one. I agree, it would sort itself out quickly.

There are so many dumb things in the FAA rules, it's hard to list just one -- but here's my latest beef: Why can I (as an owner) legally change my oil and filter -- a project that takes a knowledge of safety-wiring technique -- but it's illegal for me to put a new battery in my airplane?

Changing out the battery literally takes two minutes, and requires undoing two bolts -- but requires an A&P sign-off? WTF?

With that rant you have demonstrated you do not understand the applicable CFR's pertaining to Owner Performed Aircraft Maintenance, yet you want to be allowed to work on a certified aircraft?

 

[bbchien]

The stupid equation is a harsh one. I agree, it would sort itself out quickly.

There are so many dumb things in the FAA rules, it's hard to list just one -- but here's my latest beef: Why can I (as an owner) legally change my oil and filter -- a project that takes a knowledge of safety-wiring technique -- but it's illegal for me to put a new battery in my airplane?

Changing out the battery literally takes two minutes, and requires undoing two bolts -- but requires an A&P sign-off? WTF?

Jay, you can change the oil and filter see part 43 Appendix A.

As for the battery you can change it too- though it needs an approved Return to Service.....sigh.

 

[Tom-D]

With that rant you have demonstrated you do not understand the applicable CFR's pertaining to Owner Performed Aircraft Maintenance, yet you want to be allowed to work on a certified aircraft?

There should be a great number of tasks added to that list, direct parts replacement isn't that difficult.

An owner maintained category could be treated just like a EXP aircraft with an annual inspection that requires the aircraft to meet its type design or its properly altered condition.

It would be simply a matter of who could turn the wrench.

the owners that would take advantage of this category would be the ones who would take better care of the aircraft day to day than the ones that would not, and use the once per year maintenance period that they do now.

deferred maintenance would be a non issue with these aircraft.

 

[RotorAndWing]

There should be a great number of tasks added to that list, direct parts replacement isn't that difficult.

An owner maintained category could be treated just like a EXP aircraft with an annual inspection that requires the aircraft to meet its type design or its properly altered condition.

It would be simply a matter of who could turn the wrench.

the owners that would take advantage of this category would be the ones who would take better care of the aircraft day to day than the ones that would not, and use the once per year maintenance period that they do now.

deferred maintenance would be a non issue with these aircraft.

Agreed.

But the problem comes about for accountability. As previously demonstrated, when you have owners that won't even take the time to read and understand exisiting regulations how to you get them to read and comprehend a maintenance manual or ICA's? Would you trust these individuals to perform maintenance?

 

[Tom-D]

Agreed.

But the problem comes about for accountability. As previously demonstrated, when you have owners that won't even take the time to read and understand exisiting regulations how to you get them to read and comprehend a maintenance manual or ICA's? Would you trust these individuals to perform maintenance?

The FAA can control the owners in this category just like they do to A&Ps in 43.13 by control of who can and who can't be allowed to be in this category.

If you can't do it right, you loose the airworthiness certificate. The A&P-IA becomes your police force. It's airworthy or it isn't.

 

[poadeleted21]

Many of the people you look down at at WalMart can repair damn near anything mechanical. Not the WalMart in the middle of the city, but the WalMart in the country.
My nephew has been repairing farm equipment for 20 years (he's 30 now), and could easily keep a Cherokee or 172 running right.

It's not everyone. It's those who have the knowledge, intelligence, and determination to complete a private pilot's license or higher.

If it's unsafe for a PPL to fix the rock-simple systems in a 1966 Cherokee, but perfectly OK for anyone with a pulse to install a lift on their Chevy and drive head on with folks on a two lane road with 24" of clearance and closure rates over 120mph.

I don't look down on the people at wal-mart. I wouldn't let my A&P cut my hair or do my taxes, but I'm sure there are plenty of fine folks at wal-mart that I would. I said wal-mart because it typically has a mix of anybody and everything. I tend to stay well within my circle except for the trip to get those always low prices at wal-mart.

I'm not so sure, I've rebuilt car engines, more motorcycle engines than I care to remember, was a lawn mower/4-wheeler/jet ski mechanic for the local shop through college and even ran a small engine repair shop on the side after that was over. I still have my A&P look over my oil changes.

Changed my fuel pump the other day, I wold have turned it on dry if he hadn't stopped me. I don't think owner maintained will work, I think owner with a PPL and stretching the current list out a little might.

I'd even be in favor of a "less than A&P" license, I just don't have the time to dedicate to working for 2 years in a shop and there are no A&P schools handy in my area, If someone would allow maybe a 6-8 week ground school for 2-3 hours in the evenings and pass a competency exam for an owner/ppl to do more maintenance I'd love to do that.

 

[PilotAlan]

I'm not so sure, I've rebuilt car engines, more motorcycle engines than I care to remember, was a lawn mower/4-wheeler/jet ski mechanic for the local shop through college and even ran a small engine repair shop on the side after that was over. I still have my A&P look over my oil changes.

I guess my question is this. We don't see experimentals falling from the sky, we have a sample of such aircraft, except with experimentals, *anyone* can work on them (not just a pilot).
People who have bought experimentals seem to do a pretty good job of figuring out what they can do and what they need to bring in an A&P for (not what they are *required* to bring in an A&P for).

I would not do engine work without an A&P looking at it. But it makes no sense that I can't swap out my nav light with LEDs, or do the brakes, or any other of the hundreds on maintenance items that are rock simple.
Our planes are about as complex as a 1966 tractor (actually less so, he don't have transmissions and PTOs).

The FAA aircraft certification and maintenance regulations are the absolute worst example of bureaucratic overreach and control in the history of the federal government. They took total jurisdiction over aviation, applied incredibly Byzantine controls and rules to it, and have destroyed it.

 

[wanttaja]

I guess that explains why older aircraft are falling out of the sky all over Canada.

Or perhaps not.

Certainly would be nice if the FAA instituted the equivalent of the Canadian owner maintenance category here.

http://www.copanational.org/AircraftInCaOwnerMaint.cfm

The average Walmartian already thinks small airplanes are dangerous; they won't fly in them period, much less decided to maintain their own planes

Ron Wanttaja

 

[ajstoner21]

I'd even be in favor of a "less than A&P" license, I just don't have the time to dedicate to working for 2 years in a shop and there are no A&P schools handy in my area, If someone would allow maybe a 6-8 week ground school for 2-3 hours in the evenings and pass a competency exam for an owner/ppl to do more maintenance I'd love to do that.

There is kind of a "less than A&P license". There is an A&P Certificate, and a Repairman Certificate. One difference is, a person with a Repairman Certificate must surrender it when they leave their place of employment, and can only do work their employer is certified for (if I understand that right).

but, I see what you're saying though. It would be nice to go get "trained to do X", and then be allowed to do that on an airplane you own and operate. The problem would be that, if you did it once, nothing says you'll remember how to do it right when you do it a year from now.


And if you don't havetime to dedicate to working for 2 years in a shop, i'm not sure you would have time for A&P School either. I say that, because I'm in an A&P school. I'm doing the "night" program, and its basically from 5:30 to like 10, 4 nights a week, for 3 years. Thats after working a full time job. It will require a lot of studying, and practice.

 

[PilotAlan]

The problem would be that, if you did it once, nothing says you'll remember how to do it right when you do it a year from now.

The same's true with an A&P.
There's a reason they make maintenance manuals.

 

[ajstoner21]

The same's true with an A&P.
There's a reason they make maintenance manuals.

Very true.

 

[steingar]

There is kind of a "less than A&P license". There is an A&P Certificate, and a Repairman Certificate. One difference is, a person with a Repairman Certificate must surrender it when they leave their place of employment, and can only do work their employer is certified for (if I understand that right).

but, I see what you're saying though. It would be nice to go get "trained to do X", and then be allowed to do that on an airplane you own and operate. The problem would be that, if you did it once, nothing says you'll remember how to do it right when you do it a year from now.


And if you don't havetime to dedicate to working for 2 years in a shop, i'm not sure you would have time for A&P School either. I say that, because I'm in an A&P school. I'm doing the "night" program, and its basically from 5:30 to like 10, 4 nights a week, for 3 years. Thats after working a full time job. It will require a lot of studying, and practice.

Congrats on being part of the problem. I wrench my motorcycle, which has more parts than and goes faster than my airplane. Don't need any certificate at all. I guarantee the engine on my bike is way more complicated than the engine on my aircraft, the bike engine was designed in 2001, not 1951. I do not need two years of anyone's stinking academy to take apart something that predates my first car.

Experimentals have been flying in the system for decades with experimental avionics, none have wound up where they weren't supposed to be because the avionics failed. The need for certification of this equipment is not entirely transparent.

 

[poadeleted21]

I guess my question is this. We don't see experimentals falling from the sky, we have a sample of such aircraft, except with experimentals, *anyone* can work on them (not just a pilot).
People who have bought experimentals seem to do a pretty good job of figuring out what they can do and what they need to bring in an A&P for (not what they are *required* to bring in an A&P for).

I would not do engine work without an A&P looking at it. But it makes no sense that I can't swap out my nav light with LEDs, or do the brakes, or any other of the hundreds on maintenance items that are rock simple.
Our planes are about as complex as a 1966 tractor (actually less so, he don't have transmissions and PTOs).

The FAA aircraft certification and maintenance regulations are the absolute worst example of bureaucratic overreach and control in the history of the federal government. They took total jurisdiction over aviation, applied incredibly Byzantine controls and rules to it, and have destroyed it.

I'm not in tune with the experimental regs, but I believe you have to build it yourself before you can turn wrenches on it. Still can get out of the STC/TSO x 10 multiplier for parts and avionics mess but I don't think you can do your own maintenance unless you are the builder. I figure if you can get an Experimental together and the time flown off of it, your qualified to work on that plane.