If you mean installing a tractor light bulb instead of an
"aircraft" light bulb, sure, I know LOTS of owners like that.
Well, that's illegal. And I'm coming from a work standpoint here, but
you don't see mechanics doing that on transport catergory aircraft and
engines. Why should GA owners feel they are exempt from the same rules?

I don't know any other way to say this: Because that FAA rule is
stupid.

A tractor light bulb that is identical to the one that says "aircraft
landing light" on it costs half as much, simply because the marketing
departments know they can double the price of anything that says
"aircraft" on it. Personally, I use the real deals (only because I
haven't found a tractor equivalent to the three Q4509 landing light
bulbs my plane uses), but I woudn't worry about an owner that buys NAPA
landing lights.

Now, of course, you have to exercise some degree of intelligence when
working on a plane that you own. For example, is it okay to run an
extension cord under the panel from your cigar lighter over to your
yoke-mounted GPS? If you zip tie the wires so that they're not a trip
hazard (and can't get fouled in the rudder pedals) does this then
become a "permanant installation", and thus become illegal for an owner
to do?

Most owners would say running an extension cord is fine. Some would
not.

Now, how about installing a power port in the back seat for the kids to
use? This means running the wires behind the side panels and carpet,
and installing a jack in the side wall. Most owners would draw the
line at that, and would have an A&P sign off on their work (or hire
them to do it) -- but is it REALLY any harder than running the
extension cord in my first example? Marginally -- but just about any
guy with any automotive experience could do it.

So owning becomes a judgement thing.

(An aside: What *is* the correct spelling of the word
"judgement/judgment" nowadays? The dictionary lists both spellings as
correct.)

Now take a rental plane. That plane is owned by...somebody, often not
by anyone who flies it regularly. That plane is seen as a commodity,
as a useful means to an end -- not as a pampered and loved magic
carpet. Suddenly all those "border-line legal" maintenance items are
going straight through to someone's bottom line -- you don't think
there's intense pressure to "skate" on some of them?

I approach aircraft in much the same way I approach property. With a
building, look at the gutters and down-spouts, and within seconds
you'll have a good idea how well the building has been maintained.
With aircraft, look at the leading edges of the wings. Are there two
years worth of bugs there? Is there old oil coating the nose gear?
That's potential trouble -- and virtually every rental plane I ever
flew fit that description.

I just don't believe rental planes are receiving the same level of
maintenance as owner-operated planes -- and you would *think* that we
could pull some meaningful statistics to prove (or disprove) this.
Where's "Flying's" Ricard Collins when we need him? This is right up
his alley...
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"