Wing Flap wrote:


Much too sweeping of a statement. Age of avionics, any other
electromechanical device, consider age related metal fatigue/failures,
quality of rebuilds........the older the greater thechance for misuse.

Age of avionics is independent of the airframe age. These tend to be
updated over the years.

Metal fatigue is more related to the number and quality of hours on the
airframe (I'm talking about non-pressurized GA) than chronological age.

the older the greater thechance for misuse.

This is much too sweeping of a statement. Some of the most abused
aircraft belong to FBOs and tend to be of the newer variety. One of my
neighborhood FBOs has several PA28 trainers from the 80s that are pushing 15,
000 hrs. on the airframes.

John Galban=====N4BQ (PA28-180)

--
Message posted via AviationKB.com
http://www.aviationkb.com/Uwe/Forums...ation/200805/1