![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
wrote:
A more electrically-oriented example would be if you wanted to add an ammeter to your voltmeter-equipped plane vs. adding a voltmeter to your ammeter-equipped plane. In the former, you need to sever the charging wire and put in either the meter or a shunt for the meter. In the latter you only need a negligible-current wire to run to a voltmeter. I would argue that the latter is a minor alteration, but the former is much more significant. I'm sure the regs don't have any way to distinguish between issues that subtle. No, the regs don't. People do. There is such a thing as judgment. An A&P is supposed to be able to make a judgment call with respect to what constitutes a major vs. minor alteration, within certain guidelines. The guidelines give a fair amount of latitude. In many FSDO's, the poliy is to make that latitude go away by dramatically restricting what is allowed as a minor alteration. Just shows how broken the whole system is. Well, yes. That's why I don't think it's useful to discuss what the rules actually are and what constitutes compliance - because it changes from FSDO to FSDO, and from inspector to inspector, and if an inspector wants to hang you he will find a way. The only useful things to discuss are (a) what is actually reasonably safe and (b) what you can get away with in terms of inspections. In general, the only reason you need an annual is in the event of an accident, and then only for insurance purposes. You might argue that you need it to be 'legal' but that's a false argument. No plane is ever legal. Any plane can be grounded. Therefore, you're really no more legal with an annual than without. Unless the plane looks like crap or has obviously non-aviation stuff installed, a ramp check will not catch an out-of-annual aircraft - not that ramp checks are common. I don't recall Jay getting phucked having to remove strobes. That sounds like it was an ugly FAA-ism. No. It was a bad shop. The IA had the option of letting the 337 stand, and nobody would have questioned it. For decades, nobody had. I believe those strobes are still in a shoebox. Michael |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
PDA GPS power issues (i.trek Mouse) | Mark Morissette | Owning | 8 | March 24th 05 02:14 PM |
Power management on a O-300 | Victor | Piloting | 0 | July 9th 04 01:09 AM |
Cessna buyers in So. Cal. beware ! | Bill Berle | Owning | 92 | June 26th 04 03:24 PM |
FORSALE: HARD TO FIND CESSNA PARTS! | Enea Grande | Piloting | 1 | November 4th 03 12:57 AM |
Aircraft engine certification FAR's | Corky Scott | Home Built | 4 | July 25th 03 06:46 PM |