![]() |
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 |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
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" |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Florida Rentals | Arnold Sten | Piloting | 0 | December 14th 04 02:13 AM |
Wreckage of Privately Owned MiG-17 Found in New Mexico; Pilot Dead | Rusty Barton | Military Aviation | 1 | March 28th 04 10:51 PM |
Deliberate Undercounting of "Coalition" Fatalities | Jeffrey Smidt | Military Aviation | 1 | February 10th 04 07:11 PM |
Rentals in Colorado | PhyrePhox | Piloting | 11 | December 27th 03 03:45 AM |
Rentals at BUR | Dan Katz | Piloting | 0 | July 19th 03 06:38 PM |