![]() |
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 |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Tuesday, February 3, 2015 at 3:45:05 PM UTC-5, Don Johnstone wrote:
Up until today I was firmly of the opinion that EASA and their regulation was an unnecessary imposition on gliding. I had always believed that no-one who flew a type certified glider would make structural modifications without consulting the type certificate holder and obtaining their approval for a modification, I simply did not believe that anyone could be THAT irresponsible. I seems I was wrong, which is nothing new. I suppose that EASA is a necessary evil while there are those who think that such behavior is acceptable. What worries me most is that these actions are taken by people who are described as well respected and qualified engineers. It certainly increases my understanding of the attitude of EASA to FAA licensed engineers. I am well aware that in the past such modifications were made to simple wood and fabric constructed gliders, cutting and patching a hole in fabric or indeed metal skins is a completely different matter to drilling holes in a GRP structure, the best that can be said is that such action has not failed, YET, or maybe not. To say that a course of action is ok because A.N Other did it and got away with it is not safe practice, especially when it encourages those without knowledge to try an "inspired" fix. If you can produce a note of compliance, a relevant AD or tech note, from the type certificate holder I will of course take it all back. I'm not so sure what Mr Johnson did would fall into the category of some really bad action as the writer above seems to imply. The maintenance and repair manuals required as part of instructions for continued airworthiness specify various levels of damage and how they are to be handled. Come small holes commonly can be taped over, at least temporarily. It is quite possible the hole Mr Johnson described falls in that range. As as aero engineer by degree, he certainly would have made the proper judgement. Sometimes, to get access to inner stuff to keep older gliders flying, a hole may need to be cut. Obviously it should be repaired as appropriate. In truth and composite repair is commonly easier that one in metal. That said, Joe Winglifter should not just cut holes in stuff obviously. EASA is an evil that is best avoided at all costs. In my view it has contributed little, if anything to our little part of the universe, yet has added much cost and aggravation to those it affects. UH |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Discus Aileron Seals | Peter F[_2_] | Soaring | 8 | August 20th 13 05:07 PM |
left aileron for Discus CS wanted | [email protected] | Soaring | 0 | September 28th 12 01:31 AM |
New Ventus 2 and Discus Winglets - M&H | Alpha Eight | Soaring | 11 | February 21st 12 04:41 PM |
Looking for Left Outer Aileron for Ventus C | Bob Gibbons[_2_] | Soaring | 0 | June 30th 09 02:12 AM |
Ventus 1 - anyone have experience w/o aileron centering spring? | Gary Emerson | Soaring | 0 | November 1st 08 02:36 PM |