Type certificates

"Tarver Engineering" wrote in message ...
There is no production certificate for an experimental, but it is a tpye of
airplne in Part 21 and Part 43.

It is a type, but there is no "TYPE CERTIFICATE." You are correct that
without a type certificate, there is also no production certificate.

"Ron Natalie" wrote in message
. ..

"Tarver Engineering" wrote in message
...
There is no production certificate for an experimental, but it is a tpye
of
airplne in Part 21 and Part 43.

It is a type, but there is no "TYPE CERTIFICATE." You are correct that
without a type certificate, there is also no production certificate.

Now Ron, the reason the 337 is not applicabl is because the homebuilt is an
experimental, as is written explicitly in Part 43. Or do you have an
additional "red queen" finding from FAA Chief counsel?

The 100 hour inspection exception you quoted the FAA chief counsel as
finding is a change to engineering, on no basis; just like Kelly got the
MIDO to chang the lubrication scedule for DC-9s on "no basis".

Perhaps the FAA chief counsel would do well to review some of these "good
buddy" word games. I know engineers that say, "just because I said that
before does not mean I say that now". The rest of FAA gave up most of that
"good buddy" type thinking with the FY97 budget.

WARNING! PLONK MODE IMMINENT!

Mssrs. Tarver and Natalie:

I've had enough of this personal diatribe. Please, take it off the
newsgroup and onto your personal emails. Yes, I can execute the delete
button but my finger is getting tired.

It's like watching a slow motion car wreck. Can't take my eyes off of it
even though I know it is a bad thing that can only end badly. Jeez!

"Casey Wilson" wrote in message
...
WARNING! PLONK MODE IMMINENT!

Mssrs. Tarver and Natalie:

I've had enough of this personal diatribe. Please, take it off the
newsgroup and onto your personal emails. Yes, I can execute the delete
button but my finger is getting tired.