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 |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Question re towplane airworthiness (USA)
On Apr 19, 8:57*pm, "BT" wrote:
I still do not think that a "Restricted" certificate is required to conduct glider tow operations with an aircraft operating under a "standard" airworthy certificate in the "Normal or Utility" category. Agree. Andy |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Question re towplane airworthiness (USA)
On Apr 19, 9:25*pm, brian whatcott wrote:
Brian wrote: I think you are going about this the wrong way. The rules are restrictive not permissive, In other words the FARs tell you what you can't do, not what you can. //snip/ Brian Interesting sentiment. I've heard this said of other systems of rule-making: 1) Anything not expressly permitted, is prohibited. Versus 2) Anything not expressly prohibited, is permitted. I always thought that system 2) was more permissive, in some way. And this is the FAR way, I think you are saying. I never thought of the FARs as being permissive though. :-) Brian W 1 is the German way. Let's not go there. 2 is the US way, which suits us fine, though we are still further constrained by the underwriters, the IRS, and local issues. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Question re towplane airworthiness (USA)
Frank Whiteley wrote:
On Apr 19, 9:25 pm, brian whatcott wrote: Brian wrote: I think you are going about this the wrong way. The rules are restrictive not permissive, In other words the FARs tell you what you can't do, not what you can. //snip/ Brian Interesting sentiment. I've heard this said of other systems of rule-making: 1) Anything not expressly permitted, is prohibited. Versus 2) Anything not expressly prohibited, is permitted. I always thought that system 2) was more permissive, in some way. And this is the FAR way, I think you are saying. I never thought of the FARs as being permissive though. :-) Brian W 1 is the German way. Let's not go there. 2 is the US way, which suits us fine, though we are still further constrained by the underwriters, the IRS, and local issues. "What Brian C. (not Brian W.) and Frank W. said." General Aviation -including soaring, of course -in the U.S. is close enough as it is to being on life support without practitioners within it jabbing needles willy-nilly into its twitching corpus for (really and truly, to me) incomprehensible reasons. Bob - shaking head sadly - W. |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
FAA Inspection for New Airworthiness | PS | Soaring | 8 | July 8th 09 03:27 PM |
Experimental Airworthiness | PS | Soaring | 13 | July 1st 09 03:54 PM |
TBO and airworthiness | Jim Stewart | Owning | 26 | April 17th 07 05:05 PM |
A question on Airworthiness Inspection | Dave S | Home Built | 1 | August 10th 04 05:07 AM |
Exhibition/Racing Airworthiness Certificate Question | bsquared | Soaring | 5 | June 22nd 04 06:24 PM |