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 |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Question on 172 M electrics... (1974 Skyhawk II)
Hi All! We do not have a wiring diagram (yet) for our plane. The Cigar Lighter socket is dead, and we need to fix it to power our new portable GPS. (or have a poower cable installed....) Which 12V point (bus) should it be wired to? (dont want to unwrap the harness to check out the wiring. ) Inline fuse or one of the panel breakers? Would it have been disconnected for some reason? (I have heard there was an AD on some aircraft to disco it) TY! Dave |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Found it! discoed in 1983...
Looks like it can be reconnected if we install a fuse or breaker in line... Can anybody confirm this? Dave On Fri, 09 Apr 2004 01:07:13 GMT, "G.R. Patterson III" wrote: wrote: Would it have been disconnected for some reason? Yep. As you've heard, there was an AD (at least in the U.S.) to either put it on its own circuit breaker or fuse or to disconnect it. Most owners opted to disconnect it. I don't know Canadian practice, but in the States there would be an AD log in the back of the airframe logbook. Check the text of all those shown as complied with until you find that one. I've been told that you can reactivate the outlet by adding a breaker, but you'd need to check the AD text to be sure. George Patterson This marriage is off to a shaky start. The groom just asked the band to play "Your cheatin' heart", and the bride just requested "Don't come home a'drinkin' with lovin' on your mind". |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
wrote in message ... Found it! discoed in 1983... Looks like it can be reconnected if we install a fuse or breaker in line... Can anybody confirm this? Sure. Just install a fuse or breaker. The fuse is probably easier. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Bill Zaleski wrote: You must have a mechanic perform the work in accordance with the AD and sign off the compliance. Anybody can do the work, the mechanic must sign it off. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Yes, correct to the extent that you describe, but not only must the
mechanic sign it off, but he must personally observe the work being done before it is signed off. After the fact maintenence sign-offs, though common, are illegal. Guess you want the reference? FAR 43.3 (d) I should have used the word "inspect" instead of perform. Sorry. On Fri, 09 Apr 2004 17:03:10 GMT, Newps wrote: Bill Zaleski wrote: You must have a mechanic perform the work in accordance with the AD and sign off the compliance. Anybody can do the work, the mechanic must sign it off. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Ah, grasshopper, you must read the WHOLE paragraph, not just those parts that
you personally believe. You, of course, are mistaken once again. See the "to the extent necessary" clause? If I tell an owner to remove a wheel, clean and lube the wheel bearings, and reinstall the wheel, and if I've seen the owner do this perfectly a half-dozen times, how many "personal observations" do you think I'm going to make? After the fact maintenance sign-offs are NOT illegal if the signer was in on the deal from the getgo and told the owner exactly what to do and when any inspections (if any) were necessary. (BTW, I don't mind disagreement with my holdings. However, you need to post your qualifications for making the statements before I will give you one gram of credence. A&P? IA? Private pilot with 43 hours?) Jim Bill Zaleski shared these priceless pearls of wisdom: -Yes, correct to the extent that you describe, but not only must the -mechanic sign it off, but he must personally observe the work being -done before it is signed off. After the fact maintenence sign-offs, -though common, are illegal. Guess you want the reference? FAR 43.3 -(d) Jim Weir (A&P/IA, CFI, & other good alphabet soup) VP Eng RST Pres. Cyberchapter EAA Tech. Counselor http://www.rst-engr.com |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
A&P, I.A., FAA Aviation Maintenance Safety Counselor, 11,000+ hours,
holder of all category and class ratings except airship, 4X ATP, 4X commercial, if you must ask, but what does that matter? Are you really going to try and sell the idea that observing an operation being done once on an aircraft automatically covers repeated occurences of the same operation of multiple instances? That sure doesn't fly in the Airlines. If you watch a few engine overhauls from one non mechanic, are you going to sign off on one you didn't supervise? "To the extent necessary" does not mean "no extent". The reg requires you to be personally present to "observe the work BEING done", not BEEN done, to ensure that it is being done properly. As a Master Parachute Rigger, I can not simply fall back on the premise that my supervision is valid just because I watched my trainee pack correctly in the past. Every operation has to be observed, each time. Same idea, Jim. Maybe things are different in Grass Valley. On Fri, 09 Apr 2004 18:14:09 -0700, Jim Weir wrote: Ah, grasshopper, you must read the WHOLE paragraph, not just those parts that you personally believe. You, of course, are mistaken once again. See the "to the extent necessary" clause? If I tell an owner to remove a wheel, clean and lube the wheel bearings, and reinstall the wheel, and if I've seen the owner do this perfectly a half-dozen times, how many "personal observations" do you think I'm going to make? After the fact maintenance sign-offs are NOT illegal if the signer was in on the deal from the getgo and told the owner exactly what to do and when any inspections (if any) were necessary. (BTW, I don't mind disagreement with my holdings. However, you need to post your qualifications for making the statements before I will give you one gram of credence. A&P? IA? Private pilot with 43 hours?) Jim Bill Zaleski shared these priceless pearls of wisdom: -Yes, correct to the extent that you describe, but not only must the -mechanic sign it off, but he must personally observe the work being -done before it is signed off. After the fact maintenence sign-offs, -though common, are illegal. Guess you want the reference? FAR 43.3 -(d) Jim Weir (A&P/IA, CFI, & other good alphabet soup) VP Eng RST Pres. Cyberchapter EAA Tech. Counselor http://www.rst-engr.com |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
VOR/DME Approach Question | Chip Jones | Instrument Flight Rules | 47 | August 29th 04 05:03 AM |
ICom A-5 Question - Battery Level Indicator | Harry Gordon | Piloting | 22 | December 5th 03 12:07 AM |
Legal question - Pilot liability and possible involvement with a crime | John | Piloting | 5 | November 20th 03 09:40 PM |
Question about Question 4488 | [email protected] | Instrument Flight Rules | 3 | October 27th 03 01:26 AM |
T Tail question | Paul Austin | Military Aviation | 7 | September 23rd 03 06:05 PM |