A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

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.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Owning
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Radio buzz



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old April 23rd 07, 05:00 PM posted to rec.aviation.owning
The Visitor
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 231
Default Radio buzz

Ah this is where the argument decends into finer and finer minutae of
nothing. I will not bother chasing your leads, because on the surface of
your post I can tell you maintenace items are delt with in the MCM not
an OM. Have you ever been to Canada? Or only on your flight sim?


So again, your own advice applies to the very same post, please be busy
enough not to post misinformation.

Even if I was wrong, it doesn't excuse the way you wrote to me.
It is called acting like a t&$#. But you won't see that, like so many
other things you will miss. I don't even care if I am right or wrong.
You seem pretty wrapped up in something pretty small.

Find someone with _your_ kind of spare time.
Maybe Jim who seems to think anybody can work on their avionics and
return them to service.

  #32  
Old April 23rd 07, 05:20 PM posted to rec.aviation.owning
The Visitor
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 231
Default Radio buzz



RST Engineering wrote:
When you have the balls to post your real name,


Having the balls has nothing to do with it. Only a child/schoolyard
bully would think that way. But take the easy out if you want to.

The real issue still remains. In Canada I suppose if a person worked on
his own avionics he could return them to service if it was some sort of
experimental aircraft. Perhaps not. Perhaps it would need to be marked
as unservicable. Because it could otherwise be sold one day to a person
with a normally registered aircraft.

I was just asking you....

"If he opens it up, isn't there some sort of qualifications he needs to
certify it and return it to service?"


And I asked because is seems from your post, that a person can. If
clarifying your opinion is too risky, I understand.

Instead of biting my ankles, can't you two keep each other busy. You
seem to have mutual interests.

John

  #33  
Old April 23rd 07, 05:36 PM posted to rec.aviation.owning
RST Engineering
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,147
Default Radio buzz


"The Visitor" wrote in message
...


The real issue still remains. In Canada I suppose if a person worked on
his own avionics he could return them to service if it was some sort of
experimental aircraft. Perhaps not. Perhaps it would need to be marked as
unservicable. Because it could otherwise be sold one day to a person with
a normally registered aircraft.


The OP was from the States. I answered because my expertise is in avionics
as it applies to the States. Canada is not my field and I won't debate the
victorian rules of Canada.


I was just asking you....

"If he opens it up, isn't there some sort of qualifications he needs to
certify it and return it to service?"


And I asked because is seems from your post, that a person can. If
clarifying your opinion is too risky, I understand.


The States rules specify that the CALIBRATION of radio equipment is a major
repair. There are other sections that specify who can and cannot perform a
major repair. If you don't CALIBRATE the sucker, then all else is minor or
preventive, including fixit.

One of the regular posters in this NG notes with tongue firmly in cheek that
if you connect the radio to the landing light switch, then "repairing broken
circuits in landing light wiring" is specifically permitted in the
preventive maintenance that can be done by the owner.



Instead of biting my ankles, can't you two keep each other busy. You seem
to have mutual interests.



I've met some real nice Canadians and some real assholes, just like
everywhere else. You tip to the right of the previous sentence.

Jim


  #34  
Old April 23rd 07, 05:43 PM posted to rec.aviation.owning
The Visitor
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 231
Default Radio buzz



RST Engineering wrote:


When you have the balls to post your real name, let me know and I'll
continue the conversation.


(Okay Jimbo, I accept your implication that you do not converse with
anyone who does not use their full name. And also what you think of
them. Wow, I never realized how easy computers are to use.)

I am pretty tired these days but that is just the sort if thing someone
says because they want to divert away from the facts. Sort of a way to
take the offence and back-peddle at the same time. After all, probably
more than half this newsgroup don't use their full name and you seem
okay with them doing so. Oh, perhaps you have gotten yourself in the
corner before with others and reached for the same "out".

Please, you two resolve the issues in this thread. I will believe
whatever mature conclusion you two agree on concerning the technical
aspects of maintaining one's own avionics. It is obviously an issue the
two of you are passionate about.

There are alot of nice people in this newsgroup.
And some I have come to respect and like.
Life is what you look for.

John

  #35  
Old April 23rd 07, 05:53 PM posted to rec.aviation.owning
The Visitor
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 231
Default Radio buzz






Impressive response, but my question was not answered.
I will restate it.


"If he opens it up, isn't there some sort of qualifications he needs to
certify it and return it to service?"




That was my origonal question, you seemed to have a reaction to. I
wasn't trying to tell you anything. But I guess I should have known
better than to ask a question.

In Canada radios get "green tags" and avionics shops have to meet
certain qualifications and be certified to do so. It costs them a lot of
$$$ to do so. They even put stickers on the radio case and withness
paint on the screws. Strangely they did at some of the US shops I have
visited.


That's all, I just didn't know a private owner could return it to
service in the United States.




  #36  
Old April 23rd 07, 06:48 PM posted to rec.aviation.owning
Michael Houghton
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 22
Default Radio buzz

Howdy!

In article .com,
Robert M. Gary wrote:
On Apr 20, 11:03 am, (Michael Houghton) wrote:
Howdy!

In article .com,
Robert M. Gary wrote:

On Apr 19, 7:25 am, "RST Engineering" wrote:
That's an interesting heresy and untruth. Mind telling us how you came to
believe this?


"Robert M. Gary" wrote in
messagenews:1176693109.733600.114470@b75g2000hsg. googlegroups.com...


without opening the unit (which is now illegal to do ).- Hide quoted text -


- Show quoted text -


I'm told you have to have an FAA approved manual for the unit to open
it. The manufactor has keep those manuals secret (like Garmin does) so
you have to send it to the factory. However, the factory will no
longer look at it. Are you saying you would be willing to open the
unit and service it for me???


You initial statement was a bald assertion that opening the unit was
*illegal* for you to do. Now you say that someone (unnamed) told you
this.

Perhaps you could examine the relevant regulations to see what rules
apply in what way.

Merely opening up the case is unlikely to be *illegal* on its face.
It might be that, having opened it up, it can't be put back into
service (as a transmitter) without the blessing of someone with the
appropriate radio credentials. It might be that any repairs that are
made have to be vetted by same credentialed repair person. It might
be an old wives' tale.


This is without a doubt the stupidest reply I've ever seen on USNET.
Gee, if you ever need heart surgery I can do that for you. I can
remove your heart. Apparently you don't think its relevant that I
don't know how to put it back in. Once this unit is opened, it is a
paper weight, there is no one who is legally able to return it to
service so I'll have to live with it working intermitantly unless the
cause is external.


Clearly, you have read very little on USENET.

I'm just responding to your words. Your story keeps changing with
each reply.

Can you cite actual regulations that support your claims? You've been
asked in various ways to do so, but you have shown no inclination to
do so. That speaks poorly of your ability to reason from facts.
You continue to insist that if you open it up, it can never be
returned to service. On what grounds (citations required) do you make
that claim?

I hypothesized a number of possible explanations for your claim, but
have no reason to try to do your homework for you. In addition, I see
no reason for you to get abusive in your reply. The fact that you have
done so speaks volumes of your character.

Gees, you'd think there would be an IQ test to use a computer.


Would you get special dispensation to not have to take it?

yours,
Michael


--
Michael and MJ Houghton | Herveus d'Ormonde and Megan O'Donnelly
| White Wolf and the Phoenix narrowwares
Bowie, MD, USA |
http://whitewolfandphoenix.com
Proud member of the SCA Internet Whitewash Squad
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
NASA Apollo 11 astronauts left to right are Neil A Armstrong, Michael Collins, Edwin E 'Buzz' Aldrin 8903695.jpg [email protected] Aviation Photos 1 April 10th 07 08:14 PM
bit of a buzz Chris Piloting 11 December 14th 05 09:05 PM
buzz off Eric Joiner Military Aviation 0 June 1st 04 04:40 PM
F-14 buzz JD Naval Aviation 3 February 11th 04 07:39 PM
the buzz John Shelton Soaring 3 December 18th 03 01:16 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:34 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.