X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2008 19:09:40 -0500 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from QMTA01.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net ([76.96.30.16] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.2.10) with ESMTP id 3300461 for lml@lancaironline.net; Fri, 14 Nov 2008 14:43:32 -0500 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=76.96.30.16; envelope-from=jimauman@comcast.net Received: from OMTA12.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net ([76.96.30.44]) by QMTA01.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net with comcast id f3cW1a00v0x6nqcA17iuEL; Fri, 14 Nov 2008 19:42:54 +0000 Received: from OFFICE ([71.194.176.117]) by OMTA12.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net with comcast id f7is1a0022YMHK38Y7isFh; Fri, 14 Nov 2008 19:42:53 +0000 X-Authority-Analysis: v=1.0 c=1 a=f___xwSCzfUA:10 a=7JntrZgt49wA:10 a=RnOZ9p3EAAAA:8 a=dFvvo0DcAAAA:8 a=356M-s_Iuhy4qUgic6gA:9 a=Gv6_dGkct5GeIcRS90gA:7 a=03hNjLPi2RXz5-fwOhjk9s87D-wA:4 a=gJcimI5xSWUA:10 a=SSmOFEACAAAA:8 a=NfhC2uPySQNhNRRj8dkA:9 a=3hDlRw81wTZnfYLhGdoA:7 a=ok_sMvHpqfp42i1hsWfMOYLhH9gA:4 a=37WNUvjkh6kA:10 From: "Jim Auman" X-Original-To: "'terrence o'neill'" , References: Subject: RE: [LML] The FAA compromises public safety X-Original-Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2008 13:42:56 -0600 X-Original-Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_000A_01C9465E.E77403E0" X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5579 Thread-Index: AclGiLN37KYzUN3dQBWhg8xkJDcijQABFXwg In-Reply-To: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_000A_01C9465E.E77403E0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Terrance wrote: "This Airworthiness Inspection is the same kind of job any AI or &E does on every certified aircraft every year. Why to we need separate Airworthiness inspectors for Experimentals? " http://www.faa.gov/education_research/testing/airmen/test_guides/media/faa-g -8082-11b.pdf http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/field_offices/fsdo/lbb/local_more/media/ ap_testing.pdf Here are two references for you to look. The reason "why?" is that applicants for Amateur-Built Experimental certificates do make mistakes that can be picked out at Airworthiness Inspections. Sometimes big ones. The Airworthiness Inspector, for that day, (ASI or DAR) is there to verify conformity to the paperwork that applicant presents for that aircraft only. Your writing uses incorrect and out of date nomenclature of certificate holders and suggests that no one else is more creditable than you or the builder of that aircraft. I have experienced applicants that had not even read the applicable parts of FAR 91, let alone FAR 45 or the Advisory Circular 90-89A pertinent to the Program Letter presented in the Application Packet.. They did not understand their responsibilities to present their aircraft, let alone operate it in preparation for first flight. Big violations of the first paragraph of their Operating Limitations. Big Risks to Public Safety. On inspection day all applicants learn something very important for their operating safety if an ASI or DAR is doing a valuable job. You may not like what I have presented here, but I did try to keep it brief enough and focused on your opening quotation. No virus found in this outgoing message Checked by PC Tools AntiVirus (5.0.0.22 - 10.100.048). http://www.pctools.com/free-antivirus/ ------=_NextPart_000_000A_01C9465E.E77403E0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

 

 

Terrance wrote:

 

“This Airworthiness Inspection is the same kind of job any AI or &E does on every certified aircraft every year.  Why to we need separate = Airworthiness inspectors for Experimentals? “

 

http://www.faa.gov/education_research/testing/a= irmen/test_guides/media/faa-g-8082-11b.pdf

http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/field_offi= ces/fsdo/lbb/local_more/media/ap_testing.pdf=

 

 

Here are two references for you to look.  The reason = “why?” is that applicants for Amateur-Built Experimental certificates do make = mistakes that can be picked out at Airworthiness Inspections. Sometimes big = ones.  The Airworthiness Inspector, for that day, (ASI or DAR) is there to = verify conformity to the paperwork that applicant presents for that aircraft = only. 

 

Your writing uses incorrect and out of date nomenclature of = certificate holders and suggests that no one else is more creditable than you or the builder of that aircraft.  I have experienced applicants that had = not even read the applicable parts of FAR 91, let alone FAR 45 or the Advisory = Circular 90-89A pertinent to the Program Letter presented in the Application = Packet..  They did not understand their responsibilities to present their = aircraft, let alone operate it in preparation for first flight.  Big violations = of the first paragraph of their Operating Limitations.  Big Risks to = Public Safety.

 

On inspection day all applicants learn something very important = for their operating safety if an ASI or DAR is doing a valuable = job.

 

You may not like what I have presented here, but I did try to = keep it brief enough and focused on your opening = quotation.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



No virus found in this outgoing message
Checked by PC Tools = AntiVirus (5.0.0.22 - 10.100.048).
http://www.pctools.com/fr= ee-antivirus/
------=_NextPart_000_000A_01C9465E.E77403E0--