X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Thu, 04 Oct 2012 08:43:28 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from cdptpa-omtalb.mail.rr.com ([75.180.132.120] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 6.0c1) with ESMTP id 5792135 for lml@lancaironline.net; Wed, 03 Oct 2012 17:11:29 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=75.180.132.120; envelope-from=dfs155@roadrunner.com X-Original-Return-Path: X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.0 cv=IuCcgcDg c=1 sm=0 a=9LmAXEz63j2NgFYNcmwa5A==:17 a=Z9DVfGi6iZUA:10 a=zTVDa7HKqxcA:10 a=8nJEP1OIZ-IA:10 a=doupyKFmAAAA:8 a=NdnY77sTRi0A:10 a=vgjm5RKZergIAv8Yy3YA:9 a=wPNLvfGTeEIA:10 a=9LmAXEz63j2NgFYNcmwa5A==:117 X-Cloudmark-Score: 0 X-Originating-IP: 76.178.22.154 Received: from [76.178.22.154] ([76.178.22.154:4532] helo=dan) by cdptpa-oedge03.mail.rr.com (envelope-from ) (ecelerity 2.2.3.46 r()) with ESMTP id E0/E5-17657-ED9AC605; Wed, 03 Oct 2012 21:10:55 +0000 X-Original-Message-ID: <84C6C4DC424A4C5CBA7B90372AA57064@dan> From: "Dan Schaefer" X-Original-To: "Lancair list" Subject: Re: FAA certification X-Original-Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2012 14:10:58 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5931 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.6157 Angier, this sounds like the same FAA guy that some years back, red-tagged the props on a twin down at a LA airport (while it was parked and the pilot was absent) for an "obvious" prop strike. Turns out that they were "Q-Tip" props and had not been dinged! For those who don't know, Q-Tip props have the tips curled aft a bit to, supposedly, enhance efficiency or maybe to reduce noise. Don't know what happened to him but perhaps the feds shipped him out to your area following the screw-up. Your inspector is reading from a different bible than the one he should. You need to get him to show you the FAR part 91... (not part 135...) he's citing to assert his claim. Though an alternate static source is not a bad idea, it is not required for certification. Good luck, Dan Schaefer