I can understand why you feel the way you do.  I've had a run-in or two
myself, but have been fortunate enough to have been granted some leniency.
I think the bad stuff is a lot more popular conversation than the good
when
it comes to pilots talking about the FAA.  I really try to be ready for a
ramp check every time I fly, and to teach my students to do the same (even
INVITED an inspector to show instructors and students the ramp check
process).   Yes, it's invasive, but so is filing your income tax.  On the
maintenance side, anything I install had better have the required tracing
and approval or I'm on thin ice.  Even receipts for simple hardware must
now
be kept for tracking.  That's just the way it is...  As to legal defense,
I
think that any mechanic who doesn't carry liability insurance and a legal
plan is living on the edge.

I will open up my own shop someday,  but not until I can cover this basic
and necessary expense.  This sad fact of life is not unique to aviation,
of
course- anyone who has the lives and limbs of others depending on the
quality of his/her work must protect themselves in the same way.
Obviously, you and your mechanic were treated crappily, and I don't mean
to
diminish that.   But as a whole, if  we "drivers" don't like the speed
enforcement, how can we change anything by taking it out on the traffic
cops-  when the policies come from City Hall??


From: Audean <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: The Craigmyles <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Friday, January 22, 1999 9:28 PM
Subject: FAA


>
>Rob,
>The crash of 99893 left a bitter taste in our mouth for the FAA. and here
is the
>reason why.
>
>The NTSB, sent a FAA inspector to investigate the flight in the name of
them..
>
>Upon his arrival we asked if he could be a NTSB person or still that FAA
>person... he assured us he was there as The NTSB.. we allowed him to
proceed.
>He had us to order another gasolator from the wag aero and we did then he
wanted
>another one unopened box (this was at our expense) and all three were the
>same.... he agreed that the crash was due to the quick drain seperating
from the
>plane...
>
>He in turn  notified the NTSB and they picked up 5 more from wag aero and
all
>five was like the ones here in Calif..
>
>He then turned around and became a FAA inspector and went after our
mechanic.
>siting him for putting the gasolator on the plane.... this really pissed
us
off
>and as if came closer to coming to Fed. court the madder we became.....
for
Wag
>Aero was not held accountable for the part and we purchased it and gave
it
the
>mechanic to put on the plane.
>
>I had some strong words with said inspector.. his commment was are you
going to
>testify for your mechanic... you dam sweet tooting we were.... how dare
them to
>fault him and let the big guy go...I told him did he think for one moment
that
>we would allow the mechanic to work on another plane for us if we felt
for
one
>minuted it was his fault.??? no answer from him.
>
>The mechanic beat the charges but it cost him the fees for the lawyer to
do
so
>and this wasn't right.
>
>Later same inspector, was in the area (he has a plane at our airport) and
spoted
>6596Q with wayland strobes... they were installed legaly and wayland said
they
>were approved for the coupe.... this clown sited the plane we place  tape
over
>the switch to them as inoperable and called Wayland.... Wayland  had the
cow...
>when Wayland got thru with them we were told to have the plane inspected
and
>they would approve them... by changing some wording on the paper work and
>resumit...
>
>No way was this clown going to step a foot into our hanger with out a
search
>warrent....  We flew the plane to Sacremento and had it inspected by
another FAA
>inspector.. and all paper work was approved.
>
>Another time... we were flying a rental archer 29P into Sacremento Exe.
when the
>plane taxied to the transient tie down... the FAA inspector met us on the
>ramp... first wanting to see pilots license (never hand one to them as
that
is
>considered voluntary surendering them)... husband showed him the license
and
>medical , place same back in to his wallet... the inspector  took the
plane
>apart and grounded it upon its return to the Salinas, airport... one
number
on
>its airworthy certificate at the corner was missing.
>
>We inquired as to why the ramp check.... some one from Salinas,  ( wonder
who )
>had called Sacremento Exc. and told them there was a unlicensed pilot
from
>Salinas, flying a rental plane...
>
>May not of been the FAA. but still sticks in the throat...
>
>We have seen other pilots in our area treated about the same.. so we
really
do
>not have very much trust in them... maybe there are some good ones out
there.
>but they do lurk around and other pilots has already had things sent to
the
FAA
>that was said on this list and other web pages.
>
>Just thought I would give you our story on it.
>
>Audean
>N6596Q
>

<<attachment: winmail.dat>>

Reply via email to