I don't think you really understand what I was trying to say. I am not advocating anyone fail to do routine inspection nor to fail to fix any problem, nor do I advocate making a secret of any unusual problem you find. I am advising caution as to whom you tell and with what sense of urgency you tell the problem. Yes there are good guys in the FAA as I am sure there are also good guys in the IRS but there are plenty of them that are not. And there are even more who know far less that they like to think they know. One of the best examples of that was the guy that had his Q tip prop on his Mooney red tagged because it was "bent" by the FAA guy who was out walking down the line. Having a friend who was with the FAA for several years I know that they get more brownie points for nailing you than helping you out. The bottom line is an isolated problem can suddenly become an AD, one which could cost as much as the airframe is worth. I am only advocating caution. For too many years I have listened to horror stories told by aircraft owners who have found problems and then go out like chicken little telling everybody they must fix such and such immediately or their lives are in danger. Seldom have I seen these dire problems be more than isolated problems. Sure there are always problems which do occur with a more increased frequency than would be normally expected and may well be an item which does deserve an AD. Maybe I am paranoid but I would rather trust my own annuals to identify a real problem. I feel that it is best if the owner helps to perform the annual along side his/her IA. Two sets of eyes are better than one, and you need to be familiar with your engine and airframe so that you are able to evaluate wear. You cannot expect your IA to remember you plane well enough to really note an increase or change in wear pattern on your plane. Most failures do occur with some warning, if you are familiar enough with your aircraft you will probably have sufficient warning to avoid an incident. Last another reason to assist with the annual or any maintenance for that matter is IA's and A&P's do make mistakes and since it is your butt up there it increases the odds any mistake will be caught and caught because you have a bigger stake in this than your A&P. Again 2 sets of eyes. Also chances are just as good that your A&P or IA is not as familiar with Coupes as would be desirable. A lot of Coupers have financed their A&P's learning curve on Coupes.
Dave
At 06:38 PM 1/22/99 -0500, you wrote:
>>>>
I doubt that I could ever hear the phrase "I'm from the FAA and I'm here to help you" without responding with a giggle, a little fear, or both. On the other hand, I've dealt with some very fine people who happen to work for the FAA, who also own and fly classic airplanes. While any organization as voluminous as this agency can be prone to spasms of mindless, ridiculous abuses of authority, most of the FAA people I've had contact with as a mechanic and CFI are where they are through extensive aviation experience (outside the FAA), and also a through a love for aviation. Government will always be imperfect, and that means that things will go hideously wrong, and innocents will suffer.<<<<
However, I do not want to live my life in worry and suspicion. I'm not speaking of you, Dave... but if someone hypothetically wanted to live in the woods, never read an AD or see an IA, do an annual, etc, and fly his plane (solo) until the wings corroded and snapped, I have absolutlely no problem with that. I have a vicarious admiration for true anarchists. However, I don't believe in a halfway; and if Dave or anyone convinces me that the FAA really is so corrupt and omnipotent that we must watch our words lest they ground us all for recognizing a problem, then I'll immediately pack everything up, and go carve out my own aviation Ruby Ridge in the hills somewhere. Until such a day, I plan to open up the inspection panels and let the sun shine in. When I put my Coupe in license, any FAA inspector will be welcome to look her over- heck, I'll even take 'em for a ride! This was still America last time I checked.-----Original Message-----
From: Mi Vida Loca <<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>[EMAIL PROTECTED] <<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thursday, January 21, 1999 9:55 PM
Subject: Difficulty reports
I do not in any way want anyone to hold back on informing others about a problem you experience and especially if you have personal knowledge of it happening to someone else but be very careful how and to whom you make these reports. The FAA in their zeal could in a heart beat turn every Coupe into yard art. Never be lulled into thinking they are really out there concerned about your safety. They are out there to act as an enforcement agency and to cover their own butts. Any of you who doubt this need only look to Bob Hoover or the Swiss Air mess. Remember the insulation and wiring they are bad mouthing is the same stuff they certified as airworthy. The FAA still seems to feel that 1920's technology is fine and have resisted with all their power advancements. If you doubt this statement just look under the cowl at your mags. It would take very little on their part to decide on an AD such as the old Piper spar AD for the Coupe which could put many of us on the ground with costs of AD's far exceeding the value of your aircraft. BTW that AD came from a single plane which had been used to fly pipelines. Eventually the AD was receded but it could have left many a Cherokee sitting in the weeds. Not everybody can afford a total rebuild of their wings. It is easy to say that you applaud such zeal until you think back to just the infamous Swiss cheese wing AD for the Coupes. Be very cautious with what you say, and to whom you say it.
Dave
41 Charlie
Dave's Ercoupe Page
http://www.flash.net/~dmprosvc/dave
ICQ # 1388138
http://wwp.mirabilis.com/1388138#contactingme
