mtv wrote:STOL,



It may well be that the "repairman" may be the person who built the plane, and therefore not hold an A and P certificate, but they would hold repairmans authority for THAT aircraft, which is the same thing.


MTV

Not exactly Mike,

As the builder, if given the repairman certificate you could in the case of say a field repair.
Basically do anything you want, remember your the factory and you know best. And your experimenting.

If your an IA or an A&P you may laugh at what the builder did say I would never do that etc. And they may say I would never sign that off, but they don't have to because again the factory knows best.

So being a builder and being an A&P are not the same. The A&P would be hopefully be following safe practices and procedures the repairman may be carrying wire and glue, legal but probably not the best idea.

Crash an experimental with no injury as my neighbor did he got a "OK thanks for calling" from the Feds.

mtv wrote:Gump,

Consider that if the fellow had field repaired his 182, flew it home, and upon landing lost control of the plane due to a failed repair, then crashed into.....

Basically, the consequences of litigation would be far worse than anything the FAA could do to him.

Well guys, that's true of life in general. We're all gonna die, and we're all gonna die from something.

The thing is, in this case the field repair worked, and nothing was damaged but pride. I'm saying the situation should have ended there. I've seen plenty of sloppy, dangerous, and downright incompetent maintainance over the years, all perfectly signed off and in the book legal. Let the Feds go after that stuff, not some little guy just trying to get home.

Guess it's just a different type of person and attitude. There's a reason why I live and fly "in the wilds of Nevada" and not in some place like California. I think I'm smart enough to take care of my own self, and if I do a field fix, I'm trusting my own life with my own skill and wit. And if I screw up, then I'll face the consequences.

Same government that professes to be so concerned about our welfare also subsidizes the tobacco industry, which kills 600,000 people a year in this country, and untold millions world wide.

But what the hell do I know.

Gump

aktahoe1 wrote:It does not make any sense to point fingers at anyone on this forum.

And yet you do. You don't know what you're talking about but you'll throw accusations around.

aktahoe1 wrote:I can tell you for certain, 100% it came from this site. I was questioned about this forum and my posts. They had them.

All you really know is that they read this site at some point. Just how many people saw you take off, twice? Any number of those people are online on any given day. We were at Moose Creek this weekend and complete strangers to me know about you. And yet you know exactly who turned you in. I am aware of several FAA employees who read this site, one who has posted in this thread. If you ask me you turned yourself in when you sat down at the keyboard. In any event when the situation you find yourself in is over do a FOIA request for the information that FSDO has. That's all public information. You'll never find my name, address, phone number, etc. All of that stuff FSDO gets in investigations otherwise they'd be on wild goose chases all day long.

aktahoe1 wrote:No need to get into who the snake in the grass is.....I already know...thats the important part. Its not for you to try and figure it out. Most of you know whom it is as well. Bottom line, it does not matter!

You don't know squat, that much is obvious.

aktahoe1 wrote:I made a poor choice and the guy who spoke up has a job to uphold. Its just to bad he did not wait the 10 days to see if I would do the correct thing and uphold my own integrity as a pilot.....

You're implying that a non-FSDO FAA employee has to report any violation he/she sees to FSDO. That is not now and never has been the case even if I was at work. It certainly isn't the case when I'm off the clock. I have the same heart burn with FSDO as everybody else and some of the dumb stuff they do.

aktahoe1 wrote:I guess thats what happens when you fly around in a low wing all day not being able to see the ground.

I see the ground just fine and am not trying to look out from inside a cave. As if it matters. Isn't the point of this site that we're all out there no matter what we fly? And don't get too indignant, based on the email that came my way after my first post there's quite a few people who hope you get hammered into the ground by the Feds. I don't care one way or the other. Good luck, you're going to need it.

Bonanza Man wrote:

aktahoe1 wrote:It does not make any sense to point fingers at anyone on this forum.

And yet you do. You don't know what you're talking about but you'll throw accusations around.

aktahoe1 wrote:I can tell you for certain, 100% it came from this site. I was questioned about this forum and my posts. They had them.

All you really know is that they read this site at some point. Just how many people saw you take off, twice? Any number of those people are online on any given day. We were at Moose Creek this weekend and complete strangers to me know about you. And yet you know exactly who turned you in. I am aware of several FAA employees who read this site, one who has posted in this thread. If you ask me you turned yourself in when you sat down at the keyboard. In any event when the situation you find yourself in is over do a FOIA request for the information that FSDO has. That's all public information. You'll never find my name, address, phone number, etc. All of that stuff FSDO gets in investigations otherwise they'd be on wild goose chases all day long.

aktahoe1 wrote:No need to get into who the snake in the grass is.....I already know...thats the important part. Its not for you to try and figure it out. Most of you know whom it is as well. Bottom line, it does not matter!

You don't know squat, that much is obvious.

aktahoe1 wrote:I made a poor choice and the guy who spoke up has a job to uphold. Its just to bad he did not wait the 10 days to see if I would do the correct thing and uphold my own integrity as a pilot.....

You're implying that a non-FSDO FAA employee has to report any violation he/she sees to FSDO. That is not now and never has been the case even if I was at work. It certainly isn't the case when I'm off the clock. I have the same heart burn with FSDO as everybody else and some of the dumb stuff they do.

aktahoe1 wrote:I guess thats what happens when you fly around in a low wing all day not being able to see the ground.

I see the ground just fine and am not trying to look out from inside a cave. As if it matters. Isn't the point of this site that we're all out there no matter what we fly? And don't get too indignant, based on the email that came my way after my first post there's quite a few people who hope you get hammered into the ground by the Feds. I don't care one way or the other. Good luck, you're going to need it.

Zane, you're turn. The "can't we all just get along" isnt going to work this time.

Bonanza Man, because you won't answer my pm's I'll ask here in open forum. Do you really think all the name calling and slams against aktahoe1 are necessary ? Isn't that what got you in trouble with many here in the first place ? Is the anger you direct at people here at BCP a manefestation of the stress at your job, which I understand is significant ?

I think it's time you just let it go and start having a little more respect for the people here at Backcountrypilot. We don't need to be called names, berated or slammed by you. When and if I ever fly into Billings airspace I will most assuredly give you the respect you want and deserve. Please do us the courtesy of returning the favor here at BCP.

It seems that the wanker filter is malfunctioning again!

Shit happens. People screw up. People learn or they don't. We don't have much control over the FAA watching our forum, and we don't have much control over other pilots. I like the last part at least.

I spewed my rant as best I could regarding community and camaraderie in "Are we really a community?" thread. I have a vision for this place that can be characterized by polite, honest, constructive criticism where those who make mistakes are enlightened, not verbally beaten and scolded for their actions. Then I laugh at myself.

I don't support Bonanza Man's tone, or any of you who resort to personal insult in place of more tactful wording, but I learned a long time ago that while I have some control over organization, this place isn't my ant farm and I can't shape personalities. I'll kick out anybody who turns another pilot in for lack of anything better to do, or anyone who inappropriately harasses another user. Personality flaws, however, aren't a banning offense.

How many of you gave much thought to what you would do in aktahoe1's situation before you saw it on this site? How many of you greener pilots like myself never really gave much thought to the legal or regulatory aspect of flying a busted up plane? I know I really hadn't. In that regard, this has been a good learning experience.

Let's put the junior high crap to bed and get on with the flying talk.

jmtgt wrote:

1SeventyZ wrote: I'll kick out anybody who turns another pilot in for lack of anything better to do, or anyone who inappropriately harasses another user.

Then why did you let Bonanza Man back in?

John, I know you want to ban everyone who doesn't agree with you or rubs you the wrong way. I'm referring to profane PM's and stalker-like private communications. Just because I call you a jackass out in the open, doesn't mean I'm harassing you. I asked Bonanza Man straight up if he turned Aktahoe1 in, and he said no. I have to take a man at his word, even if the court of public opinion is against him.

Some of you need to soften up and some need to toughen up. I've got better things to do.

Zane,

Well said.

MTV

I'm going to go rent Pushing Tin again so I can try and understand Bonanza Man's perspective and or state of mind...

mtv wrote:STOL,

You will notice that in my statement I adopted at least PART of Gump's philosophy, by stating that I ferried airplanes after an IA that I trusted (and by the way who was also FAA certified) inspected it, and determined it could be ferried safely .

I don't believe the ferry after damage regs are any different for Exp aircraft. It may well be that the "repairman" may be the person who built the plane, and therefore not hold an A and P certificate, but they would hold repairmans authority for THAT aircraft, which is the same thing.

Nonetheless, you can't fly an airplane that's been damaged legally without a ferry permit, issued by the FAA. That's the reg, and the path to acquiring it is quite clear.

An Experimental certified aircraft is subject to all the same rules as a normal category aircraft once it's completed and issued an airworthiness cert. The one difference is you can't use it for compensation or hire, except in very restricted circumstances.

MTV

One persons damage is another persons modification. As the builder, engineer/ factory/ test pilot the holder of the repairmens certificate is the final answer. I don't want to get in a pissing match with you because I have read alot of your posts and consider you a good guy and fellow pilot. I had the same thought process when I owned several certified ships. Once I was exposed to the experimental side of things I had a renewed love of aviation. In 95 % of the final inspections done by the FAA on experimentals before their first flight they dont even want to see the condition of the finished craft, they will not have you open an inspection cover, look at the wiring etc,,, They just want to see if the N number is properly displayed, warning decals are present and you paid the taxes on the darn thing. They are not about to pass judgement or comment on the airworthiness because they did it in the past and got sued by some fleabag lawyer. On my experimental the Wyoming FSFO would not even come out to inspect it. They told me the didn't and wouldn't inspect experimentals, I have met most of them and they are good guys but for some reason that office doesn't perform that service. They referred me to a DAR, Tim Micus out of Greybull. Great guy and he had me open almost every inspection cover and he looked at everything. I spent several thousand hours creating my toy, making it as safe as possible and I am proud of it and he commented on how nice a job I did. In other states the FAA will come out to inspect and it is a free service. Tim charged me 500 dollars. He earned every penny by throughly scrutinizing my plane and when he left my mind was at ease that it was assembled as best as humanely possible...

Then I had to make that first flight to see if it would actually fly and not kill me...


Is this a great country or what ?

Tailwinds and rant off....

I do not know this for sure, but I doubt that the FAA reads this and CPA and all the other pilot forums to see who they can pinch.

There may be some FAA employees that are back country minded that read this stuff in there time off and may shake their head a little. Then when back to work I do not think they pursue it.

I think that the narc is from this forum or somebody that saw them on the ground. If I were a betting man it was from this forum because the FAA has all the posts. And it was done anonymously. and once the feds have the letter, they have to check it out.

So sad it has come to this.

Tim

STOL,

No pissing contest. I fully understand the experimental certification process. Point is, when you're done with it, the agency issues an airworthiness certificate, in the Exp/Homebuilt category.

Any modification to that airworthiness requires that you go back through some hoops. Not exactly the same hoops as the guy with a certified airplane, but......

My point stands. If you bend your airplane in the boondocks (and I sincerely hope you don't) you still are required under the regs to acquire a ferry permit to move the airplane to a "repair facility". You don't get to just change the design somewhere out in the field.

I could be wrong on this, but I'd like to see the regulation which permits you to change the airworthiness basis without the DAR or FAA.

MTV

"I think that the narc is from this forum or somebody that saw them on the ground. If I were a betting man it was from this forum because the FAA has all the posts. And it was done anonymously. and once the feds have the letter, they have to check it out

What possesses someone to narc?? Do they get paid? Do they feel like a boyscout earning a badge? When did we all become De Facto FAA Deputies??? I'm not even a rebel but I'm always pullin for the common man.

I sat on a bench next to the hangars in Corona, CA in 1988, eating a sandwich and enjoying some afternoon GA takeoffs and arrivals. A guy comes in to land in a purple ercoupe and lost it in the crosswind. He smacked the runway hard, went sideways into the dirt and almost nosed over. I followed a group of guys out to see him and they immediately instructed me to help them pull his airplane into the hangar. His plane was bent but his buddies wanted the plane in the hangar, like NOW. It was all over in 7 or 8 minutes. The airport traffic hardly skipped a beat and I never felt so alive!

Crap, now I'm going to be turned in.

mtv wrote:STOL,
No pissing contest. I fully understand the experimental certification process. Point is, when you're done with it, the agency issues an airworthiness certificate, in the Exp/Homebuilt category.

One is NEVER done with an experimental >..

SixTwoLeemer wrote: The airport traffic hardly skipped a beat and I never felt so alive!

That made me laugh and reminded me of the time on Seinfeld when Kramer and the dealership car salesman tried to see how far the car could go on a tank of gas.

How bout' we start a new talk about Titties or something? all this chit chat about the Faa and who is a moron is getting pretty old.

low rider wrote:How bout' we start a new talk about Titties or something? all this chit chat about the Faa and who is a moron is getting pretty old.

Ooooh . . .kay . . . can titties and buttered toast be made into a turbine? What happens if you lick . . . oh forget it.

Sheep?

Titties is real good, but I'm not sure about Nevada guys talking about sheep

Posted on a sign driving I-80 across Wyoming:

Eat Mutton...50,000 coyotes can't be wrong! Sheep have their place...it all depends on your outlook. I like to hunt coyotes.

Titties or the FAA?...Some are better than others.

Pilot In Command...decisions and responsibilities...after the fact, some are more wise than others.

Mistakes...we all make them.

One who never makes mistakes = perfect.

One who makes mistakes but doesn't admit it = AH!

One who makes mistakes and will learn from these mistakes = human.

HC