MikeOH

I appreciate your patience on this, but I'm still not clear on if INSPECTION is REQUIRED by an A&P (or IA) after a NON A&P performs work on an aircraft. I don't how much clearer I can make my question. The real point of my question is that while I've always assumed non A&Ps may well work on my aircraft while in a shop, certified repair station, or not, I've also assumed that an A&P (or IA) INSPECTED their work BEFORE signing off the work in my logs as airworthy/approved for return to service. This discussion has raised the ugly question, IMHO, if that isn't even required??? Which bothers me considerably as what happened here poignantly illustrates! Maybe I'm the only one so naive to have not realized no inspection of a non-certificated mechanic's work is even required.

Am I to understand, in either case, that NO inspection by an A&P post work is actually required? That is, if the A&P, or repair station, chooses to sign off the non A&P's work WITHOUT inspecting it, that is perfectly legal?

@N201MKTurbo Not trying to twist your words; I'm trying to understand in the CONTEXT of this discussion where a NON A&P worked on the plane and dented the push rod tubes, yet the damage was NOT discovered. I was under the impression that an A&P or IA is REQUIRED to inspect and sign off the work of a NON A&P. Is that correct, or not?

Ok, your words are clear but, as a non A&P, I really want to make sure I'm understanding this correctly. Am I to understand there is NO requirement for an A&P to inspect work AFTER it has been performed by a non A&P and BEFORE the plane is approved for return to service??? If so, that is a pretty appalling "quality system" IMHO as an engineer. Indefensible, frankly.

I would suspect it won't remain free for long!

That was my take; but don't bet your future skin cancer on my opinion

chatgpt's take on UV and aircraft windows:

Hmm, that smells like I would spring for a NEW horse blanket

I am NOT judging others but, for me, THIS is exactly why I do not fly at night. I want to be able to SEE my landing spot!

I'm a bit confused as the tool referenced in the AD is designed to check the wooden tail for deterioration by applying a substantial side load and measuring for less than 1/16" permanent deformation after the load is applied. Thing is, I was under the impression that there had been an AD that ELIMINATED ALL wood TAILs on Mooneys. (requires replacement will metal tails) Is that not the case?

@SilentT Has the A&P that "lost" your seats agreed to pay for their replacement? They were in his custody so, if he won't, I'd be rather inclined to file a small claims action. I've never sued anyone in my life but this situation would piss me off enough that I'd be inclined to!

Put a small load on the battery when out of the aircraft; maybe a small 28V bulb. If the voltage collapses you'll know it's the battery.

Hmm, 8kts costs you nearly 3 gph! I love LOP

WOW! That was painful to watch

BINGO! At my home drome (KPOC) I have never missed turning off at taxiway D, 1600 feet from the threshold. That's calm wind. If I have 10 kts on the nose I can make taxiway C with heavy braking, 650 feet from threshold. Minimum energy at touchdown!

Another 'vote' for the oil drain back tubes; specifically, the short rubber section between the 'hard line' and the case. Mine were hard, cracked and therefore not sealing.

Probably where LASAR buys them!

Having BTDT, 100% agree! I did the passenger side first and thought “this going to be a piece of cake”! Little did I know….

Hmm, doesn't work so well when you only have a landing light. Which I have on from takeoff to landing. I've never had an issue with a simple, "Confirm Mooney XXX cleared to land runway YY" request if I'm a bit unsure.

Yeah, but the shipping is $5.95

Maybe just me, but your new font is nearly impossible to read.

Good read, but keep in mind this is a site for VATSIM; it is NOT an FAA or government site! Note the disclaimer at the bottom of the page:

Yeah, that was a FABULOUS box. It almost seemed like Garmin wanted to not merely eliminate competition, which makes sense, but eliminate a better product (the CNX80/GNS480), which made NO SENSE!

I have honed out minor scoring on automotive master and wheel cylinders; no idea if that is acceptable, or what the limits are before the piston cup won't seal, for aircraft. Seems low risk to try, BWTHDIK

Or, five minutes with tin snips, pliers, and a can of Krylon