jkhirsch

Here's to the Mother ****ing FAA

Recommended Posts

Look at Status, Certificate Date, and Expiration Date.

 

 

S

 

The information contained in this record should be the most current Airworthiness information available in the historical aircraft record. However, this data alone does not provide the basis for a determination regarding the airworthiness of an aircraft or the current aircraft configuration. For specific information, you may request a copy of the aircraft record at http://aircraft.faa.gov/e.gov/ND/

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*Members that donate $10 or more do not see advertisements*

A positive attitude and five bucks for a new registration could be the answer?

Best regards,

-a-

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jeff..Jeez a lot of info. from the gang, I still would contact an aviation lawyer to determine my next move..this stuff really pisses me off...I'm a mild mannered old guy  but the FAA and all the invasion on our airplane's pisses me offf. GOOD LUCK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guys: while that info is public knowledge, no need to go posting all of it here- a simple link to the database, or just a "heads up: your registration expired" would probably do...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Must likey your plane didn't have the proper fuel cap decals. They should indicate the type of fuel not just the gallons. Very common with FSDO inspectors. Keep in mind they have to justify their employment or they get on the budget axe cut. 

 

José 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the early 90s my M20E was ramp checked while tied down outdoors.  Never received a call but had a hang-tag on my prop.  There was a small amount of grease on one blade, near the inside hub.  I ended up getting a ferry permit to my A&P's shop. He looked it over, wiped the grease off and signed it off as airworthy.  Just a royal PIA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reason 238 why one should keep your plane locked up behind hangar doors.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Generally speaking ramp checks are no big deal. Just go with the flow, fix anything that is mentioned and go on with life. It's not worth getting upset about. 

Attitude plays a big part in what they write down. They don't want issues and you don't want issues. 

Yes, they have a quota to do.Just like line checks on airlines. I've had them in 121, 135 and 91. Although sometimes the Inspectors are wrong on what they think is incorrect on the plane. I've found that on at least 3 occasions.  One notable one in KMDW under the wing of a 737 in a shouting match toe to toe with an idiot FAA guy. I do not recommend that attitude though, I won only because I knew without a doubt I was correct.

You'll get a "fix it" ticket probably, get it done and nothing  more will be said.

As my Chief Pilot once said, "go home, drink some wine, relax, it ain't worth gettin up set over". 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Arguing with the FAA is like arguing with a wife.

Even when you win, you lose.

Have a friendly discussion, comply, and go fly.

Be happy.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Owning an aircraft is intense.

 

No kidding. The only other personal property I can think of that would bring this level of scrutiny and Federal involvement is a machine gun. I'll bet you the machine gun is easier.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If there were hangars available in Lexington, it would be in one. I'll likely have to buy the airport to get a hangar. Here's the waitlist for hangars: 13 people in line for Boxes. 27 people in line for Ts.

 

I'm about tired of using the asterisks in my posts, but these mother ****ers grounded my airplane on some bull**** that has been signed off on by 3 mechanics that I can absolutely verify. The latest mechanic of the previous owner, the pre-buy mechanic in Couer d'Alene that I chose, and the latest mechanic that I had do an annual in October. The shop that I used for the last annual included an A&P and an IA that would have had eyes on the plane.

 

There is basically some minor hangar rash in a 2 places that they contacted Mooney about...and just wtf do we all think Mooney says when the FAA calls...rebuild, rebuild the whole GD'ed plane it's not safe don't fly it.

I was so enraged yesterday I didn't think to take any pictures, but if I can find the ones that the original owner sent me, when he said that they had been checked out and were no issue, I'll post those.

 

So now I'm grounded, and now I officially don't like the FAA, I previously loved them because they made it so easy for me to start a 141 school.

 

I originally thought this was instigated by someone to try and stir up trouble for me, because 2 stories short, I don't let people treat me the wrong way in business.

 

However when I met with the guy yesterday, they weren't interested in me at all, which makes the think that they really were just out there filling a quota.

 

I've attached the paperwork that I was provided with, depending on what I hear from them next week, AOPA legal may still be getting involved.

 

Apparently I can't upload a PDF anywhere? So I converted it to images and uploaded those and attached them.

 

 
P.S. The registration is an on-going nonsense thing with that office, they've extended it about 3 times now, but it's entirely unrelated as well.
P.S.S. If you don't mind to remove the personal information, so that it's at least not crawled I would appreciate it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would like to see pictures as well.  If this is as it seems how many 50 year old planes don't have a few dents in them?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With all these discrepancies what did you expect the FAA would do? Ignore them and let you fly??

They're doing their job. You should be grateful.

I think they're being are very nice informing you to take corrective action.

And what did you expect Mooney to say. It's ok let it fly?! Did you expect them to argue with the FAA on your behalf?

Blaming others and cursing the FAA is not constructive. Fix it and move on!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you need to check your ass is what I think, these "discrepancies" have been signed off on mutiple annuals, they didn't happen the day before the inspection. Bottom line: If it was groundworthy. they mechanic should have grounded it, or at least told me what would happen if the FAA caught me, thereby letting me choose to illegally fly the plane and take responsibility.\

 

But.....Since you're so smart you already knew that it's the A&Ps job to deem the aircraft airworthy before they stamp it.

 

The FAA took pictures, I didn't yet, but I will and I'll get them uploaded so everyone can determine how they feel about it on their own fruition.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The items shown on the list are consistent with an airworthy old plane and you will find them in other planes on the ramp. Looks like the inspector is an inexperienced guy trying to justify his employment. The fact that there are so many silly items tells me that he is trying to impress someone and deserves to continue on the job. He is in a low inspector position because he would not have the time to bother with little planes while inspecting part 135 planes and maintenace records.

 

You are in no violation since the discrepancies were not assessed after a flight. If the plane is not flying there is no need to fix the discrepancies.

 

Ask for pictures to substantiate his findings. In any litigation pictures are required. I doubt if any of the above will show on a picture that shows the aircraft registration also 

 

José  

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok..this is bullshit.... I'd spit on them...... (oh, sorry...did I really say that...gosh, I would not want to appear openly hostile).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

You are in no violation since the discrepancies were not assessed after a flight. If the plane is not flying there is no need to fix the discrepancies.

 

José  

unfortunately Jose, he does have to address the issue. It may not need to be reskinned or have anything repaired but because it has been deemed unairworthy by the FAA not addressing the squawks and flying the airplane opens a bigger can of worms. at that point you are challenging the FAA's authority and they will come back and hit you hard. if he can get documentation stating that the dents do not adversely affect air flow, lift and controllability of the aircraft and are with in acceptable limits, the inspector should accept it and release the aircraft. the big issue is mooney made a statement so now you have to get them to reverse their opinion. one thing you can try to do is get in and take pictures of the ribs and spars in the damaged area to prove that there is no additional structural damage. your A&P probably has a borescope he can do that with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We don't know the pretext under which these questions were asked to Mooney, or what pictures were provided to them but a better answer might have been that they were unable to provide an opinion without inspecting the plane in person.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What Jose was saying, I think, is that I am under no violation because they didn't "catch" me flying the plane and then deem it to be unairworthy.

 

I'm not one that's huge on "passing the buck" I take responsibility for my own actions, but the way I see it is that I pay a mechanic to make sure that things like this don't happen. Since all of these "discrepancies" existed when I had the annual inspection complete, and can easily prove that, this falls either on the mechanic for negligence, the FAA for bullshit intimidation of Mooney, or Mooney for just give an answer that covers their ***.

 

You can bet the mechanic won't be happy about the FAA trying to yank his license because of some bull**** that Mooney spewed without due diligence.

 

Unfortunately the FAA doesn't need due diligence...

 

Edit: They also conveniently didn't provide me with the full string of emails. If it gets that nasty I guess I'll have to subpoena them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I were in a similar situation I would contact Stacy myself and get his side of the story.  I've talked with him before when I had problems and found him to be very reasonable and helpful.  What is missing is what the inspector said or showed him to get him to make the statement that was made.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jeff, there a few things you can fix on that list without much problem or cost. I would get them corrected in order to show the FAA "good faith" even if you don't agree with their assessment. I doesn't matter to them what you think. They need resolution at this point.

 

The FAA is going to ask for the maximum it should be remembered that any damage, distortion, or malformation of the wing leading edge renders the

airplane unairworthy. From their view it should be "good as new" next step for me would be to get your mechanic to the plane, let him inspect the discrepancies and make a log book entry indicating they are airworthy. The FAA cannot establish when the dents were made therefore they are not airworthy, they need a current inspection. IF you A&P /IA signed them off before and there is no change to the condition they should be airworthy now.

 

Get the stuff you can easily repair fixed and get the rest signed off with a current date in the logs. Submit to the FAA and they should go away. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you need to check your ass is what I think, these "discrepancies" have been signed off on mutiple annuals, they didn't happen the day before the inspection. Bottom line: If it was groundworthy. they mechanic should have grounded it, or at least told me what would happen if the FAA caught me, thereby letting me choose to illegally fly the plane and take responsibility.\

 

But.....Since you're so smart you already knew that it's the A&Ps job to deem the aircraft airworthy before they stamp it.

 

The FAA took pictures, I didn't yet, but I will and I'll get them uploaded so everyone can determine how they feel about it on their own fruition.

Not to take the FAA's side or anything, but come on now. Dents I would agree are subjective. On bigger planes they have tolerances in the SRM with regards to depth and area before repair or replacement.

However cracks in the elevator skin, a painted over data plate, cracked wingtip skin, missing screws, and missing fairings should have been caught at the last annual. I work on airplanes and none of that would have escaped our shop. If your mechanic feels it's airworthy right now then just have him make a statement that the aircraft was inspected and conforms to it's type design; it's in airworthy condition, give that to the inspector and roll on. If not, then why not?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The "regulated" world is definitely different than the "real" world.

The factory has one design, it's been tested and approved for flight. It follows an approved method for manufacture and has approved methods for maintenance and repair.

The real world has dents and dings outside the initial manufacturing step. the plane still may fly, but all the testing done before may no longer apply. Under what conditions does it stop flying? Nobody knows without testing...

Where these dents and dings occur require different levels of consideration based on how they could effect flight.

Dents in the prop...

The concern is for crack propagation leading to separation of part of the prop. Significant imbalance can lead to separation of the engine for the A/F. Flight comes to an abrupt halt...

Dents in the aeleron...

Concern for changes to the design are induced flutter. Once flutter begins, it may not end. Flutter can lead to damage or separation of part or all of the aeleron. Having a broken aeleron hanging on the wing could be hard to balance with the opposite aeleron. Aelerons are essentially required for flight.

Dents in the wing...

A small change in the surface can extract a large change in lift. The speed brakes demonstrate this extremely well. They are small, but they generate a very large disruption to the lift component of the wing.

Dents in the monocoque...

Part of the fuselage is a weight bearing structure. Dents can effect the structures ability to do its job.

In summary...

There are some things that are acceptable in real life (to an extent) that cannot be proven safe and effective in front of the regulators.

If you have damage to your plane you can expect to have to fix it, by the proper methods, by the proper people, prior to flying it.

You cannot expect the factory to recommend something that doesn't fit this logic. You can expect that their recommendation fits using proper parts, procedures and people. And be thankful that you don't have a fiberglass plane...

Search for topics like 'dent filler, being used on wings. Very few people are happy with this, when they find their plane has been "fixed" with this method...

We may not like how the FAA or even the FDA operates. But our area of the world operates much better with them, than without.

Did you read The Jungle, by Upton Sinclair? It covered the atrocious unregulated environment in the food industry prior to the development of the FDA.

I hope this helps explain how regulated environments tend to work from an engineer's point of view.

Save the vitriol for the time after you have been proven correct.

Best regards,

-a-

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PTK...Sometimes you just make me scratch my head...

HUH?

Do you kick injured dogs when they are down with tails between their legs?

No Scott I don't as a matter of principle. But did you read the list of discrepancies?!

Missing fairings and screws cracked skins and painted data plate?

What "annuals" was it getting. Signatures in the log book?

I mean what leg does he have to stand on cursing the FAA inspector and being upset with Mooney!

For crying out loud!

The inspector doesn't know the history of the plane. And neither does Mooney!

All he sees is the tip of the iceberg and wonders what's lurking underneath.

Also he and everyone knows what goes on. There are annuals and then there are "annuals!"

He is going by first impression on looking at it and it wasn't good.

Just doing his job.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now