BeechTalk - BT

Username Protected · **Posted:** 12 Jun 2023, 22:08

Username Protected wrote:

I would argue that it is harder to maintain an aircraft than to build it. In general, you can get very clear instructions - step by step - on the basic build process. Maintaining it? Do you really know what to look for? Can you recognize when the gear locks aren't going over-center? Can you stab and time a magneto? OK, how about 4 of 'em? What are the lubrication points and what lubricants are appropriate? Having done the EAB thing for 28 years, I've come to the conclusion that building is about time and determination. Maintaining is more subjective and it is much harder to know what you don't know...

For what it is worth, this isn't aimed at you in particular, but when people start talking about retract, IFR, twins that just happen to be EAB, I start thinking about how big of a project it is to keep that buncha parts flying in formation with high dispatch reliability.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 13 Jun 2023, 02:03

Username Protected wrote:

There is a reason the FAA allows the builder (and only the builder) to maintain their own airplanes.

Not true, the FAA allows anyone to maintain an EAB, there are no restrictions on who can do maintenance on an EAB. The only task limited to the builder, or an A&P, is to sign off the annual (aka condition inspection).

Username Protected · **Posted:** 13 Jun 2023, 02:24

Username Protected wrote:

There is a reason the FAA allows the builder (and only the builder) to maintain their own airplanes.

Not true, the FAA allows anyone to maintain an EAB, there are no restrictions on who can do maintenance on an EAB. The only task limited to the builder, or an A&P, is to sign off the annual (aka condition inspection).

Username Protected · **Posted:** 13 Jun 2023, 08:08

Username Protected wrote:

Still, the builder can sign off an annual and the non-builder can’t, so my point may be weaker but remains.

Nope, read it again. Any A&P may sign off the conditional inspection. It needn't be an A&P with IA.

It may also be the original builder with a Repairman Certificate (which is tied to that one, individual aircraft). This is the common case for original builder-original owner.

Quote:

Joe blow the neighborhood handyman can replace a cylinder on an EAB? I did not know that. Seems scary.

Just as scary as those small airplanes buzzing around the local airport, flown by people who don't hold first class medicals.
:peace:

Username Protected · **Posted:** 13 Jun 2023, 08:12

Username Protected wrote:

Joe blow the neighborhood handyman can replace a cylinder on an EAB? I did not know that. Seems scary.

yep, and it's not scary at all.
I do some fabric work on E-AB planes. I'm not an FAA A&P (had an aircraft maintenance engineer license in south africa if that means anything - which it doesn't).
If someone calls me about patching a hole on their belly or recovering an aileron, they don't ask about licenses. They ask about what weight of fabric and type of glue (btw I really like the stewart system)
I've got a set of kitfox tailfeathers in my basement right now. Plane broke loose in the wind and tail swung into a barbwire fence. I told him I'd cover them and paint through the charcoal stage, but he's have to do the color topcoat himself. Not because i can't do it, but his plane is a horrible purple color and I refuse to spray that.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 13 Jun 2023, 08:33

With all due respect.

This thread points out the divergence of views and attitudes we have as pilots. The EAA has built an enormous following made up largely of folks who like to "get their hands dirty".

Tinkerers? Yes, but I say that as a complement. People who love detail with the patience of Job. That pretty much describes who I AM NOT. :thumbup:

I think this is one reason that BT is such a valuable community.

Jg :peace:

Username Protected · **Posted:** 13 Jun 2023, 09:44

Username Protected wrote:

Still, the builder can sign off an annual and the non-builder can’t, so my point may be weaker but remains.

Nope, read it again. Any A&P may sign off the conditional inspection. It needn't be an A&P with IA.

It may also be the original builder with a Repairman Certificate (which is tied to that one, individual aircraft). This is the common case for original builder-original owner.

Quote:

Joe blow the neighborhood handyman can replace a cylinder on an EAB? I did not know that. Seems scary.

Just as scary as those small airplanes buzzing around the local airport, flown by people who don't hold first class medicals.
:peace:

Username Protected · **Posted:** 13 Jun 2023, 09:48

Username Protected wrote:

We have had a few with no medical and no basic med buzzing around some Virginia airports. I am one of them but I have a qualified Safety Pilot and/or CFI in the right seat or left seat depending upon insurance requirements.

If I am in an LSA - no medical, just a driver’s license.

That's why I wrote it in green (sarcasm color). I think the various medical requirements that we current have are a great improvement over what we had 10-20 years ago, just as I think the details of experimental aviation are also well thought out, risk-based, and pretty sane.

If all of us had a Karen "there oughtta be a law" kind of fearful attitude towards every new-to-me aspect of aviation, there wouldn't be much left of aviation! I much prefer a mentality of "that's interesting, I hadn't heard of that- tell me more."

Username Protected · **Posted:** 13 Jun 2023, 09:53

I knew the green font! I loved it! …just want to tick off the folks that don’t think us sullied unwashed masses, without medicals, shouldn’t fly.

What I was kind of hoping as I would also see something without green font that corrected me and added on ultralights, including those crazy folks in powered parachutes on YouTube.

I can’t remember the episode, but one of them had some crazy Karen call in to the FSDO and reported him for not having a medical. Apparently, the inspector called him, asked him, told him why they had to call, and that was it.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 13 Jun 2023, 10:00

Username Protected wrote:

I knew the green font! I loved it! …just want to tick off the folks that don’t think us sullied unwashed masses, without medicals, shouldn’t fly.

What I was kind of hoping as I would also see something without green font that corrected me and added on ultralights, including those crazy folks in powered parachutes on YouTube.

I can’t remember the episode, but one of them had some crazy Karen call in to the FSDO and reported him for not having a medical. Apparently, the inspector called him, asked him, told him why they had to call, and that was it.

Ahhhh, got me- we're speaking the same language.

(I also like JGG's mentality- sort of a "not my cup of tea" approach with a nod to the variety of airport neighbors out there.)

Username Protected · **Posted:** 13 Jun 2023, 11:15

Username Protected wrote:

Not because i can't do it, but his plane is a horrible purple color and I refuse to spray that.

You sound like me! Hahaha. Made an entire aviation career out of saying “nope”. From skydiving instruction to parachute rigging to aircraft maintenance. And that was *before the mechanic shortage.

“Just say no”. Hmmm…where have I heard that before?… :scratch:

Username Protected · **Posted:** 13 Jun 2023, 11:19

Username Protected wrote:

Tinkerers? Yes, but I say that as a complement. People who love detail with the patience of Job. That pretty much describes who I AM NOT. :thumbup:

Having owned multiple experimental aircraft and flown them for over a decade, I can also say that I observed a TON of short cutting by others flying experimental aircraft, a lot of "that'll do" and "certified doesn't mean better" attitudes displayed

so it cuts both ways, and there's nothing wrong with self identifying that don't belong in that group

There are some silly examples in the certified world of FAA rules failing a logic test, but there's a TON to be appreciated by having standardized and certified airframes with AD's, SB's, etc.....and insurability, and resale, which everyone should value

Username Protected · **Posted:** 13 Jun 2023, 15:44

Username Protected wrote:

Still, the builder can sign off an annual and the non-builder can’t, so my point may be weaker but remains.

Nope, read it again. Any A&P may sign off the conditional inspection. It needn't be an A&P with IA.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 13 Jun 2023, 17:11

Good conversations! I’m not a certified aircraft mechanic but I do have pretty advanced mechanical skills. I am a pilot that owns a 50 year old twin. Having been through an annual and seeing the complexity of this airplane and having gone to visit another built velocity twin, I’d say it’s a much safer airplane. Not that my plane isn’t safe, it’s just 50 years old and one just never knows when that next thing is going to fail. I like working on things and tinkering, I’ve rebuilt a couple cars and do all my own car/truck maintenance. It’s just relaxing to me. So as a retired fellow soon I think I’d like the challenge and the end product would be a super cool twin that I would know intimately and could repair myself, anywhere, anytime. :cheers:

Username Protected · **Posted:** 13 Jun 2023, 22:39

Username Protected wrote:

I would argue that it is harder to maintain an aircraft than to build it. In general, you can get very clear instructions - step by step - on the basic build process. Maintaining it? Do you really know what to look for? Can you recognize when the gear locks aren't going over-center? Can you stab and time a magneto? OK, how about 4 of 'em? What are the lubrication points and what lubricants are appropriate? Having done the EAB thing for 28 years, I've come to the conclusion that building is about time and determination. Maintaining is more subjective and it is much harder to know what you don't know...

For what it is worth, this isn't aimed at you in particular, but when people start talking about retract, IFR, twins that just happen to be EAB, I start thinking about how big of a project it is to keep that buncha parts flying in formation with high dispatch reliability.

Say what???

If there is someone who built a high performance, retract aircraft but doesn’t know if the gear locks aren’t over center, then they didn’t build the airplane!

Velocity Twin