BeechTalk - BT

Username Protected · **Posted:** 04 Sep 2018, 17:39

Username Protected wrote:

That's true of all inspection programs, even when you select the manufacturer's program. Once selected, you are not required to update it during your ownership. If Cessna/Textron updates the inspection program or adds SIDs, they do not apply to you.

Mike C.

Mike you got a source for this. Textron has added a bunch of new inspections for king air and we comply with them.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 04 Sep 2018, 17:56

Username Protected wrote:

That's true of all inspection programs, even when you select the manufacturer's program. Once selected, you are not required to update it during your ownership. If Cessna/Textron updates the inspection program or adds SIDs, they do not apply to you.

Mike C.

Mike you got a source for this. Textron has added a bunch of new inspections for king air and we comply with them.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 04 Sep 2018, 18:08

Username Protected wrote:

here's a good example from the conquest SIDS. Lots of really smart people here on BT (including Mike C) have talked about this topic - try searching for conquest SIDS on BT which is waht I did.
https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/he ... 0-%20(2010)%20legal%20interpretation.pdf

Got a better link. I even copied everything to .pdf

Username Protected · **Posted:** 04 Sep 2018, 18:12

Little Charles took his first plane ride at 1 week old. He is almost a month old now! Future pilot for sure

Username Protected · **Posted:** 04 Sep 2018, 18:27

Congrats on the new addition to the crew!

I had baby Lauren up on a long-haul flight (3.3hrs to El Paso) when she was around 3 months old. Since then we've done a bunch more flights, and later this month going all the way to Ohio (at 165 kts true... I need your jet for that trip

)

I've found the baby banz https://www.amazon.com/Baby-Earmuffs-In ... g=btalk-20 (no affiliation, just a happy customer) work well for headphones, we have the ones with bluetooth so when she gets older screen time will be possible for entertainment.

We've been pleasantly surprised that thus far, even in the descent where children usually can have ear problems, she doesn't seem to mind or cry. We do give her a pacifier and/or milk bottle on descent but it doesn't seem to bother her one way or the other. She handles turb better than my wife :duck:

It is great to see a next generation getting started early.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 04 Sep 2018, 18:30

Excellent, I ordered some baby muffs. That was my next question on piston travel.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 04 Sep 2018, 18:35

One more because I can't help myself. Fatherhood (even starting at my old age of 38) is great, not without bad days, but I can recommend to those who may be on the fence, although it may eat into the plane budget when they get bigger!

Username Protected · **Posted:** 04 Sep 2018, 18:39

Yes in the back of a Citation it is not really a concern, but in a piston I think it is important, even though the 42 is actually fairly quiet with the turbodiesels, it's still likely above recommended ambient continuous decibel levels so better safe than sorry.

She wears them with no fuss at all, not sure if that is normal since this is our first baby. I keep saying she is so easy that it is convincing us to have a second, and the second will of course be a terror as that is about how my luck runs!

Username Protected wrote:

Excellent, I ordered some baby muffs. That was my next question on piston travel.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 04 Sep 2018, 18:41

Username Protected wrote:

Got a better link. I even copied everything to .pdf

Sorry don't know what went wrong
google these terms "faa opinion letters conquest sid"
Furnas 2010 opinion from FAA has about every question wrapped up into one document.

My understanding from here and from reading elsewhere-
If you've already selected an inspection program and documented that selection then its frozen and textron or anything outside of an AD can't change the requirements on you after you've selected it.

If the aircraft is new to you then the FAA says you have to make your own selection at the beginning of your ownership and at that point one of your only viable options is the "current" manufacturers inspection program or say the Bacon thing we're talking about here. Or as it says in the letter the owner may elect to follow the new inspection program which it sounds like you may have unwittingly done (I'm assuming here forgive me please if not the case) And if that election is documented then your stuck with the new program and can't go back from the sounds of it.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 04 Sep 2018, 18:41

Username Protected wrote:

Excellent, I ordered some baby muffs. That was my next question on piston travel.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 04 Sep 2018, 18:51

Same to you both, beautiful baby boy!

I agree, they would make a great looking couple! If my daughter told me her boyfriend's father is a pilot I'd be saying "I like this kid already"

Username Protected wrote:

That's a good looking baby, I'm an old 38 too so let's plan on a date in 18 years? Charles and Lauren

Username Protected · **Posted:** 04 Sep 2018, 23:55

Username Protected wrote:

Mike you got a source for this. Textron has added a bunch of new inspections for king air and we comply with them.

From the FAA:

https://www.faa.gov/other_visit/aviatio ... O09008.pdf

changes to an inspection program appropriately adopted by the owner/operator under § 91.409(f)(3) are not mandatory unless required through rulemaking.

Once you select an inspection program under 91.409(f), you are not required to adopt ANY future changes unless forced by the FAA via AD or 91.415. This applies to ALL inspection programs, be it manufacturer, Bacon, or home made.

The FAA has opined (yet to be tested in court, BTW) that a new owner has to select a then current inspection program when they acquire the aircraft. What this means is that at every change of ownership, the new inspections inserted by the manufacturer become required for the new owner but not the old owner.

As I have written on this subject in the past, this is a blatant violation of the Administrative Procedures Act. The APA was the basis for the original clarification that an owner does NOT have to adopt new inspections as that would be handing over rule making to the manufacturers.

But what the FAA is ignoring is that a subsequent owner will be subject to those new rules, and thus the manufacturer DID make new rules. The APA does not have an exclusion for rules that take effect in the FUTURE, those rules are just as subject to the APA as any rule that takes immediate effect. Therefore, the FAA position that a new owner has to adopt new inspection rules unilaterally set by the manufacturer without due public rule making process is illegal.

I have enough windmills to tilt at, but I hope someone contests this someday.

Mike C.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 05 Sep 2018, 00:00

The good thing about these threads is it makes me almost think I could afford a 501 or a MU2. Then, realty sets in. I’d have to find one with 10 years of engine life and then sell it. Not including something catastrophic happening. At least, it makes a AEST look reasonable. :coffee: