Exceptional AI? I don't know if that's good or bad. My own experience has shown me that Exceptional AI's can be a pain in the A--. My current experience is that I took the Coupe in for a Tank repair, but before it will hit the airways again, it'll have rebuilt brake master cylinder, brake pedal, overhauled carb, new fuel line, air cleaner, and whatever else he sees prior to twisting the last screw. Now, most of this was needed, but my point is that he seems to be going out of his way to drum up some extra work. After all, what does it really matter if a person buys a bolt that is pre drilled for a cotter pin, or if he drills it himself? As long as the bolt is the correct spec, it shouldn't matter. I believe we can all find things that are OK, but some Exceptional AI will take exception to it. Oh well, I'd best not go on with this, as the Exceptional could take exception to it.
Larry Dick Chevalier wrote: > This is further information on a thread I started a few months ago regarding > a set of fabric covered wings on my '61 Forney. There were a number of > helpful suggestions from the list for which I am grateful. Here is what > happened next: > > I informed the dealer/IA who sold me the airplane. His opinion initially > was the wings were ok to be used on this airplane citing they were built > under the same Type Certificate number as the airframe. Further research of > the logs indicated the wings were obtained from a 2xxx serial number 415-C. > The Type Certificate number for the 415-C and those that followed, up > through the Forney and beyond, are different. The major difference is the > 415-C has a gross certificated weight of 1260 lb. while the "D" model up > have a gross weight of 1400 lb. owing to strengthening of the rear spar in > the wing. > > Shortly after I informed the seller of this fact, he contacted his local > FSDO (not same as mine) and made a preemptive CYA report as to the > un-airworthiness of my plane. The FAA apparently will not exact punishment > in order to encourage disclosure of maintenance mistakes. Subsequently, I > received a certified letter from the same FSDO advising me they had received > information that my aircraft may not be airworthy due to incorrect wings. > (daaa). The second paragraph advised me that pursuant to 91.417(c) I had 5 > days to submit the a/c maintenance records to their office. In case you > haven't read the referenced rule, it only says I must make the records > available for their inspection. (I hate liars.) In a telephone > conversation with the FSDO operative, he made several attempts to get me to > send the logs to him. I told him that if for any reason the logs were lost, > I would loose a great deal of the value of the aircraft, a risk which could > not be justified. I offered to fax or mail copies of the pertinent entries, > but that didn't seem good enough (probably because my copies couldn't be > used for castration). He wanted me to present the records to my "local" > FSDO office, but I told him it was a 4-1/2 hour drive and that wasn't > practical. He said he would confer with his boss and get back to me. That > was three weeks ago. I haven't heard from him since. (I guess they like > castrations where the bull is pinned to the wall.) > > Through the list I was fortunate enough to find and make a deal for a set of > '61 Forney wings, with mfg. data plates, from a party able to yellow-tag > them. I am leaving Friday for the Northwest to trade wings. > > The dealer/IA who documented an inspection and then sold me the plane > insists that he should not have to pay the entire cost of making the plane > compliant with the Type Certificate and airworthy. I maintain that if he > had known of the problem prior to sale, that is exactly what he would have > had to have done. (Mabe he did know and tried to pass the problem along and > get away with it.) As it is, I am devoting my time and trouble for nothing. > The out of pocket expenses alone will reach nearly $5k by the time the wings > are transported and painted. > > What have I learned from this: It pays to be cynical; dealers will lie to > you, FSDO fascists will lie to you, if it looks questionable it probably is. > A pre-purchase inspection is good, but may not reveal an innocuous problem > that has been overlooked for 30 years. It took an exceptional IA to find > the problem. Exceptional IA's are just about as hard to find. > > I have also been fighting a problem I thought was related to plug fouling > due to an overly rich carb. I had the carb rebuilt ($450) and one cylinder > seemed to be pumping a little excessive oil. The intermittant engine > roughness appeared so soon after cleaning the plugs (1/2 hr.) I became > convinced that I have had a valve sticking intermittantly. A local mech > tried to rebuild the oily cylinder and found the rings were badly worn. In > addition, one of the rocker arm ears was eaten out badly. When he tried to > ream out for bushings, the ear cracked. I have ordered a complete new set > of Millenium cylinders ($3k) figuring that if one cylinder has that many > problems, the others are suspect too. I'm just tired of fooling with the > thing and being unable to trust it. My wife is just about to go ballistic. > This was supposed to be an "inexpensive airplane" (oxymoron) As my dad used > to say, "Ain't no such animal". > > Thanks for listening, I feel better already. > Dick in NM. > > __________________________________________________________________________ ______ > To unsubscribe from this list please send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > ______________________________________________ > Faster, stronger and able to send millions > of emails in one click: the new Topica site! > http://www.topica.com/t/14 --------------------------------- to unsubscribe send mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ______________________________________________ Faster, stronger and able to send millions of emails in one click: the new Topica site! http://www.topica.com/t/14
<<attachment: winmail.dat>>
