Roy and Ed have started a good process and I am very pleased that it is getting good attention from the group. I applaud their effort and wish to support them in any and all ways. Lets start with just the "Statement of problem". The first and second paragraphs are fine and correct. The third is correct but it does not convey the correct problem IMHO. The problem is one of not having complete and correct information to work from so the poor A&P who has to work on a Coupe does the best he can with the very poor manuals we have available and with the information in the FAA publications. He may well miss something that people with greater type knowledge would not have missed and this can happen on any aircraft large or small old or new. The correct problem to deal with first is the need to develop modern manuals that do provide detailed information on proper maintenance and inspection requirements for all of our Coupes. While we are doing this we can make them easy to use and have them written for a less technically advanced reader so that we may all be able to read and understand them. With todays computer technology it would be simple (but a lot of hard work) to produce such a manual on CD with hypertext links to any references so that when the page text said to use 5606 to fill the strut we could click on 5606 and have details of what it is pop up. If we are looking at a drawing we can zoom in and get a better look and we can point to a part and click and get full details including alternate parts. All items that come off the aircraft can be covered with how to information including the tools needed, the list of parts that must be changed or that frequently need to be changed such as seals, gaskets or crush washers. We could also be told what service products we would need such as lubricants, fluids or special sealants. In short we can read and plan a job (including printing the instructions) and be sure that we are ready to do the job before we start it. This is the way large aircraft are done and it will work for us even better. I agree that some kind of "Repairman Certificate" is a good idea and that it should be specific to a given owned aircraft much like the Experimental Aircraft Builder gets. It should not be as broad in scope as we still do not have the skills to make major changes with our limited knowledge in most cases. I think Percy had a very good idea when he pointed out the need for training and supervision. First, we must know the minimum basics that a new A&P must learn in an academic sense, which I see as having to pass the three A&P knowledge (written) tests and the Oral. Then a type specific practical could be developed. Yes you will need to know a few things that you will not find on your Coupe but that will not hurt you and if you take one of the home study courses like the King course it can be done very simply. What most of us do not have the time for is the 5000 hours of experience required to be a "Real A&P". This is where the type specific issue works we only need to learn the hard part about one aircraft. The experience you could log working on your aircraft could count towards becoming a full A&P and in time some would like to go on to this. I think any Repairman needs to have some supervision and I would suggest that a requirement for an A&P sponsor who would inspect the work done on the aircraft at least once a year and certify that you have done the work correctly under his sponsorship could be reasonable. He does not sign off each job and he does not have to be there each time the aircraft is worked on he is just there to make sure that mistakes are caught and that you have someone to call if you have a question that you should get answered before you proceed. I have seen much concern about the Annual inspection and the desire to get away from IA's. IMHO this is not a good idea. I am sure that if the basic maintenance is being done well any worthy IA will not be a problem and any A&P with three years of current experience can get an IA if he wants to it is not a real big deal. I agree that we could extend the Annual time period but the device to do that would be an Approved Maintenance Program. The Approved Maintenance Program could have several levels of required checks in it and the one that approximated the Annual could be set for the first to occur either 300 hours or two calendar years (any combination the FAA would accept) and this check could have the requirement that it be signed off by an IA. All smaller check could be accomplished today by an A&P and if we are successful we could have them done by a "Repairman". I would see such an Approved Maintenance Program having detailed "Work Cards" just like big aircraft with all the information you need to do that particular maintenance task included. These frequently have drawings of the task, a list of tool, all the supplies and parts required to do the task and even a man-hour standard time. It is a very effective system and if used correctly by someone who has been trained in that system many of us could do the work with no problems. That is how major large aircraft maintenance facilities are able to use effectively non-certified mechanics and still be sure that the work is done correctly. Give it some thought, these are things small groups of people in the club can do with the talents available and they will benefit all of us. I might add that an aircraft that was clearly on such a maintenance program could be expected to have a greater sales value as it would be in generally better condition than most and it would be documented clearly as to what had been done in the way of recent maintenance. Have a good day. Best regards, Vern 1949 415G N94892 __________________________________________________________________________ ______ To unsubscribe from this list please send mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ___________________________________________________________ T O P I C A The Email You Want. http://www.topica.com/t/16 Newsletters, Tips and Discussions on Your Favorite Topics
<<attachment: winmail.dat>>
