At 10:11 PM 7/22/00 -0400, Glen Ward wrote:
>Greg, that might sound good, but it is impossible.  After he contacts the
>FSDO, they may take the possible unairworthiness of his plane as
seriously
>as the mechanic's not-so-good work.

I think I said that. So what? If it's unairworthy it's unairworthy. The
fact
that the FAA doesn't know about it won't magically cause the airplane
to keep flying. Nor will the signature in the log-book. Only airworthiness
will.

Glen, aviation isn't like a cartoon, where you can run off a cliff and, 
until you look
down, you don't fall.

Only a fool would, on prima facie evidence of his A&P and IA being
incompetent
and/or negligent continue to, as you suggest, 'enjoy' the plane for a year

while
fixing it to make it airworthy.

No, you make it airworthy and then you fly it. You don't fly it into 
airworthiness.

At some point, there is a duty to the discipline of being an airman that
says
that when you see someone who's dangerous to other airmen, you take action
so that your colleagues don't get pancaked.

And one can argue that as the 'owner/operator' of an airplane, if you know
the
A&P and/or IA who signed it off to be unqualified, you are not meeting
your
duties under the FARs.

Yeah, it might mean you have to get the non-annual annual re-done. So
what?
The other choice is to fly behind the jerk's work for a year.

Greg

__________________________________________________________________________
______
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>>

Reply via email to