Richard, I have owned my coupe 24 years, and what you are saying is mosty true. And I have worked on mostly old planes so I have seen just about everything. I havn't just worked on coupes. Some of the others are swifts, pipers new and old, mooneys, stearmans, T-6's, B-25's, beech, champs, cessna's new and old. When I worked full time on planes this is how we did it. We had a flat rate for annuals. Price depended on the type. The price was for the inspection, and that ment doing the parework too. If I found something wrong then that was time and parts. All the shops I worked in we had more than one mech. and after we got done we would look at each others work, 4 eyes are better than 2. The last shop I worked in we were both IA's. People brought me there planes because I was through and fair. I was even busy in the winter here in Wi. As far as looking At other mech. sign offs you bet I checked to make sure the work was done. A few guys I knew I would trust, but not guys I didn't. After all if your name is the last one in the book guess who they will come after first. I have found many Ad's signed off that weren't done. For example, the AD on a coupe gascolator, it had no brackets. On a PA-28,I found 2 AD's signed off that didn't even apply to that airplane. That means that the IA didn't even look at the airplane. It was a penciled inspection. I have hundreds more. So do you still want me not to be through? Mark
--- In [email protected], Richard Wilkens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Mark, > > Just to carry this point on one step further. I have owned my Coupe > for 21 years. Over that period I have had maybe nine or ten APs do > annuals for me. If I understand you, I paid each of those APs three > or four hours to look at the same paperwork at say an average of > $60.00 an hour (9 * 3 * 60 = $1,620 to $2,400), even though each > signed a line in the log book that says it has been checked. The > first AP gave me a very nice computer printout that he signed off on > each AD that was out at that time. He signed it 20 to 30 times. > > I am also very sure that not one (OK one) ordered the aircraft record > from the FAA to see what changes to the aircraft had 337s. Do you > order the aircraft record for every plane you work on? > > Having been an motorcycle than an auto tech in a past life, I know > different mechanics look at different thing when working on a > machine. We all have pet things we do. My first AP always removes > the prop. He found a cracked spinner backing plate on mine, be he is > the only one who has ever done that. (He repaired it the first time, > than about ten years latter I took it back to him and this time he > made me replace it because it was repaired. He forget he was the one > who repaired it. The total of the two were about $400) I am > personally more conformable changing APs from time to time because > one AP may over look the same thing. > > I believe that most older aircraft are missing 337s either because > they were never issued or there is an honest difference of opinion. > > The thing in older aircraft that scares me is the changing of data > plates. You see from time to time people selling log books and data > plates to an old junked or destroyed aircraft. If somebody installs > that data plate on another aircraft, every thing in the log books is > a lie. Doing this is the about the worst case of fraud I can imagine. > > At least this got the list talking again. > > Richard > N99904 > > > At 09:37 PM 11/21/2008, Mark H. wrote: > > > >Richard, > >No flame from me. Yes you have very good points. > >This is what I'm getting at. > >Say I'm your IA. I do an annual for you. What you pay for is a > >complete inspection. And the airplane to be airworthy. That means the > >paperwork too. That is what you pay for, and I believe that is what > >you sould get. why not do the job right and cover all the bases and > >cover you and the mech. It's the right thing to do right? > >FYI,When the Faa does an investigation into something, they will > >call IA's that work on that type aircraft for their input. So it's > >not the insurace company doing the inspection. I have been called a > >couple times. Mark >
