• If You Are Having Trouble Logging In with Your Old Username and Password, Please use this Forgot Your Password link to get re-established.
  • Hey! Be sure to login or register!

October 1

S

StewartB

Oct. 1st is the day the "new" field approval procedures take effect. I just spoke to my inspector to make sure I'm not painting myself into a corner on the 12. If any of you are in the process of modification, get the 337 done and signed-off now. The new guidelines will take some time to get comfortable with.
SB
 
stewartb said:
Oct. 1st is the day the "new" field approval procedures take effect. I just spoke to my inspector to make sure I'm not painting myself into a corner on the 12. If any of you are in the process of modification, get the 337 done and signed-off now. The new guidelines will take some time to get comfortable with.
SB

Stewart...

Whoa, back up the truck!... What "new" field approval procedures?... Is this just an Alaska thing?... My local FSDO doesn't know anything about new procedures... The new Part 145 (repair station) rules were supposed to take effect the first part of October, but that's been put off another 3 months... Educate me...
 
Maybe it is just local. From my ASI's description, it's essentially the document that you downloaded earlier that defines what can and can't be field approved, and those things that may be approved with engineering. The engineering approval, I was told, will take months to get, leaving the plane NOT AIRWORTHY while the paperwork goes through. We in Alaska will have something called a "Legacy" approval available, where a previously allowed mod may be done, but the airworthiness certificate gets a restriction saying that if the plane leaves Alaska, it must be returned to the original configuration as applies to that mod. That provision may help a plane fly while the engineering approval is happening.
I was warned that mechanics won't like the application process, either. Documentation of parts, procedures, references to drawings, etc. all will be required. Mechanics up here are scrambling to get approvals this month.
SB
 
stewartb said:
Maybe it is just local. From my ASI's description, it's essentially the document that you downloaded earlier that defines what can and can't be field approved, and those things that may be approved with engineering. The engineering approval, I was told, will take months to get, leaving the plane NOT AIRWORTHY while the paperwork goes through. We in Alaska will have something called a "Legacy" approval available, where a previously allowed mod may be done, but the airworthiness certificate gets a restriction saying that if the plane leaves Alaska, it must be returned to the original configuration as applies to that mod. That provision may help a plane fly while the engineering approval is happening.
I was warned that mechanics won't like the application process, either. Documentation of parts, procedures, references to drawings, etc. all will be required. Mechanics up here are scrambling to get approvals this month.
SB

Wow!... I know this sounds sacreligious, but sometimes I'm almost glad I live in California!... Can't believe I said that!...

My local FSDO is still doing business like it did quite some time ago... The only thing they pulled back on were some helicopter approvals, but even that's back to normal now...

Hmmm... "One FAA"...
 
can't wait till that lawyer takes his new top cub to alaska for that "trip of a lifetime hunt", bends it and then Dan's fly's out to get it and needs to make some repairs, tells the "professional" that he will have to leave his airplane 'outside in Alaska" as it is unairworthy to return to his home state of WA the 337 for welding up his "previously modified cub" can not be field approved without the "committee of they" approving it? If they approve it temporarily it will have to "remain in Alaska" or be considered unairworthy, (When did Alaska finally get there freedom from the USA?) and will have to be submitted to engineering--quoting the 'new regulations that are only good in AK'

Let the legal crap fly! "our friendlier, more efficient FAA"

Tim
 
Diggler,

I think it is the the FAA playing CYA!!

Wes Landes and Bill Firman, Charly and Cal, and many many other builders and fabricators are great contributors to GA, Actually Bill had built the 'Cargo pod' years before Landes built one. Wes just modified the "original Sullivan Tank" that he purchased the STC on and has successfully produced to make the combo cargo pod (good product) The major difference was Bill was building his on a much smaller budget. The main challenge facing the FAA (my opinion) is they don't know what to do with "common sense engineering" and have been forced by their burocracy to lump the two terms together and in many instances they don't go well together.

I sure hope they work it out or we are going to see even a more rapid decline in 'small GA', as well as more work in the kitplane/exp being done over seas! What a shame!! (looks alot like the auto industry in the late 70's and 80's.

Tim
 
diggler said:
I wonder what caused the FAA to change their policies. Was in Airglas complaining about Firman. Crosswind STOL complaining about 160 hp field approvals (airframe). Individuals complaining different FSDOs. Lawsuits?

Might be those things... My gut feeling is that there may be liability concerns and more likely a lack of familiarity with the product and how to modify it... Lots of 757/767 inspectors, shortage of Cub inspectors and fear of the unknown...
 
Amen Cuby. I see the same thing. Inspectors who have never been around small airplanes. Some have never been around airplanes period. My inspector retires in 2 years. After that I am probably screwed.
 
Steve Pierce said:
Amen Cuby. I see the same thing. Inspectors who have never been around small airplanes. Some have never been around airplanes period. My inspector retires in 2 years. After that I am probably screwed.

Might be the time to fill out the application, it's on-line now... I hear alot of complaints about the "heavy iron" inspectors, but it seems that they are the only ones who apply... The local FSDO is fortunate and just hired a guy who can't even spell 737 and has lots of dope and fabric airplane kind of experience... He'll start at approximately $20K a year more than he was making as a wrench and have a great future... We need more like him...
 
Actually, the problem started when an inspector turned down a field approval, so the mechanic called another...and another, until he found one that would sign it off. (A practice I've participated in.) The inspector that originally refused filed a complaint with his supervisor, and it got noticed, and bumped to the administrator's office. Thus, the call for a procedure that all inspectors must abide by.
SB
 
stewartb said:
Actually, the problem started when an inspector turned down a field approval, so the mechanic called another...and another, until he found one that would sign it off. (A practice I've participated in.) The inspector that originally refused filed a complaint with his supervisor, and it got noticed, and bumped to the administrator's office. Thus, the call for a procedure that all inspectors must abide by.
SB

Interesting, the latest change to Order 8300.10 specifically states that if the inspector isn't comfortable with the field approval, he/she is to direct the applicant to an inspector that is... This has always been an unwritten practice, but as of the latest change, it's now in print...
 
Kinda solves the grievance issue in the future, huh? We need to remember that the FAA is a big organization, with lots of different personalities. How'd you like to manage human resources in a government agency as big as this one?
SB
 
I don't think working for the FAA would give me any personal satisfaction. More money or not. Besides I get bored easy, have to keep doing different things. Though I must admit I have considered it.
 
Well I sympathize. I have about 20 employees, and most of the time I'm just a referee. I don't have to abide by the same rules of engagement that you do, though. I always say, as a boss, crap flows UPHILL!
SB
 
stewartb said:
Well I sympathize. I have about 20 employees, and most of the time I'm just a referee. I don't have to abide by the same rules of engagement that you do, though. I always say, as a boss, crap flows UPHILL!
SB

When I started with this company, they sent me to 3 months of brain washing... One of the few things I remember them telling me was "shit flows downhill and the turds float to the top"... There's always one floating higher than me...
 
Field approval process

Stuart, the change went into effect about 6 months ago for the rest of the U.S.A. . Because of our strong senate deligation (Ted Stevens - REPUBLICAN), Alaska got a 6 month stay on enforcement. We will be treated the same as outsiders on 10-1-03. You shouldn't have let it slip that we were getting special treatment again. One of these guys that live in the states will feel disenfranchised and next thing you know Jesse Jackson will be envolved. Crash
 
Back
Top