Caveat - I have just logged in and, at this stage, can only presume that there has been a fatal in Madrid earlier this morning, my time .. no doubt, I'll catch up on that as I do my morning PPRuNe review ..
Actually, Checkboard, I'd take a contrary view...
(a) it is a problem variously seen throughout the Industry, perhaps especially in GA ... and you would well recall that sort of problem in an earlier life in Oz. For far too long, too many folk have accepted this sort of nonsense as being acceptable maintenance practice ...
(b) one of the underpinning bases for continuing airworthiness is the paper trail in the maintenance record system.
(c) back-of-a-fag-packet notes for the other guy fly totally in the face of (b).
(d) if the pilot's concern is valid, the snag should generate an appropriate investigation which will result either in
- rectification or, if the groundies cannot replicate the fault
- the investigation will be referred to aircrew for further monitoring/reporting or a specific test flight for data gathering will be scheduled
(e) if the pilot's concern is not valid, the investigation will result in the snag being written off serviceable
(f) the above depends, of course, on an appropriate level of integrity across the board
The pilot should see his role as reporting what he/she observed, not diagnosing what it may have meant in maintenance or engineering terms.
Where practicable, it is absolutely appropriate to discuss the matter with the maintainers prior to writing up the snag. What is not acceptable in a disciplined system is either not doing anything with the knowledge of a perceived snag or using the note-for-the-next-guy system
I will, of course, remove any overtly non-technical or other inappropriate posts/comments from the thread