CAR 232...an Ausfly experience coming to you?
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: australia
Posts: 1,044
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
yr' wrong,
Go back to the ATSB report on a previous post on this thread.
I stand by my statement that, in this day and age, corrosion prevention in tube frames has come a long way since linseed oil.
Tootle pip!!
PS: Has it ever occurred to your tiny mind that 4130 tube frames are not limited to aircraft, I built my first one before I was old enough to vote.
Go back to the ATSB report on a previous post on this thread.
I stand by my statement that, in this day and age, corrosion prevention in tube frames has come a long way since linseed oil.
Tootle pip!!
PS: Has it ever occurred to your tiny mind that 4130 tube frames are not limited to aircraft, I built my first one before I was old enough to vote.
So please tell us how you cam manufacture a window and install it. Still not done that.
I have already pointed you to the relevant regulations and associated advisory material, if you can't read and understand them, it is not my problem. That it is apparently beyond your present level of knowledge is not relevant, as to whether or not it can be done.
Folks,
This is a bit of an addendum to my last post, I think it is highly likely that Mr. yr' wrong has only a very limited knowledge of paint systems developments over the years, with particular application to corrosion control.
Linseed oil treatment of welded tube structures was probably the pointy end of such techniques in 1915, but it is now 2015. Indeed, the various proponents, after about 100 years, still can't agree on whether it should be raw or boiled linseed oil.
After all, as I understand it, Mr. yr' wrong is what the FAA call a maintenance technician or mechanic, although in Australia we dress it up with the term "engineer", which, in most countries would mean holding at least a BE, not just a trade qualification.
Such a person would not be expected to have an in-depth knowledge of such specialist matters, but rather a functional knowledge sufficient to carry out basic aircraft maintenance instructions and tasks relevant to his trade.
As such, he would not be expected to have an in-depth knowledge of such operational matter as LOP engine operations, which are not maintenance tasks, although, it would seem likely he believes he is an authority on such matters. Quite why this seems to be so is not clear.
Likewise, Mr. yr' wrong does does not seem to understand that there is no requirement to be an AME or LAME to carry out instruction on how to correctly fill out a maintenance release. I can assure Mr. Yr' wrong that at all relevant time I was suitable qualified and licensed to carry out such aviation instruction.
In fact, on far to many occasions I have found new M/Rs releasing an aircraft to service have not been correctly completed by the signatory on the release.
Tootle pip!!
PS: I am well familiar with the aroma of linseed oil, I spent five years about a mile down wind of a linseed oil factory. Beautiful smell.
where I was a whiteness in court against Casa o. This very subject. So yea I know a lot about it
Maybe I should claim my first teething ring was 4360, or better still, EN 60.
You whitness ?? as opposed to a blackness??
Actually, the fact that you gave testimony on a particular matter in court means ??
So yea I know a lot about it ---- does not follow, although you presumably knew enough for the purposes of your testimony as a tradesman, but even this could only be determined by reading the transcript, particularly any cross examination.
Tootle pip!!
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: australia
Posts: 1,044
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So please tell us how you cam manufacture a window and install it. Still not done that.
Yr' wrong,
I have already pointed you to the relevant regulations and associated advisory material, if you can't read and understand them, it is not my problem. That it is apparently beyond your present level of knowledge is not relevant, as to whether or not it can be done.
Tell us dumb ones/ Show us exactly where its say you may manufacture parts.
Folks,
This is a bit of an addendum to my last post, I think it is highly likely that Mr. yr' wrong has only a very limited knowledge of paint systems developments over the years, with particular application to corrosion control.
In correct more than likely more up to date than what you are.
Linseed oil treatment of welded tube structures was probably the pointy end of such techniques in 1915, but it is now 2015. Indeed, the various proponents, after about 100 years, still can't agree on whether it should be raw or boiled linseed oil.
Once again you have not shown why it is used. Ill give you a clue it has more than one use
After all, as I understand it, Mr. yr' wrong is what the FAA call a maintenance technician or mechanic, although in Australia we dress it up with the term "engineer", which, in most countries would mean holding at least a BE, not just a trade qualification.
Once again incorrect. An Aust LAME carrys out more than what a FAA IA can do and considerately more than an AMP
Such a person would not be expected to have an in-depth knowledge of such specialist matters, but rather a functional knowledge sufficient to carry out basic aircraft maintenance instructions and tasks relevant to his trade.
Once again LAME is not a trade.
So lets look at it this way;
I have never seen anyone that has not been able to fly. If you can drive a car you can fly, Only one person had real trouble she moved training centres and got though it.
Now kid of the street with 12 months training into a 4 engine bomber over Germany getting the sh&t shot out of him at night in bad weather. In a little over 12 months of training.
Now different kid goes into engineering.
1st year can find his shoes
2 nd can do his laces up
3 getting some where
4 not to bad
5,6,7,8 learning really started
9,10 I can with reasonable confidence place him onto the hangar floor and not have to check on him ever five minutes.
Now when he is doing his lic (which was the hardest in the world to achieve ) when I started 3 sittings a year, now still only 10. No walk in and sit down at a computer at basically when you wish.
So lets look at that again 1 year to 10 years, No wonder a former PM called you BUS drivers.
The difference between a Dr and an engineer is a Dr place there mistakes into the ground, and only do it one at a time.
Some post back you said you often have trouble with engineers. We can see why.
As such, he would not be expected to have an in-depth knowledge of such operational matter as LOP engine operations, which are not maintenance tasks, although, it would seem likely he believes he is an authority on such matters. Quite why this seems to be so is not clear.
Once again incorrect. We as LAME know and have to know all aspects of aviation with the exception to nav when you do engine airframe but EIR know more about it than any pilot would ever know.
Difference is you pay to do a course then you pay for us to fix your mistakes after you done the course its a win win.
Likewise, Mr. yr' wrong does does not seem to understand that there is no requirement to be an AME or LAME to carry out instruction on how to correctly fill out a maintenance release. I can assure Mr. Yr' wrong that at all relevant time I was suitable qualified and licensed to carry out such aviation instruction.
In CORRECT once again.
What about the AA exam our did we forget about that.You know AA its the exam on AIr Law for engineering , woops I forgot you have not done that exam have you.
Please state your qualification's to this statement. On a previous post you admitted you haven't issued a M/R. so what the go. Yep lots of typos on M,R, why because a generally rule end of the day pilot waiting to go and typos are made. So please other than typos what mistakes do we make.
In fact, on far to many occasions I have found new M/Rs releasing an aircraft to service have not been correctly completed by the signatory on the release.
Such as
Tootle pip!!
Now anyone that's knows me also knows I get on extremely well with pilots so please do not think for one minute that im down on you guys. I also will never give you an aircraft that I would not fly in myself. But when people get on this site and make statements that they know it all and clearly do not, as has been pointed out by others as well. Statements like LOP for example, I see the damage I answer there questions and will not be drawn into this again. Make a new thread. I and others like my self need and have to know all aspects of aircraft applications, this not only means what we do in the hangar but what and how it is used why it is used and operational aspect's in flight. To that point I had a problem in flight wit an aircraft. The owner said they went through this problem over the week end and came up with what they thought was the proplem. I got all the info for the flight profile and found and said what the problem was. They said know because xyz still works , yep because of this. Changed component done. And anyway we all know what this person is about and how he acts even with his own kind.
Yr' wrong,
I have already pointed you to the relevant regulations and associated advisory material, if you can't read and understand them, it is not my problem. That it is apparently beyond your present level of knowledge is not relevant, as to whether or not it can be done.
Tell us dumb ones/ Show us exactly where its say you may manufacture parts.
Folks,
This is a bit of an addendum to my last post, I think it is highly likely that Mr. yr' wrong has only a very limited knowledge of paint systems developments over the years, with particular application to corrosion control.
In correct more than likely more up to date than what you are.
Linseed oil treatment of welded tube structures was probably the pointy end of such techniques in 1915, but it is now 2015. Indeed, the various proponents, after about 100 years, still can't agree on whether it should be raw or boiled linseed oil.
Once again you have not shown why it is used. Ill give you a clue it has more than one use
After all, as I understand it, Mr. yr' wrong is what the FAA call a maintenance technician or mechanic, although in Australia we dress it up with the term "engineer", which, in most countries would mean holding at least a BE, not just a trade qualification.
Once again incorrect. An Aust LAME carrys out more than what a FAA IA can do and considerately more than an AMP
Such a person would not be expected to have an in-depth knowledge of such specialist matters, but rather a functional knowledge sufficient to carry out basic aircraft maintenance instructions and tasks relevant to his trade.
Once again LAME is not a trade.
So lets look at it this way;
I have never seen anyone that has not been able to fly. If you can drive a car you can fly, Only one person had real trouble she moved training centres and got though it.
Now kid of the street with 12 months training into a 4 engine bomber over Germany getting the sh&t shot out of him at night in bad weather. In a little over 12 months of training.
Now different kid goes into engineering.
1st year can find his shoes
2 nd can do his laces up
3 getting some where
4 not to bad
5,6,7,8 learning really started
9,10 I can with reasonable confidence place him onto the hangar floor and not have to check on him ever five minutes.
Now when he is doing his lic (which was the hardest in the world to achieve ) when I started 3 sittings a year, now still only 10. No walk in and sit down at a computer at basically when you wish.
So lets look at that again 1 year to 10 years, No wonder a former PM called you BUS drivers.
The difference between a Dr and an engineer is a Dr place there mistakes into the ground, and only do it one at a time.
Some post back you said you often have trouble with engineers. We can see why.
As such, he would not be expected to have an in-depth knowledge of such operational matter as LOP engine operations, which are not maintenance tasks, although, it would seem likely he believes he is an authority on such matters. Quite why this seems to be so is not clear.
Once again incorrect. We as LAME know and have to know all aspects of aviation with the exception to nav when you do engine airframe but EIR know more about it than any pilot would ever know.
Difference is you pay to do a course then you pay for us to fix your mistakes after you done the course its a win win.
Likewise, Mr. yr' wrong does does not seem to understand that there is no requirement to be an AME or LAME to carry out instruction on how to correctly fill out a maintenance release. I can assure Mr. Yr' wrong that at all relevant time I was suitable qualified and licensed to carry out such aviation instruction.
In CORRECT once again.
What about the AA exam our did we forget about that.You know AA its the exam on AIr Law for engineering , woops I forgot you have not done that exam have you.
Please state your qualification's to this statement. On a previous post you admitted you haven't issued a M/R. so what the go. Yep lots of typos on M,R, why because a generally rule end of the day pilot waiting to go and typos are made. So please other than typos what mistakes do we make.
In fact, on far to many occasions I have found new M/Rs releasing an aircraft to service have not been correctly completed by the signatory on the release.
Such as
Tootle pip!!
Now anyone that's knows me also knows I get on extremely well with pilots so please do not think for one minute that im down on you guys. I also will never give you an aircraft that I would not fly in myself. But when people get on this site and make statements that they know it all and clearly do not, as has been pointed out by others as well. Statements like LOP for example, I see the damage I answer there questions and will not be drawn into this again. Make a new thread. I and others like my self need and have to know all aspects of aircraft applications, this not only means what we do in the hangar but what and how it is used why it is used and operational aspect's in flight. To that point I had a problem in flight wit an aircraft. The owner said they went through this problem over the week end and came up with what they thought was the proplem. I got all the info for the flight profile and found and said what the problem was. They said know because xyz still works , yep because of this. Changed component done. And anyway we all know what this person is about and how he acts even with his own kind.
Last edited by yr right; 4th Sep 2015 at 21:21.
Yr right...in truth your level of education is just about associate diploma mech engineering level...wish I knew that thirty years ago, would have sat all the exams in one hit.
However, this is getting away from the real issue...FOIs making up their own interpretations in the field. Anyone been pineappled on any other issues?
However, this is getting away from the real issue...FOIs making up their own interpretations in the field. Anyone been pineappled on any other issues?
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: australia
Posts: 1,044
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yr right...in truth your level of education is just about associate diploma mech engineering level...wish I knew that thirty years ago, would have sat all the exams in one hit.
However, this is getting away from the real issue...FOIs making up their own interpretations in the field. Anyone been pineappled on any other issues?
However, this is getting away from the real issue...FOIs making up their own interpretations in the field. Anyone been pineappled on any other issues?
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: australia
Posts: 1,044
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yr' wrong,
Maybe I should claim my first teething ring was 4360, or better still, EN 60.
You whitness ?? as opposed to a blackness??
Actually, the fact that you gave testimony on a particular matter in court means ??
So yea I know a lot about it ---- does not follow, although you presumably knew enough for the purposes of your testimony as a tradesman, but even this could only be determined by reading the transcript, particularly any cross examination.
Tootle pip!!
Maybe I should claim my first teething ring was 4360, or better still, EN 60.
You whitness ?? as opposed to a blackness??
Actually, the fact that you gave testimony on a particular matter in court means ??
So yea I know a lot about it ---- does not follow, although you presumably knew enough for the purposes of your testimony as a tradesman, but even this could only be determined by reading the transcript, particularly any cross examination.
Tootle pip!!
Occasionally someone in CASA reincarnates the myth that there's a 6 POB limit on PVT ops and costs must always be shared equally among the POB in order for ops to be PVT.
According to whoever the numpty is/are, a provision that deems an operation with particular characteristics to be one kind of PVT operation actually defines the only operation that can be PVT.
According to whoever the numpty is/are, a provision that deems an operation with particular characteristics to be one kind of PVT operation actually defines the only operation that can be PVT.
Yr right...in truth your level of education is just about associate diploma mech engineering level
Under the AQF (or whatever it is called now) maybe, maybe not. Speaking from having sat on the peak body setting up the "competency based" system some years ago.
Washing an aircraft and not putting it on the M/R
Once again LAME is not a trade.
yr' wrong,
That is not what I said, but I'll let that go, you seem to have trouble with English comprehension.
I'll bite, if you are not a tradesman, what are you?? What classification do you think you fit into.
Do you believe you are qualified to be a member of the Institute of Engineers, and can therefor call yourself a professional engineer.
As a general statement, in my opinion you are one of the most prejudiced persons I have ever seen on pprue, with an attitude, not common but not rare among LAMEs, a belief in a level of aviation knowledge that borders on fantasy (witness your claims that you know all about aircraft operations, except nav.), allied with the firm belief that all pilots are dumb idiots.
Even on the subject of "linseed oil" it is clear to me that you only have a limited knowledge, certainly not the "big picture". That's OK for what you have to do, you don't need to know the in depth why, just the how, any more than a painter has to know about paint chemistry.
Of course, what would I know of the US/NZ/UK etc. systems, I am just a dumb pilot who only hold CPL/ATPL whatever in a variety of countries.
Tootle pip!!
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: ChCh NZ
Posts: 402
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't know if we actually see many LAME comment on pilot or nav matters on most forums. From what I am seeing I am guessing many pilots seem to think that they may have knowledge on aircraft maintenance matters.
This has carried over from the transparencies thread but I made a comment there that the rules can't easily be read in isolation.
I can think of one example straight off that may resonate with a few here.
I was working in one country many years ago when they went through a rule revamp.
Anyway it had the expected clause about ground running and taxiing aircraft by non-pilots. No-where did it say that LAME's could not actually fly the aircraft though. As we know if you understand the aircraft inside out and can taxi and do ground runs etc then flying is easy after that.
I know myself and several other engineers had a very good understanding of the rules, if perhaps a little selective.
Anyway we noticed that if the engineering staff flew on the aircraft immediately prior to the maintenance check we could detect minor defects that may have been overlooked otherwise. Door noise and other similar rattles etc comes to mind.
Anyway eventually I started flying the aircraft and could then pick up on such things such as throttle cable notchiness in the cruise, or having to resync the pitch. The pilots enjoyed the new feel of the machines so much that I did a deal with one whereby I flew his last flight of the day. It was after my work in the hangar anyway and I could then tackle any abnormalities straight away the following day.
We were often carrying fare paying passengers but I never did tell them that I was the engineer.
Why would I and as was stated on the other thread there was no harm done.
I know the other engineers were doing exactly the same with other companies. I am sure the reasoning was the same, many defects were getting rectified that would otherwise be missed. That has to be a good thing and as I said no-where in the rules did it say that we couldn't.
It is just a matter of which eye you have to close when you read, right ?
For all that, flying an aircraft is a little over-rated. There is nothing that difficult about it.
This has carried over from the transparencies thread but I made a comment there that the rules can't easily be read in isolation.
I can think of one example straight off that may resonate with a few here.
I was working in one country many years ago when they went through a rule revamp.
Anyway it had the expected clause about ground running and taxiing aircraft by non-pilots. No-where did it say that LAME's could not actually fly the aircraft though. As we know if you understand the aircraft inside out and can taxi and do ground runs etc then flying is easy after that.
I know myself and several other engineers had a very good understanding of the rules, if perhaps a little selective.
Anyway we noticed that if the engineering staff flew on the aircraft immediately prior to the maintenance check we could detect minor defects that may have been overlooked otherwise. Door noise and other similar rattles etc comes to mind.
Anyway eventually I started flying the aircraft and could then pick up on such things such as throttle cable notchiness in the cruise, or having to resync the pitch. The pilots enjoyed the new feel of the machines so much that I did a deal with one whereby I flew his last flight of the day. It was after my work in the hangar anyway and I could then tackle any abnormalities straight away the following day.
We were often carrying fare paying passengers but I never did tell them that I was the engineer.
Why would I and as was stated on the other thread there was no harm done.
I know the other engineers were doing exactly the same with other companies. I am sure the reasoning was the same, many defects were getting rectified that would otherwise be missed. That has to be a good thing and as I said no-where in the rules did it say that we couldn't.
It is just a matter of which eye you have to close when you read, right ?
For all that, flying an aircraft is a little over-rated. There is nothing that difficult about it.
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: dans un cercle dont le centre est eveywhere et circumfernce n'est nulle part
Posts: 2,606
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Two pilot LAME's come to mind and both refused to fly my aircraft after annual inspection. I always thought this was an indication of their faith in the work. Having said that I'm reminded of some historical statistics regarding the most dangerous times for aircraft mechanical breakage is straight after someone having worked on it. This morphed into unnecessary inspections dictated by regulatory authority. Someone will correct me I'm sure, but I think there was a military study done also. Perhaps they were just looking after their insurance risks and passing that task to the owner/ now test pilot. I believe this is called "problem transference".
yr write: My dealings with LAME's has not been pleasant in that they generally charge outrageously, refuse to accept responsibility, lock your aircraft up if there is a dispute, sometimes do inspections by mail, tell fibs and believe they are God.
This Deity however being claimed by a recently departed CAsA AVMED Director which would make LAME's "tradespersons" which in turn mandates they use the tradesman's entrance at my house. I hope this doesn't offend because it shouldn't if you know your place.
yr write: My dealings with LAME's has not been pleasant in that they generally charge outrageously, refuse to accept responsibility, lock your aircraft up if there is a dispute, sometimes do inspections by mail, tell fibs and believe they are God.
This Deity however being claimed by a recently departed CAsA AVMED Director which would make LAME's "tradespersons" which in turn mandates they use the tradesman's entrance at my house. I hope this doesn't offend because it shouldn't if you know your place.
Leadsled, my opinion is based on studying Assoc. Dip.Mech Eng at the old QIT. Fast forward to current and trying to help my son pass the old system LAME exams. The course notes for engines and basic exam covered some (not all) of my engineering course. Engines was a good course, answered a lot of questions regarding the inards of big radials that I was always afraid to ask...cam timing, good subject
Passed that easily, same with props.
....hence the statement. I would describe LAME as a technical trade, nothing more.
Passed that easily, same with props.....hence the statement. I would describe LAME as a technical trade, nothing more.
And pilot is a profession ?
I think the answer to that is probably not.
I am reminded of the situation, many tears ago, of an application to the old Industrial Relations Commission by the then Australian Airline Pilots Association to be removed from the basic wage system, and be "recognized" as a profession.
The application failed and the Commission decided that an airline pilot was the equivalent of a First Class Fitter, plus a margin for skills.
Profession/Professional is, in my view, now a very debased term, when I hear hairdressers describing themselves as "professionals", as if merely getting paid for something makes you a professional. Indeed, in my view, many younger pilots are quite precious about this aspect of their job.
-my opinion is based on studying Assoc. Dip.Mech Eng at the old QIT.
Tootle pip!!
Join Date: May 2013
Location: have I forgotten or am I lost?
Age: 71
Posts: 1,126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've replaced my windscreen 3 times now.
I buy the sheet, cut it to shape, drill it and install it myself.
I've replaced the side windows.
stupid, stupid rules bound idiots most of you.
linseed oil ?
the product is called tubeseal. you can get it from polyfiber or aviaquip in tullamarine. it works a treat.
is it something in the water or are you guys all taking stupid pills lately.
to hell with this
I have some more TIG welding to do that is far more interesting.
I buy the sheet, cut it to shape, drill it and install it myself.
I've replaced the side windows.
stupid, stupid rules bound idiots most of you.
linseed oil ?
the product is called tubeseal. you can get it from polyfiber or aviaquip in tullamarine. it works a treat.
is it something in the water or are you guys all taking stupid pills lately.
to hell with this
I have some more TIG welding to do that is far more interesting.
Is it just me, or does anyone else think Leadsled and yr right are actually really really attracted to eachother?
You jest, of course.
As far as I am concerned, in my opinion one of the things that has done so much damage to aviation in Australia (not the only thing, of course) is the attitude and misinformation from people like yr'wrong.
linseed oil ? the product is called tubeseal
Tootle pip!!