After the annual inspection
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: 18nm NE grice 28ft up
Posts: 1,129
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
After the annual inspection
Are the annual inspections too invasive?
Once again the aircraft I use has come back from its 5 week spell at the engineers with a raft of snags it did not have when it went in.
Whats more I could buy a nice family car for the cost.
Once again the aircraft I use has come back from its 5 week spell at the engineers with a raft of snags it did not have when it went in.
Whats more I could buy a nice family car for the cost.
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: north of barlu
Posts: 6,207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How long?
I fail to understand how it takes five weeks to do an annual check unless you have an issue getting the parts.
I cant help thinking that you are only telling half the story.
I cant help thinking that you are only telling half the story.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: 18nm NE grice 28ft up
Posts: 1,129
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A&C
Parts may have been an issue.
I'm not picking on the company that did the inspection.but my experience has been that an annual usually takes about three weeks at the best.
I would like your opinion on whether the inspections frequently do more harm than good.
Parts may have been an issue.
I'm not picking on the company that did the inspection.but my experience has been that an annual usually takes about three weeks at the best.
I would like your opinion on whether the inspections frequently do more harm than good.
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 3,218
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
By definition it can't be "too" invasive...otherwise there's be no point. Perhaps it's "just enough."
Speaking as a mechanic, when performing the inspection, I find everything. Some mechanics take minimum pay, do minimum work, and find as little as possible. My conscience and professionalism dictate that nothing is let slide.
Bear in mind that the inspection, be it a 100 hour of annual (or other) inspection is just that; it's an inspection. Work done to the airplane to correct discrepancies is in addition to the inspection. Depending upon who has done the inspections before and the degree of their thoroughness, the annual inspection may be very revealing. New owners are very often aghast at the cost, because the previous owner hasn't been taking quite such good care of the airplane, or because the previous maintenance wasn't quite so exacting or strict.
When I do work on an airplane and approve it for return to service, by certifing the aircraft as airworthy I take responsibility for it's present condition when I sign the paperwork. I take full responsibility for all the work done previously to the airplane. If a mechanic did a faulty repair or missed an airworthiness directive or required inspection 20 years ago...I just took responsiblity for it. I take that responsibility seriously. Very seriously, in fact. Accordingly, I can't let an airplane escape with that signature that isn't in full compliance that merits the signature. If work has been done improperly before, if parts and hours tracking and compliance has been in error, if items are found that others have let slide, I can't, because now I'm responsibile for them.
Bear in mind that the inspection is the requirement. The aircraft doesn't have to be returned to you in airworthy condition. Once the inspection is done, you can be issued a list of discrepancies and you can elect to have them fixed elsewhere if you prefer, or any other way you like...If I do the inspection, for example, nothing says I have to ensure everything is put right. I just can't release it as airworthy until it is. I can sign that the inspection has been performed and a list of discrepancies provided to the owner...and not sign the airplane as airworthy. That's perfectly acceptable. If the owner has his or her own mechanic, his or her own parts, or has another way to get everything back in compliance after the inspection is complete, more power to them. The work is separate. I can do it, someone else can do it...that's up to the owner.
Traditionally the person doing the inspection, or the shop doing the inspection, will also do the work to bring the airplane into compliance, but that's at the discretion of the owner. Professionalism demands that the owner is fully consulted before any additional work commences, and that the owner approve any additional expenses beyond the cost of the inspection, before the work is done.
There should be no surprises.
Depending on the size of the airplane and it's condition and complexity, a typical annual inspection should take three days or so to complete. Keep in mind this includes a very thorough examination and research on the maintenance records, as well as the physical inspection of the airplane itself. It includes verification that the work listed previously in the logbooks, was done, and done properly, particularly relevant airworthiness directives, repairs, etc.
Additional work required after the inspection is complete will determine how long the airplane is out of your grasp...could be a few days, or could be a very long time.
As an example, I had a 182 which had been annualed a year before, brought to me. The ailerons were rigged such that the control yoke was turned 90 degrees with the ailerons level...other than one airplane I saw with the ailerons rigged backward, it was the worst rigging job I ever saw. The engine mount was corroded, and it had so many problems that the subsequent repairs took nearly six months. It happens. It turned out to be so expensive that the owner sold the airplane for nearly nothing. A drop zone bought it and invested in the repairs, and now has a nice 182 for skydiving.
Speaking as a mechanic, when performing the inspection, I find everything. Some mechanics take minimum pay, do minimum work, and find as little as possible. My conscience and professionalism dictate that nothing is let slide.
Bear in mind that the inspection, be it a 100 hour of annual (or other) inspection is just that; it's an inspection. Work done to the airplane to correct discrepancies is in addition to the inspection. Depending upon who has done the inspections before and the degree of their thoroughness, the annual inspection may be very revealing. New owners are very often aghast at the cost, because the previous owner hasn't been taking quite such good care of the airplane, or because the previous maintenance wasn't quite so exacting or strict.
When I do work on an airplane and approve it for return to service, by certifing the aircraft as airworthy I take responsibility for it's present condition when I sign the paperwork. I take full responsibility for all the work done previously to the airplane. If a mechanic did a faulty repair or missed an airworthiness directive or required inspection 20 years ago...I just took responsiblity for it. I take that responsibility seriously. Very seriously, in fact. Accordingly, I can't let an airplane escape with that signature that isn't in full compliance that merits the signature. If work has been done improperly before, if parts and hours tracking and compliance has been in error, if items are found that others have let slide, I can't, because now I'm responsibile for them.
Bear in mind that the inspection is the requirement. The aircraft doesn't have to be returned to you in airworthy condition. Once the inspection is done, you can be issued a list of discrepancies and you can elect to have them fixed elsewhere if you prefer, or any other way you like...If I do the inspection, for example, nothing says I have to ensure everything is put right. I just can't release it as airworthy until it is. I can sign that the inspection has been performed and a list of discrepancies provided to the owner...and not sign the airplane as airworthy. That's perfectly acceptable. If the owner has his or her own mechanic, his or her own parts, or has another way to get everything back in compliance after the inspection is complete, more power to them. The work is separate. I can do it, someone else can do it...that's up to the owner.
Traditionally the person doing the inspection, or the shop doing the inspection, will also do the work to bring the airplane into compliance, but that's at the discretion of the owner. Professionalism demands that the owner is fully consulted before any additional work commences, and that the owner approve any additional expenses beyond the cost of the inspection, before the work is done.
There should be no surprises.
Depending on the size of the airplane and it's condition and complexity, a typical annual inspection should take three days or so to complete. Keep in mind this includes a very thorough examination and research on the maintenance records, as well as the physical inspection of the airplane itself. It includes verification that the work listed previously in the logbooks, was done, and done properly, particularly relevant airworthiness directives, repairs, etc.
Additional work required after the inspection is complete will determine how long the airplane is out of your grasp...could be a few days, or could be a very long time.
As an example, I had a 182 which had been annualed a year before, brought to me. The ailerons were rigged such that the control yoke was turned 90 degrees with the ailerons level...other than one airplane I saw with the ailerons rigged backward, it was the worst rigging job I ever saw. The engine mount was corroded, and it had so many problems that the subsequent repairs took nearly six months. It happens. It turned out to be so expensive that the owner sold the airplane for nearly nothing. A drop zone bought it and invested in the repairs, and now has a nice 182 for skydiving.
First flight yesterday after 2 week annual - static source blocked,CHT gauge u/s, panel rheostat u/s and avionics problems still persisting 
I have used the same engineers for 10 years - they know the aeroplane intimately and know that I always pay promptly - I know that all the snags will eventually be fixed in time for the plane to emerge from its next annual with a new set of faults
I have used the same engineers for 10 years - they know the aeroplane intimately and know that I always pay promptly - I know that all the snags will eventually be fixed in time for the plane to emerge from its next annual with a new set of faults
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: north of barlu
Posts: 6,207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If done properly an annual check will not do any harm whatsoever, and it could safe you a whole world of hurt.
The problems usualy start when a very large job has to be carried out and it disturbs a bit of shoddy workmanship in the distant past.
Recently I had the wing off a PA28R to change the walkway skin but during the refitting of the wing we had big electrical issues that resulted from poor workmanship carried out six or seven years back. This cost the customer about 6 hours labour to fix.
But in the long run that is cheaper than having the aircraft go "tech" in the south of France.
The problems usualy start when a very large job has to be carried out and it disturbs a bit of shoddy workmanship in the distant past.
Recently I had the wing off a PA28R to change the walkway skin but during the refitting of the wing we had big electrical issues that resulted from poor workmanship carried out six or seven years back. This cost the customer about 6 hours labour to fix.
But in the long run that is cheaper than having the aircraft go "tech" in the south of France.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: 18nm NE grice 28ft up
Posts: 1,129
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
snchater
Same here. Same engineers for 20 years. Last three years in a row returned with manifold guage not working, Replacement faulty each time, ASI missreading and many other faults.
Is the aircraft not flight tested after an annual?
DO
Same here. Same engineers for 20 years. Last three years in a row returned with manifold guage not working, Replacement faulty each time, ASI missreading and many other faults.
Is the aircraft not flight tested after an annual?
DO
Last edited by dont overfil; 13th Apr 2008 at 13:30. Reason: spilling
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: north of barlu
Posts: 6,207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't overfill
There is no requirement to air test the aircraft after an annual check.
It disturbs me that the maintenance has not been done to your satisfaction, do you fore-warn the engineers of current snags so that they can pre-order parts?
As for the ASI & MP that is just sloppy workmanship.
Guppy
The same problems this side of the Atlantic but a different maintenance program and we are at the end of a longer parts supply chain.
There is no requirement to air test the aircraft after an annual check.
It disturbs me that the maintenance has not been done to your satisfaction, do you fore-warn the engineers of current snags so that they can pre-order parts?
As for the ASI & MP that is just sloppy workmanship.
Guppy
The same problems this side of the Atlantic but a different maintenance program and we are at the end of a longer parts supply chain.
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 3,218
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is the aircraft not flight tested after an annual?
The same problems this side of the Atlantic but a different maintenance program and we are at the end of a longer parts supply chain.
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Midlands
Posts: 2,359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have owned / part owned powered aircraft since 1991. In that time I have seen a lot of very bad M3 work.
Tools left on top of the engine (Several different maintenance company’s)
Lots of avionic problems, which were not there before.
A self-taper screwed through a rudder cable on a C of A (aircraft was supposed to have been test flown). The cable would not move at all, so the flight test was a complete work of fiction.
Prop bolts not wire locked
Oil sump plug finger tight and not locked.
Many more I have forgotten to remain sane.
For a while I owned a DR400, which was in very good nick. I took her to the same maintenance facility and one of the junior guys who liked the Robins did the work and the qualified engineer signed it off. The “enthusiast” left and the maintenance became very bad. Turned out the other grease monkeys did not like working on Robins. The Engineer seemed to have very little control on the work done.
It got to the point that I would spend ½ a day inspecting the aircraft after an annual before I would fly it. I ended up building my own aircraft and now I pull it apart, my LAA inspector does his very best to catch me out when he inspects it, and I do the work and put her back together. Typical Permit renewal (annual) takes me about 6 days, and my inspector about 1. My last Permit renewal, including £135 for the LAA fee, cost £248 in total and I did the test flight myself.
I would urge all owners to get as involved as possible in the maintenance of their aircraft, you may live longer.
Rod1
Tools left on top of the engine (Several different maintenance company’s)
Lots of avionic problems, which were not there before.
A self-taper screwed through a rudder cable on a C of A (aircraft was supposed to have been test flown). The cable would not move at all, so the flight test was a complete work of fiction.
Prop bolts not wire locked
Oil sump plug finger tight and not locked.
Many more I have forgotten to remain sane.
For a while I owned a DR400, which was in very good nick. I took her to the same maintenance facility and one of the junior guys who liked the Robins did the work and the qualified engineer signed it off. The “enthusiast” left and the maintenance became very bad. Turned out the other grease monkeys did not like working on Robins. The Engineer seemed to have very little control on the work done.
It got to the point that I would spend ½ a day inspecting the aircraft after an annual before I would fly it. I ended up building my own aircraft and now I pull it apart, my LAA inspector does his very best to catch me out when he inspects it, and I do the work and put her back together. Typical Permit renewal (annual) takes me about 6 days, and my inspector about 1. My last Permit renewal, including £135 for the LAA fee, cost £248 in total and I did the test flight myself.
I would urge all owners to get as involved as possible in the maintenance of their aircraft, you may live longer.
Rod1
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Here and there. Here at the moment but soon I'll be there.
Posts: 758
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Owning an N-reg I always get involved in doing it's annual. Although the mechanic is very good and has a good attention to detail, I find it reasurring to keep an eye on what he does and it is usually my job to put things back after he carries out each task. If something looks worn or in need of replacement I am there at hand to make an immediate decision and to see I am not being taken for a ride. I always recommend owners do this, you learn a lot and I believe it makes a better pilot of you.
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Down at the sharp pointy end, where all the weather is made.
Age: 74
Posts: 1,684
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
3 Posts
A mechanic approves an aircraft for return to service. The pilot who flies it returns it to service.
Perhaps they'd seen me flying before!
TheOddOne
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Had my annuals done by the same guy for years. He is very thorough and I am happy with the service. My annual takes a week at most.
The annual should just be the end of the years progressive maintenance so I have never seen why they take so long and rack up such massive bills for people.
My annual has been done this week. £1200 for the annual, plus 1 new tyre, 1 new brake disk and a set of oil hoses replaced at life on top of the usual consumables for a 50/100/150 type check. Avionics annual extra and the engine mount AD.
I have watched the work being done, the usual stuff, seats out carpets out, cable inspections, corrosion inspections, seat rails etc all following the maintenance schedule. Prop is on a 6 year overhaul so not due to next year.
Duplicate inspections done and released to service.
The annual should just be the end of the years progressive maintenance so I have never seen why they take so long and rack up such massive bills for people.
My annual has been done this week. £1200 for the annual, plus 1 new tyre, 1 new brake disk and a set of oil hoses replaced at life on top of the usual consumables for a 50/100/150 type check. Avionics annual extra and the engine mount AD.
I have watched the work being done, the usual stuff, seats out carpets out, cable inspections, corrosion inspections, seat rails etc all following the maintenance schedule. Prop is on a 6 year overhaul so not due to next year.
Duplicate inspections done and released to service.
Turned out the other grease monkeys did not like working on Robins.
One manager I worked for would have invited you to leave the hangar after hearing you refer to his staff as that, Rod1.
And as for this:
I would urge all owners to get as involved as possible in the maintenance of their aircraft, you may live longer.
That opinion is insulting to the vast majority of maintainers and lowers you in the eyes of those that know better. And I quite agree about Robins - they rate along with Grumman AA5s as the worst aircraft I have had the misfortune to work on.
And as for this:
I would urge all owners to get as involved as possible in the maintenance of their aircraft, you may live longer.
That opinion is insulting to the vast majority of maintainers and lowers you in the eyes of those that know better. And I quite agree about Robins - they rate along with Grumman AA5s as the worst aircraft I have had the misfortune to work on.
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 626
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Agree with you 100% stevef - about all you said.
Whilst not condoning poor maintenance (and I speak with feet in both camps - engineer and aircraft owner/builder/pilot) the figures show that aircraft accidents have far more to do with the manner in which they are flown, than the engineers that maintain them.
I hope Rod1 that you never need the services of an engineer that reads your ramblings should your Ban-Bi be in need of more assistance than you can administer when away from home....
Whilst not condoning poor maintenance (and I speak with feet in both camps - engineer and aircraft owner/builder/pilot) the figures show that aircraft accidents have far more to do with the manner in which they are flown, than the engineers that maintain them.
I hope Rod1 that you never need the services of an engineer that reads your ramblings should your Ban-Bi be in need of more assistance than you can administer when away from home....
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Unfortunately most UK maintenance shops are a bit disorganised. "Project management" is not their forte at the best of times.
An Annual on a complex SEP should take 2-3 days if they put say 3 people on it at the same time, having pre-ordered all the standard parts needed beforehand, and they don't work on 5 others at the same time (or when the other customers scream).
Unfortunately most of the UK fleet is ancient (~25 years average age) and the average plane will contain a pile of problems, partly due to age and partly due to bodges done in years past.
That is essentially the tradeoff between buying an old plane and buying a new/newer one. With a new one you can expect 10-15 years of essentially zero airframe related maintenance, with a corresponding reduction in downtime.
I pay about £2500 for my annuals; this is well above what I could get it done for, but I get it back in a few days rather than a few weeks. And the people doing it are nice and competent.
An Annual on a complex SEP should take 2-3 days if they put say 3 people on it at the same time, having pre-ordered all the standard parts needed beforehand, and they don't work on 5 others at the same time (or when the other customers scream).
Unfortunately most of the UK fleet is ancient (~25 years average age) and the average plane will contain a pile of problems, partly due to age and partly due to bodges done in years past.
That is essentially the tradeoff between buying an old plane and buying a new/newer one. With a new one you can expect 10-15 years of essentially zero airframe related maintenance, with a corresponding reduction in downtime.
I pay about £2500 for my annuals; this is well above what I could get it done for, but I get it back in a few days rather than a few weeks. And the people doing it are nice and competent.
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 626
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One brake disc? Because only one was corroded/worn to limits I would imagine. We're not talking cars here where discs and linings would be changed as a matched pair/set.
The theory of a 2-3 day complex SEP Annual is an interesting one. Yes for the basic inspection perhaps but not for the required standard servicing (oil/filters etc) defect rectification it just isn't possible to do the job properly in that time especially if you include the hours spent on the paperwork in this time?
As for working on more than one aircraft at a time, that has to be the way. What do we do if the pilot doesn't turn up with his aircraft when he says he will (work, weather etc etc) - sit around waiting? What happens when the parts to replace defective parts needed for your aircraft turn up a week later - does one drop everything to do your aircraft, put everyone else on hold and put the whole schedule back the necessary time? Or try and progress all the jobs and keep everyone as happy as one can? Then the owners can't come and pick up their aircraft for days (work, weather etc etc) and as for paying on collection...
If only we could only work on <5 year old aircraft, charge 2 to 3 times the hourly rate and plug a computer in a la car servicing and everything would be easier!
Great in theory....
The theory of a 2-3 day complex SEP Annual is an interesting one. Yes for the basic inspection perhaps but not for the required standard servicing (oil/filters etc) defect rectification it just isn't possible to do the job properly in that time especially if you include the hours spent on the paperwork in this time?
As for working on more than one aircraft at a time, that has to be the way. What do we do if the pilot doesn't turn up with his aircraft when he says he will (work, weather etc etc) - sit around waiting? What happens when the parts to replace defective parts needed for your aircraft turn up a week later - does one drop everything to do your aircraft, put everyone else on hold and put the whole schedule back the necessary time? Or try and progress all the jobs and keep everyone as happy as one can? Then the owners can't come and pick up their aircraft for days (work, weather etc etc) and as for paying on collection...
If only we could only work on <5 year old aircraft, charge 2 to 3 times the hourly rate and plug a computer in a la car servicing and everything would be easier!
Great in theory....
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm intrigued,
Why only one new disc?
Why only one new disc?
My aircraft is a 1979 Cessna with 3000 hrs and I don't have any airframe related issues either. The aircraft is flown very frequently 300 plus hours a year so has plenty of 50hr checks.
This means my annuals are quick and produce few problems and any parts needed are ready to hand.
I will also point out that there is not a single thing on my aircraft that is not in full working order or in need of replacement. I have a full airways FM immune avionics fit and the interior carpets, seats etc are 9/10. Not bad for nearly 30 years old!
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Midlands
Posts: 2,359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
stevef & smarthawke
I find it a little hard to believe you read what I put, but I will expand.
>>Why Grease monkeys;
The DR400 had been looked after by this organization for several years and I had been very happy with the work and had built up a good working relationship with the Chief Engineer. Unknown to me the work had always been done by one Robin enthusiast who then left. At this point the organization should have advised me to go some ware else, but this was not what happened.
I booked the aircraft in for its annual as usual and delivered the aircraft on time. The “gentlemen” who were doing the work did not want to work on a Robin and took a very long time to do a very bad job. When I finally got her back I had many problems. The second time I had brake failure (with my family in the aircraft) I finally took the aircraft else ware to be sorted. Turned out (amongst many other issues) the “gentlemen” had rigged the brakes wrongly and fitted the wrong brake shoes.
I went back and had a “word” with the organization, using words a bit stronger than grease monkey to describe their incompetence. Far from being asked to leave, I received an apology, a very acceptable arrangement regarding the bill and an explanation on why things had suddenly changed for the worse.
You say you do not like working on Robin aircraft, but I hope you would not have handled this in a similar way. As you can tell, even after a significant amount of time I am still very angry that my aircraft was unsafe and put my family at risk. Calling the idiots responsible grease monkeys was very restrained in my book.
>>I would urge all owners to get as involved as possible in the maintenance of their aircraft, you may live longer.
You find this one liner “Insulting”. I have to say I have no comprehension why.
Bose uses an organization which actively encourages the hands on approach from the owner. He is very happy with them.
Flyer recently published an article on maintenance which encouraged Owners to get actively involved.
SkyHawk-N said “I always recommend owners do this, you learn a lot and I believe it makes a better pilot of you.”
I fully agree with this. Owners that get involved communicate much better with the organization doing the work on their behalf, they gain a much better understanding of the aircraft and all this may help them live longer. Organizations who allow owner participation on maintenance also have nothing to hide, others might.
I would genuinely like to know why you find my position on this insulting?
Credibility
One of you alluded to credibility so allow me to give you some free credibility advice. There are no “Ban-Bi” aircraft on the UK register. The Ban-Bi is an MC100 which is an all metal plan built aircraft which is similar in appearance to an MCR01, but is smaller and fiendishly hard to build. I would hate anyone to fit the wrong bits to the wrong aircraft…
http://www.dynaero.com/lien/indexuk.htm
I have 900 hours flying time. In that time I have had a number of big scares, including a total engine failure on take off, a partial failure over mountains and several more. All have been as a direct result of bad maintenance/parts. The fact that none of them turned into an accident was the result of a lot of luck. That said, there are good maintenance organizations. Steve ran a very tight ship before he retired (he is my LAA inspector). Bose and IO are happy with theirs and for all I know you two also represent shining lights in an otherwise far from impressive cottage industry.
Rest assured if either of you wind up on my strip with a problem I will do my best to assist. The Camaraderie of the air dear boy.
Rod1
I find it a little hard to believe you read what I put, but I will expand.
>>Why Grease monkeys;
The DR400 had been looked after by this organization for several years and I had been very happy with the work and had built up a good working relationship with the Chief Engineer. Unknown to me the work had always been done by one Robin enthusiast who then left. At this point the organization should have advised me to go some ware else, but this was not what happened.
I booked the aircraft in for its annual as usual and delivered the aircraft on time. The “gentlemen” who were doing the work did not want to work on a Robin and took a very long time to do a very bad job. When I finally got her back I had many problems. The second time I had brake failure (with my family in the aircraft) I finally took the aircraft else ware to be sorted. Turned out (amongst many other issues) the “gentlemen” had rigged the brakes wrongly and fitted the wrong brake shoes.
I went back and had a “word” with the organization, using words a bit stronger than grease monkey to describe their incompetence. Far from being asked to leave, I received an apology, a very acceptable arrangement regarding the bill and an explanation on why things had suddenly changed for the worse.
You say you do not like working on Robin aircraft, but I hope you would not have handled this in a similar way. As you can tell, even after a significant amount of time I am still very angry that my aircraft was unsafe and put my family at risk. Calling the idiots responsible grease monkeys was very restrained in my book.
>>I would urge all owners to get as involved as possible in the maintenance of their aircraft, you may live longer.
You find this one liner “Insulting”. I have to say I have no comprehension why.
Bose uses an organization which actively encourages the hands on approach from the owner. He is very happy with them.
Flyer recently published an article on maintenance which encouraged Owners to get actively involved.
SkyHawk-N said “I always recommend owners do this, you learn a lot and I believe it makes a better pilot of you.”
I fully agree with this. Owners that get involved communicate much better with the organization doing the work on their behalf, they gain a much better understanding of the aircraft and all this may help them live longer. Organizations who allow owner participation on maintenance also have nothing to hide, others might.
I would genuinely like to know why you find my position on this insulting?
Credibility
One of you alluded to credibility so allow me to give you some free credibility advice. There are no “Ban-Bi” aircraft on the UK register. The Ban-Bi is an MC100 which is an all metal plan built aircraft which is similar in appearance to an MCR01, but is smaller and fiendishly hard to build. I would hate anyone to fit the wrong bits to the wrong aircraft…
http://www.dynaero.com/lien/indexuk.htm
I have 900 hours flying time. In that time I have had a number of big scares, including a total engine failure on take off, a partial failure over mountains and several more. All have been as a direct result of bad maintenance/parts. The fact that none of them turned into an accident was the result of a lot of luck. That said, there are good maintenance organizations. Steve ran a very tight ship before he retired (he is my LAA inspector). Bose and IO are happy with theirs and for all I know you two also represent shining lights in an otherwise far from impressive cottage industry.
Rest assured if either of you wind up on my strip with a problem I will do my best to assist. The Camaraderie of the air dear boy.
Rod1