jakej

Doesn't the Transponder have to be checked 'in situ' to comply with the AD ? It used to but maybe the requirement has changed ?

You call that ok ? Better than the worst thing that can happen I guess

For the cotton wool brigade are you going to supply a nomex suit for your passengers too ? or don't they matter ? IF proper materials & techniques & maintenance are carrried out on an aircraft then the chances of a serious incident caused by either fuel or electricity, in flight, are miniscule. A Nomex suit (was this started by a WA forumite?) & fire extinghuiser won't save you if it takes a while to get on the ground from height. The 'distraction' from heat or chemicals may be what causes your demise anyway. This topic, although it has made some of us think a bit more about a 'what if' situation, is getting to the ridiculous stage IMO. Next thing there will be calls for more regulation to 'protect' us from ourselves, give me a break:scratching head: Next you'll be suggesting Nomex suits, Fire Extinghuisers, Helmets & Airbags for boats & all vehicles - where will it end ? Ooops, nearly stepped out my front door without putting on my armour or having strobe lights fitted & the mandatory Lollipop person:fear:

Some areas of Casa have been utterly incompetent IMO, a list of all of this type was given to them, with serial & model numbers, many years ago. Then we (aircraft owners) had forms that we had to fill in to 'bring records up to date'. Nothing significant changed, some Glasair III's were even listed as PA-32 (actually Piper designation) & there are errors in the Registrations data everywhere.

Glasair 1 actually - I know of the aircraft, she will be sadly missed.

keyboard issue aleck - uppercase instead of lowercase:doh:

..and having an ASIC would not necessarily show whether you're a 'fit & proper' person in the case of say the A320, just proves the point that an ASIC doesn't prove anything other than possibly show a persons past history

2 words Nev, & they don't apply to anyone on this forum - smart Aleck I know it's a bit obtuse but some will know what I mean.

Hope you are correct Nev but I thinks it's like a revolving door, have yet to be convinced anything will change for the betterment of Aviation. Over the decades we keep hearing the same bull, the only things that change are addition of even more incomprehensible ( you need to be a specialist in Aviation Law) regulations. Oh yeah, & more patchwork 'exemptions' which are open to interpretation & opinion. Why is it that if you call Casa re a question about the rules different people get differing answers ? I have been involved with aviation for 37 years and haven't heard or seen enough to convince me it will get any better anytime soon. All the past 'Heads of Casa' say how things will change - they do, but it only gets worse. IMO the 'intimidation' of the industry by some in Casa has to be addressed - no one who has a AOC can afford to continually fight them so Casa "win" by default. The bastardisation committed by some, in the past, should never be allowed - example, I know of a Casa officer who did a audit of an AOC holder & asked where is the brand name torque wrench, when it was explained that the quality torque wrench used was calibrated as required, that wasn't good enough for him as the manual said to use the brand name one, this resulted in an Non compliance notice (NCN) go figure. Then there is the long standing issue of aircraft owners flying to a different Casa region to get maintenance done because their local guys were 'out of control' causing increased maintenance costs. I could rant on more but you get the point - Casa needs to be fixed NOW, not just with words but real action before even more leave the shrinking industry.

Until & unless the 'white ants' are identified & sacked within any bureaucracy, nothing will change IMO. Remember 'Yes Minister' ? that's what some of it's like in the gov system. How many new 'leaders' do we have to endure before the powers that be see what is bleedingly obvious to the rest of us ? What happened to the last head of CASA, wasn't he going to change CASA ? Jake J

Hey peoples, maybe we should be looking at the big picture here. Geoff13 did a greatr job BUT he should not have been put in that position due to what may have been a bad design or installation IMO. Methinks toooo... much emphasise on the pump, they are everywhere & have been used for a long time, .... just saying, not defending. The "problem" , in the first instance, appears to be a lack of circuit protection (fuse/breaker) rather than the pump or wiring type. Normally when you have a short circuit (say pump sieze) then the extra 'load' would/should blow the fuse/breaker. With tefzel wire, not automotive type, there is no This then raises the issue of some (maybe one) manufacturer NOT having a Battery master switch/solenoid (within 6" or) of the battery. Why do we have fuel taps ?- to either change tanks OR turn off fuel. Then why doesn't some aircraft have a battery master ( ie a tap) ? - maybe it's penny pinching & not about you or passenger safety. There are only 2 sources things that can feed a FIRE in your aircraft - Fuel or Battery - we need to be able to turn off BOTH. Jake J

That's the trouble with having only 10 fingers

Well done Jake J

My sentiments exactly !!! Many years ago we flew our home built to NZ with 3 x beacons (1 each + fixed unit) & a life raft plus 3 x life jackets. Why, because I could & I wanted to be rescued quickly IF I ditched (it's the hypothermia I worry about) not saying we all should have this level of equipment, it was just our preferred level.

Yeah, meant an RV10

I can see it now... people accidently falling off their aircraft & setting off the beacon or just by dropping it. PLB with a 'shock' switch ?? surely you're joking ??? That's why the aircraft types are secured to airframe, they have a 'G' switch which works in the fore/aft direction to activate on impact. Maybe I've just read the context of your post incorrectly

AJ Check your PM

Ok, you got me - I'll play the game . what level of shock do you suggest should activate a beacon ? Jake J

Where's the 10 ?

Bex It's not about the cause of a SAR exercise it's about easy & quickly it is to rescue you especially if injured or in a very remote location. So many have risked their lives searches over a much larger area, & hostile country, when a Gps enabled PLB could pinpoint the location. Jake J

We need to be mindful that the 'regs' are the MINIMUM requirements, you have a higher dof equipment if you wish or can afford. FV - there are many of the 406 ELT units that are impact activated, they just cost more. Maybe a solution could be to charge some of the SAR costs to those involved that don't carry at least a PLB ? More regulation is not wanted or needed, education & some inner thinking is. This is a general comment not directed at anyone in particular - How often do some posters here have to remind those (who decide that they don't have to or comply with the regs) that their actions CAN or WILL result in more rules & therefore more costs too ? Those people are ruining it for all of us - end of this rant !! Jake J

Thanks bushcaddy , I've sent you a pm. Jake J

Googling nikasil cylinders may be enlightening for some, I don't believe it's a cure all for engines. I've seen an engine where some of the nikasil had flaked off a piston after only 3-4 hrs, not a good look. The airframe manufacturer has not been offering the Nikasil option for the engine for some time now. Jake j