440032

Back to the PPL for a moment for a comparison.... a PPL holder is authorised (not qualified) to work on aircraft to the items listed in Schedule 8 Pilot permitted maintenance (which includes doing a daily inspection) and training is not required, just that they be competent and use the approved maintenance data and suitable tools. There is no competency check system. Many PPLs are perfectly capable of doing the basic work, (oil changes, plugs, tyres, etc) but may have no clue where to write it up, or how. Flying schools do not teach maintenance tasks (other than daily inspection).

For another sunglass alternative - COCOONS Fitovers. I get mine direct from USA. Will never go back to prescription sunnies or clip-ons, no way.

Seversky P-35

OME posted the answer a while back in post #8. Any mention of "in writing"? - no there is not. Any mention of "for individual aircraft"? - no there is not.

Ah, back in the saddle at last.

It would help if you outlined who is the "we" you are talking about, along with more of the what.

Pena capena, por favor.

I'm going to say something French. Oui. Looks like a lot of early Mudry CAP influence. Come on DJP..... think.....

That's an aeroplane pun, not a horse pun. Get back on the horse and try again.

Rumour has it it aircraft was possibly a Brumby...... (thank you, thank you, I'll be here all night.... thank you...)

Nailed it.

Big deal, used to happen all the time with Navajo night freighters running Sydney to Essendon - they'd keep on tracking straight after Eildon Weir instead of a slight right turn. ATC would eventually wake them up and sort it out. So what - now trainee pilots will have to have a meal logbook and a sleep logbook? Pi.... off..........

Unbridled humour?

Have we shut the gate on this one? Last call....

Go-jacks are exactly what you need on the mains, yes. Bunnings Aerospace also sells a range of wheeled boards which might do for a tailwheel.

So the owner of this horse that chewed this plane, does he saddle any liability?

Not at all. It just means that they have not desired or had any need to request their kit be evaluated. Could be simply because they know they would far exceed that 51%, so there's no real point having an eval done. I suspect manufacturer's wanted an independent evaluation of their products, to back up their own beliefs. FAA goes look, and says (carefully) yes, what we saw on that day appears to be an amateur-built eligible kit.

OMG... it's getting worse...... I am getting a good kick out of it though. (hello.... tap tap tap.... is this thing on....)

Manufacturers can request a kit evaluation. Or not. Probably do it prove their kits are 51% compliant, a useful sales tool.

I got nuthin.....................

Whoa! Hang on Peter! Don't get carried away.....

What's the mane message here?

New Standard Aircraft Co NT-1 at National Naval Aviation Museum, Pensacola Florida. Ka-ching!

The question of escorting your/our ASIC-less passengers..... I've looked and looked, but cannot find it to be true (or false) in the Transport Security Regulations. That one has always interested me, never found the answer, I think it doesn't exist either way. Anyone found it?

My two cents.... Listen to people who actually own one, not to people who do not own one. I own one 485 hours over 14 years. It's great. For 14 years I've had people bag out Jabiru in front of me. First thing I ask is "So, you own one?" No. "Oh, you fly one?" No. "Oh, you service one?" No. "Oh, you have all the manuals and servicing information on them then? No. "So, you actually have no hands-on experience with them whatsoever do you?" My mate had one, and it was crap! "Yeah, whatever....." Get onto the Jabiru website and download and print all of the service bulletins and manuals for that serial number engine, and them read them, highlighting things as you go, you'll see them. Keep them in separate A4 folders - Engine Manual, Parts Manual, Service Bulletins, etc. Get organised. And keep a regular eye on the website for updates. You are now the aircraft owner/operator, and you are responsible, whether you can do the work yourself or arrange to have it done. You are responsible. You need to know when things are due to be done. Check your logbook against all the service bulletins and whatnot for that serial number engine. You will no doubt probably find no mention in your logbook about several of them. Treat those as not done, and so do them. For example, two year oil hose and fuel hose life. Will your logbook show that this has been done each two years. If not - what else has not been done? Enjoy it.