Bill bill bill, what the?must be a good view from that horse your on, am I or anyone else referred to in this text deserving of such a spray? I have said the aircraft was misrepresented as Bachus stated, it and the engine were advertised as 270 TIS not since overhaul and that info was discovered post inspection. At no time did I question the definition of Time in service or airtime. When I was an engineer and studying at RMIT, vibration from the engine was concidered as fatigue and was included as a variable in calculating A/F life, but am more than happy for you to correct me if I have it wrong. So trying to decipher the text above are you saying that maintenance should only be scheduled from air time? even though a manufacturer may say different? as when I started serviceing my first Jab I rang them and asked and guess what I was told, Hobbs as this is what they fit as standard. The Tech manager of RA-AUS told me last week that it does not matter what type of meter you use for maintenance of RA-AUS aircraft as long as it is used from go to whoa and as long as the manufacturer does not say different. And in this case they did. so shoot me pal!
On the fatugue life issue I can assure you from the gazelle the jabs and the sport star I work on they have a fatigue life, it is in their manuals.
some really constructive comments here Bill:
But, Hey!!, you know better than the law, so carry on !!
From an engineering/airworthiness standpoint, with reference to fatigue life, you are equally incorrect, but I suppose you are, at least, consistent
The Act and Regulations definitions are really quite simple and unambiguous on this point, but apparently not simple enough for some.
Are you always this nasty or have I bought it out in you? we are all friends on this site and given that letters dont represent tone in a conversation, wind it back a bit please. I have not said anything that is personal or nasty toward you so why be a hard XXXX? but your call I guess
DK :kboom: