VansAirForceForums  
Home > VansAirForceForums

- POSTING RULES
- Donate yearly (please).
- Advertise in here!

- Today's Posts | Insert Pics


Go Back   VAF Forums > Main > RV General Discussion/News
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #71  
Old 03-24-2015, 06:26 PM
catmandu's Avatar
catmandu catmandu is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 917
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mel View Post
I'm getting pretty fed up with the way FAA is treating DARs, and as much as I love this job, I may just hang it up this September.
I have also talked with a few other long-time DARs who are thinking about getting out.
This is the real problem. 'Tis to weep.
__________________
Mike C.
Sierra Nevada
RV-6A bought flying
Reply With Quote
  #72  
Old 03-24-2015, 07:15 PM
enielsen enielsen is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 146
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mel View Post
I'm getting pretty fed up with the way FAA is treating DARs, and as much as I love this job, I may just hang it up this September.
I have also talked with a few other long-time DARs who are thinking about getting out.
The way I see it... you did nothing wrong at all Mel. Except bring attention to some sketchy wording that obviously delayed the release into April. Sounds RIGHT to me!

If people like you start leaving the positions you are in... that is what will make EAB undesirable.

Thank you for your DAR service!
__________________
RV-x Planning stage
Reply With Quote
  #73  
Old 03-24-2015, 07:16 PM
SR2500 SR2500 is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Colorado
Posts: 132
Default DARs

Mel,
All of us sincerely appreciate the work you and all the DARs do on a regular basis. I for one, understand the challenges you have to put up with on a daily basis but also know the good that comes from it. Please hang in there -- we need you.
Thanks,
Jerry Folkerts
__________________
Jerry Folkerts
Pietenpol, built and sold
Cygnet SF-2A, built and sold
Cygnet SF-2A, refurbished and sold
Murphy Super Rebel, built and flying
The Pedal RV, designed and built
Vans, next build
Reply With Quote
  #74  
Old 03-24-2015, 07:48 PM
1001001's Avatar
1001001 1001001 is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Just Minutes from KBVI!
Posts: 1,039
Default

Mel,

Don't be so hard on yourself. I imagine it is fairly stressful being the one who is supposed to decipher all that regulatory gobbledegook on a daily basis and turn it into operating limitations. It seems the FAA just throws stuff out there and expects everyone else to do their editing for them, without much care for how the front lines have to work to interpret their horribly flawed language. The assertion that "the intent was not to X" is fine, but they should write things a little more carefully in the first place to avoid people being able to misinterpret it to mean X.
Reply With Quote
  #75  
Old 03-24-2015, 07:49 PM
carrollcw's Avatar
carrollcw carrollcw is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Friendswood, TX
Posts: 193
Default

So, I am sorry in advance for the mini rant here, but y'all please don't post statements of "fact" here without doing a little research first. This thread got everyone all worked up due to a misreading of the order. As an attorney I understand how confusing deciphering government statutes and limitations can be. So you know, one of the most common errors in reading a government reg is what happened here. Whenever a regulation/statute/order refers to another section/paragraph/part/subpart YOU MUST LOOK IT UP!!! Otherwise, you will not be stating the rule correctly. You cannot properly understand these government publications without being diligent at reading all cross referenced sections.
__________________
RV-7 Flying Since March 2015
N412HC
Titan IOX-370
SDS Tunable Injectors
EFII Dual Ignition and Fuel Injection
Garmin G3X Touch
Whirl Wind 200RV Prop
7XS0 Polly Ranch Airpark, Friendswood, TX
Reply With Quote
  #76  
Old 03-24-2015, 07:54 PM
1001001's Avatar
1001001 1001001 is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Just Minutes from KBVI!
Posts: 1,039
Default

Carroll,

All due respect to your profession, but keep in mind that there are some of us who come at this with a very literal mind. In particular, one of my other hobbies involves having to understand some very specific regulations regarding exotic firearms, and the particular regulatory agency involved there is definitely known for issuing regulations that are indeed designed to severely limit or destroy whole segments of that hobby. So I am predisposed to see the regulatory agencies in a bit of an adversarial light.

I seem to get the impression that the FAA is somewhat better than certain other unnamed three (now four) letter organizations about this.

Quote:
Originally Posted by carrollcw View Post
So, I am sorry in advance for the mini rant here, but y'all please don't post statements of "fact" here without doing a little research first. This thread got everyone all worked up due to a misreading of the order. As an attorney I understand how confusing deciphering government statutes and limitations can be. So you know, one of the most common errors in reading a government reg is what happened here. Whenever a regulation/statute/order refers to another section/paragraph/part/subpart YOU MUST LOOK IT UP!!! Otherwise, you will not be stating the rule correctly. You cannot properly understand these government publications without being diligent at reading all cross referenced sections.
Reply With Quote
  #77  
Old 03-24-2015, 08:31 PM
BillL BillL is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Central IL
Posts: 5,516
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mel View Post
Have you ever had one of those days where everything you did was wrong? I certainly had one on Monday.

BUT, you guys learned something by researching on your own and not just taking someone else's word.

My point was that the new form of "building" operating limitations is very convoluted and can lead to inconsistent operating limitations.
Think about it. How many inspectors are going to look at that and determine that almost ALL aircraft have a single fail point that would make the aircraft uncontrollable. What about you elevator pushrod. How many single point failures can occur between the stick and the elevator making the aircraft uncontrollable?

I apologize if I upset people. Maybe I didn't go about it the way I should have.

I'm getting pretty fed up with the way FAA is treating DARs, and as much as I love this job, I may just hang it up this September.
I have also talked with a few other long-time DARs who are thinking about getting out.
Yes, I have those days sometimes - - no harm - no foul, Mel. Thanks for letting us know - - it was educational!
__________________
Bill

RV-7
Lord Kelvin:
“I often say that when you can measure what you are speaking about,
and express it in numbers, you know something about it; but when you
cannot measure it, when you cannot express it in numbers, your knowledge
is of a meager and unsatisfactory kind.”
Reply With Quote
  #78  
Old 03-24-2015, 08:36 PM
enielsen enielsen is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 146
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by carrollcw View Post
snip... please don't post statements of "fact" here without doing a little research first. ...end snip
Wow! I never take anything on the internet as a "statement of fact". And I doubt anyone lost much sleep over the OP. And... folks DID look it up and research it as is represented in this post. You didn't really didn't need to throw your title/profession around in an attempt to slap folks on the wrist. Who do you think writes all this confusing verbiage to begin with. No wonder the law profession is the brunt of so many jokes...

So what do you call a thousand Lawyers at the bottom of the ocean?
.
.
.
A good start!
(Disclaimer: Told to me by one of my good friends... who is an attorney.)

I apologize as well as I normally know better than to get involved in digital rubbish.
__________________
RV-x Planning stage
Reply With Quote
  #79  
Old 03-24-2015, 08:59 PM
RV7A Flyer's Avatar
RV7A Flyer RV7A Flyer is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: US
Posts: 2,251
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mel View Post
Have you ever had one of those days where everything you did was wrong? I certainly had one on Monday.

BUT, you guys learned something by researching on your own and not just taking someone else's word.

My point was that the new form of "building" operating limitations is very convoluted and can lead to inconsistent operating limitations.
Think about it. How many inspectors are going to look at that and determine that almost ALL aircraft have a single fail point that would make the aircraft uncontrollable. What about you elevator pushrod. How many single point failures can occur between the stick and the elevator making the aircraft uncontrollable?

I apologize if I upset people. Maybe I didn't go about it the way I should have.

I'm getting pretty fed up with the way FAA is treating DARs, and as much as I love this job, I may just hang it up this September.
I have also talked with a few other long-time DARs who are thinking about getting out.
I need to clarify something...when I said "some whacked-out DAR", I most certainly did not mean you, Mel! I was thinking more along the lines of the horror stories we hear about DARs requiring weird things like red painted fuel caps and such.

Sorry if that came across wrong! Mea culpa!
Reply With Quote
  #80  
Old 03-24-2015, 09:11 PM
RV7A Flyer's Avatar
RV7A Flyer RV7A Flyer is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: US
Posts: 2,251
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by enielsen View Post
Wow! I never take anything on the internet as a "statement of fact". And I doubt anyone lost much sleep over the OP. And... folks DID look it up and research it as is represented in this post. You didn't really didn't need to throw your title/profession around in an attempt to slap folks on the wrist. Who do you think writes all this confusing verbiage to begin with. No wonder the law profession is the brunt of so many jokes...
No, I think he was exactly right on. I'm not flaming the OP here, but let's look at it calmly. A very well-respected, educated, knowledgeable *expert* in the field makes a post that was (apparently) incorrect. No big deal, other than the *scope* of the incorrect assertion and its presumed effects on an entire industry. It's clearly something of a concern because we have, what, 8 pages of responses, lots of people searching out the actual documents, etc., to correct the misinterpretation?

OK, so as Mel says, everybody has a bad day now and again. Just like our friend MacLellan and his uneducated column/blog from a couple months ago about how EABs would never be able to install ADS-B equipment, etc. Except the difference is, Mel is a stand-up guy who admitted the mistake. How many people are now suffering under Mac's misinformation to this day, because he didn't post any correction?

It's not that lawyers are writing these regulations and making them complicated just to be making them complicated...they're already complicated because they cover a lot of different cases, and *have* to be written precisely. As an engineer, I can tell you we are equally "guilty" of writing some pretty darned complex requirements and specifications, not because we want to, but because it's required to make it correct (and like regulations, when they reference something else, you better go look that up, too).

So this little tempest in a teapot seems to have run its course here in about a day, which is good. I do think the admonition to *make sure you're right* before posting something like this is good advice (even if it is free, and from a lawyer ).
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:41 AM.


The VAFForums come to you courtesy Delta Romeo, LLC. By viewing and participating in them you agree to build your plane using standardized methods and practices and to fly it safely and in accordance with the laws governing the country you are located in.