Mosaic Signed and Announced

[N8DAV8R]

This is why I make my questions to you as YES or NO questions, because you like to add things not asked in order to obfuscate the topic. Larry didn't ask for A&P regs.

We must be reading different forums. It's EXACTY what he asked for.

Please show us where that is stated in the regs.

I provided where it is stated in the regs.

That's why you STILL haven't answered his comment or my question, that are both based on your claims:

"Based on your answer, do you think there's any difference in risk, regarding safety, between getting a condition inspection from a licensed A&P-IA or from someone who has no previous training in maintenance and takes a 14-17 day course?"

No, the reason I had not answered further is that I am not your circus monkey performing tricks for peanuts. I have a few minutes now while my kid is out flying the RV so I'm glad to add a little. It's going to be more than one word, so apologies in advance if you have trouble.

Obviously more experience is better. I think that is part of the point you are trying to make and we don't have any disagreement. This is not in conflict with the concept that some people can learn enough in the long course to perform an adequate inspection on some aircraft. They can go on from there to gain additional experience and expand their skills to include more complex aircaft. This is how maintenance works at all certification levels, whether you believe it, are comfortable with it, or not.

 

[lr172]

have no idea what you are referring to here. "or" is inclusive not exclusive. To me, the regs are very clear that an A&P can do work even if he has not previously demonstrated such work to the faa. The same way that a pilot can do a loop, eventhough he didn't demonstrate that to the faa during his checkride.

We'll have to agree to diagree on this one. Though you did raise a point that i didn't understand about the lsrm restrictions. so thanks for that.

ok, i read it a few times and see the ambiguity. Still unclear whether or not the A&P can sign off on a repair he did, if not exp[erienced. Very grey and unclear whether he can't do it or can't supervise someone else doing it. Unsure how an idependant could exist if every new thing required him to go to the faa for approval. something isn't adding up here.

Maybe one of our A&P's here can chime in.

 

[Pilot135pd]

We must be reading different forums. It's EXACTY what he asked for.



I provided where it is stated in the regs.


No, the reason I had not answered further is that I am not your circus monkey performing tricks for peanuts. I have a few minutes now while my kid is out flying the RV so I'm glad to add a little. It's going to be more than one word, so apologies in advance if you have trouble.

Obviously more experience is better. I think that is part of the point you are trying to make and we don't have any disagreement. This is not in conflict with the concept that some people can learn enough in the long course to perform an adequate inspection on some aircraft. They can go on from there to gain additional experience and expand their skills to include more complex aircaft. This is how maintenance works at all certification levels, whether you believe it, are comfortable with it, or not.

No, and that's why Larry had to reply to you again, but either way, a BIG NO to your most recent comment now !

You don't have time to write YES or NO, but you've had time to reply to others after I asked you, and to write all of this here and even try to slip in that "some people can learn enough in the long course to perform an adequate inspection on some aircraft. They can go on from there to gain additional experience and expand their skills to include more complex aircaft".

That people can LATER get experience to do a job has never been the issue, and AGAIN that's why I have to ask you YES or NO questions. SOME PEOPLE aren't ALL of those who will come out of a "2 week wonder" class ABLE, but not qualified in my opinion, to perform inspections. THAT has been my entire debate from day 1.

ANYONE, even those with 0 experience, can go into a "2 week wonder" class and come out ready to sign away, while A&Ps, and you even added A&P-IAs to the mix in your comparison, can't even take the FAA tests without having shown their experience. I remember reading here that a person could build an entire RV and still have the FAA tell them they're not qualified to take the A&P test.

That's why you didn't answer my simple question. You know that if you answer NO, that there's no difference in risk between the "2 week wonders" and A&Ps and A&P-IAs, then since you don't have an A&P certificate, anyone reading this at a minimum might question your reasoning. BTW, I'm not bashing you for not having an A&P, I don't have one either or any Rotax training, I'm just a pilot.


*Edited to correct spelling errors.

 

[docjjrmd]

I think this is a dead horse...remember flying is an exercise in self discipline. Building is an exercise in self discipline. Maintenance and inspections are an exercise in self discipline. We all need to know how to recognize when we are ignorant and need more information, education, and experience. The rules and regs set the floor not the ideal.

 

[Pilot135pd]

I think this is a dead horse...remember flying is an exercise in self discipline. Building is an exercise in self discipline. Maintenance and inspections are an exercise in self discipline. We all need to know how to recognize when we are ignorant and need more information, education, and experience. The rules and regs set the floor not the ideal.

I agree. The conversation is if those new rules and regulations are safe or not.

 

[RNB]

How many of the bickerers here submitted opinions to Mosaic prior to its formal issuance?

 

[aeroaddict]

4 pages of information. It's just like car mechanics and doctors. Some are better than others. Do your homework, know your limitations, ask for help when needed.

 

[Pilot135pd]

How many of the bickerers here submitted opinions to Mosaic prior to its formal issuance?

I looked for the definition of bickering and looks like it's when someone is "arguing or quarreling in a petty way, usually about trivial matters. The arguments are often characterized by their lack of importance or substance".

So what to you might seem like bickering, to me it doesn't because to me it's not a trivial matter. In fact to me it's a matter of safety and i take safety very seriously. Are you complaining about a debate on a forum that's made for the dissemination of ideas?

Either way, in case you were referring to me, yes I did submit my opinion about MOSAIC before it was issue, I mentioned that earlier in this thread. Did you read the entire thread? I learned a few new things from it, I suggest you read it completely.

 

[BobTurner]

How many of the bickerers here submitted opinions to Mosaic prior to its formal issuance?

I just can’t resist sticking my hand into the fire . First of all, there is no such thing as something which is absolutely risk free, or absolutely safe. People die from slipping in the shower. So please let’s stop asking for absolute yes or no answers. Second, to use analogy: Do people understand how exposure limits to x-rays are set, and why x-ray technicians have higher limits? The levels are set by requiring exposure limits to be set low enough that any additional risk of cancer is statistically undetectable. I personally think the same logic applies here. Is an A&P inspection ‘safer’ than an inspection from a ‘2 (or 14) day class guy’? Logically, it seems the answer is yes; but, the difference is so small as to be undetectable. At that point it makes sense to consider other factors (cost, convenience, etc). As an unrelated side note, I favor dropping medical exams for private pilots, for the same reason. Logically, having the exam must make GA safer. But the improvement is so tiny, that other factors, including cost, my time, and even the odds that I’ll die in a car accident on the way to the doctor, need to be considered.

 

[Pilot135pd]

So please let’s stop asking for absolute yes or no answers.

I practically never ask YES / NO questions because I normally want to expand on a subject and that's the only way to leave space open to receive more information.

The only reason I asked a YES / NO question here was because someone stated something that I found so contradictory that I wanted to be sure what he was stating. His answers would add so many additional things that I couldn't get a clear answer.

Either way, I went back and read everything from the beginning and it's sadly clear to me now that i definitly understood what he said the first time.

Is an A&P inspection ‘safer’ than an inspection from a ‘2 (or 14) day class guy’? Logically, it seems the answer is yes

i agree 100%

 

[BobTurner]

i agree 100%

I call foul. Please don’t quote me out of context by truncating my quote.

 

[N8DAV8R]

The only reason I asked a YES / NO question here was because someone stated something that I found so contradictory that I wanted to be sure what he was stating. His answers would add so many additional things that I couldn't get a clear answer.

Either way, I went back and read everything from the beginning and it's sadly clear to me now that i definitly understood what he said the first time.

I appreciate that you took the time to understand, even if you disagree and my opinion makes you sad. I said what I meant.

I didn’t write the rules. I read them in order to understand them because it’s important me. Don’t be mad at me for either one.

I’m always glad to talk about the regs, good mechanics, or bad mechanics. Preferably in that order. I probably won’t ever give a one word answer, sorry.

 

[Pilot135pd]

I appreciate that you took the time to understand, even if you disagree and my opinion makes you sad. I said what I meant.

I didn’t write the rules. I read them in order to understand them because it’s important me. Don’t be mad at me for either one.

I’m always glad to talk about the regs, good mechanics, or bad mechanics. Preferably in that order. I probably won’t ever give a one word answer, sorry.

I wasn't sad because of your opinion on the "2 week wonder" class. I was sad for you, because of how you think of A&Ps and A&P-IAs just because they have their certificates.

I'm not mad because i don't let people's actions dictate how I feel, and I don't write mad things, I just write what I believe.

Is an A&P inspection ‘safer’ than an inspection from a ‘2 (or 14) day class guy’? Logically, it seems the answer is yes; but, the difference is so small as to be undetectable. At that point it makes sense to consider other factors (cost, convenience, etc).

I appologize, I cut it up to keep my answers on point because I understood your answer to have 3 topics in 1 and I wasn't going to address the last topic of medicals. Here is your complete quote on that topic. To me it's still a YES, because we still haven't seen if the results of 0 experienced people going through a 2 week course and then being let loose on aircarft will be undetectable, since MOSAIC hasn't taken effect yet.

 

[Sam Buchanan]

Well......I started this thread so I think I'm justified in closing it. There is a lot of good info, primarily in the first couple of pages. But the last page or so is so pedantic that there is likely little useful info for the RV community at large. Thread closed.