SpaceBanter.com - View Single Post

**Fred J. McCall[_3_]** · July 13th 16, 01:43 AM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.physics,sci.astro

wrote:

In sci.physics Fred J. McCall wrote:
wrote:

In sci.physics Fred J. McCall wrote:
wrote:

snip

The maintenance manual lists what gets inspected and the maintenance
manual, along with sevreral other things, is part of the required
PAPERWORK package that must be presented during cerification.

You keep leaving out "how often maintenance (including inspections)
must be performed". Is it your claim that the maintenance manual is
merely a 'how to' document and has nothing about 'when to'?

99.99% of the time, yes.

So your claim is that the maintenance manual will say to top off the
engine oil with grade X, explain how to top it off, explain how to
change it, but just say "whenever" when it comes to how frequently the
engine oil level should be looked at and "meh" with regard to how
often to change it?

99.99% of the time, yes.

Hogwash.

I'm sorry, but that ought to sound stupid to even your ego.

That is because you keep ignoring the fact that the FAA requires 100 hour
or 12 month inpsections.

OK. So suppose I'm operating an aircraft in the category of service
that puts me into 'annual inspection'. It is your claim that I now
have engine oil and tires that are only looked at once a year? We
know the rate that jet engines consume oil at. It's in the
maintenance or specification manual. So you're now saying I need a
big enough engine oil reservoir on my jet to last for over a year of
service (because I'm only going to check the levels once a year)? I'm
sorry, but that's just insane.

Not only that, but it pretty much would seem to make the FAA the
biggest barrier to aircraft innovation. Why would I even develop an
improved part? I mean, I'm going to incur the inspection and
maintenance costs anyway, regardless of whether it needs it or not,
since the intervals are fixed by the FAA rather than having anything
to do with the actual part.

An individual item in the maintenance manual is normally inspected once
every 12 months. If the aircraft is on a 100 hour inspection schedule,
some things are inspected in the first 100 hours, others in the second
100 hours and so on until everything is inspected within 12 months.

So your claim is that a part that in the maintenance manual is called
out as requiring no inspection will be inspected every 100 hours
anyway?

Yet another childish statement.

Yet another stuck on stupid statement.

Why would something that requires no maintenance be mentioned in a
maintenance manual?

You have again been betrayed by your deficient English skills. I said
"no inspection", not "no maintenance". Can someone whose life is
apparently paper really read this poorly?

Again why would something that requires no inspection be mentioned in
a maintenance manual?

Not 'again'. You asked a different question. The answer is that
there may be routine maintenance to perform that doesn't require an
inspection first.

Inspections occur AFTER certification when the aircraft is sold to an
owner and is in operation.

Irrelevant.

Highly releveant and a point you keep missing.

Highly relevant to WHAT (that is actually being discussed)? I don't
keep 'missing' it. I don't see why you brought it up in the first
place, since no one had said that they were.

So you finally got it; on going maintenance has nothing to do with
certification other than the paperwork of presenting a maintenance
manual during certification.

Since I never said otherwise, there's no 'finally' to it. So you
finally actually read the words instead of listening to the little
voices in your head feeding your gigantic ego.

The certification process is a totally separate process that proves
the DESIGN of the aircraft meets the applicable standards for that
type of aircraft and occurs before any aircraft can be sold.

But the maintenance manual, which calls out what must be inspected and
maintained when is a required input to certification and used (by your
own claim) to determine what to inspect.

During routine, on going maintenance, after certification is complete,
and the aircraft is sold to someone.

Which part of "so what?" is it that is leaving you confused?

Your continued nit picking and arguing about it.

Uh, for most people "so what" is a LACK of "nit picking and arguing",
Chimp.

The design is certified by a combination of one time engineering
calculations and actual testing (assuming no failures during the
process).

And by the presence of a document that controls inspections.

Nope.

Yep. You've said so yourself.

No, I did not. Again you are confusing maintenance with certification.

Again, no I am not. Again you are listening to the little voices in
your head vs reading what people actually write.

Certification is not inspection, which is on going maintenance.

True, but so what? Water is wet, which is not dry. Now if you'd ever
said that water was dry my response would make sense. However, since
you haven't, it doesn't. Just like yours doesn't, since I never said
that certification was inspection.

During the certification process separarte TESTING documents are used
to perform TESTING, not routine maintenance.

Who gives a ****? You're still stuck on stupid and apparently unable
to parse simple declarative English sentences.

Apparently you as you keep confusing inspection, which is on going
maintenance with certification testing.

'Apparently' only to you. Perhaps if YOU ACTUALLY READ THE ****ING
WORDS?

Before you say something else blazingly stupid, you should read
ALL of Part 25 14 CFR and see what the actual requirements are for
the certification process.

Before you say something else blazingly stupid and irrelevant, YOU
SHOULD TRY READING WHAT OTHER PEOPLE ACTUALLY WRITE. For example, you
keep blithering on about how normal inspections aren't conducted
during certification, as if someone had said they were. The only
person saying that is you.

You are the one going on and on about inspections during certification,
not me, you lying sack.

Hogwash. I've done no such thing. Stop listening to the little
voices in your head and read what people actually write. Let me see
if I can make what I'm saying so simple that even your gigantic ego
can figure it out:

1) The maintenance manual, which must be complete at certification,
determines what is inspected and tested during operation. YOU have
said this, even though you've made the remarkably stupid statement
that there is nothing in the maintenance documents about how
frequently anything should be done.

Complete as in completely written.

Yes, exactly. And that completely written document is used for what,
precisely, post-certification?

When it is done is 100 hours or 12 months.

Whether it's actually needed or not, because Jimp the Chimp says so.

2) Given 1), above, quite obviously there is a link between
'certification' and 'testing during operational use'. Well, there is
unless you think they just burn the maintenance manual once
certification is complete.

The link is the maintenance manual is delivered to the owner upon sale
so the OWNER can perform on going maintenance.

Yeah, isn't it though. And the owner has to do all those inspections
and stuff that the FAA mandates. You sound like you've finally gotten
it, but given your insistence all through this article that you DON'T
get it, I'm betting you'll revert. Your ego will allow nothing less.

--
"Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar
territory."
--G. Behn