|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Leaning tower of falcon 9
In sci.physics Fred J. McCall wrote:
Chimp, I'm getting neck pains from trying to follow your changes of direction. wrote: In sci.physics Fred J. McCall wrote: wrote: snip That does not mean any procedure has to be actually performed during cerification. So they'll certify based on zero evidence? Wow, you just make **** up as you go, don't you? Non sequitur. Certification is based on engineering data and flight testing, not by going though the ongoing maintenance procedures. One more time; certification and on going maintenance are two separate things. During the certification process, the maker has to GENERATE a maintenance manual for on going maintenance. During certification things like the flaps down stall speed is verified. During on going maintenance the flap hinges are inspected for wear. Two different things. Two different things. The maintenance plan is the basis for what gets inspected when (you say). The maintenance plan never gets executed (you say), including little details like part duty cycles and such (you say). This means that the FAA certifies a pig in a poke. I never said any of that. 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. 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. Inspections occur AFTER certification when the aircraft is sold to an owner and is in operation. 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. The design is certified by a combination of one time engineering calculations and actual testing (assuming no failures during the process). 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. As it amounts to hundreds of pages, I am NOT going to post it. -- Jim Pennino |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Leaning tower of falcon 9
wrote:
In sci.physics Fred J. McCall wrote: Chimp, I'm getting neck pains from trying to follow your changes of direction. wrote: In sci.physics Fred J. McCall wrote: wrote: snip That does not mean any procedure has to be actually performed during cerification. So they'll certify based on zero evidence? Wow, you just make **** up as you go, don't you? Non sequitur. Certification is based on engineering data and flight testing, not by going though the ongoing maintenance procedures. One more time; certification and on going maintenance are two separate things. During the certification process, the maker has to GENERATE a maintenance manual for on going maintenance. During certification things like the flaps down stall speed is verified. During on going maintenance the flap hinges are inspected for wear. Two different things. Two different things. The maintenance plan is the basis for what gets inspected when (you say). The maintenance plan never gets executed (you say), including little details like part duty cycles and such (you say). This means that the FAA certifies a pig in a poke. I never said any of that. Well, you did, but you're little tiny intellect apparently can't see around your gigantic ego to realize it. 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'? 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? Inspections occur AFTER certification when the aircraft is sold to an owner and is in operation. Irrelevant. 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. 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. 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. As it amounts to hundreds of pages, I am NOT going to post it. You will if you think that sort of spew is a useful tactic to protect your gigantic ego. -- "Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar territory." --G. Behn |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Leaning tower of falcon 9
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. 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. Why would something that requires no maintenance be mentioned in a maintenance manual? 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. 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. 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. During the certification process separarte TESTING documents are used to perform TESTING, not routine maintenance. 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. -- Jim Pennino |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Leaning tower of falcon 9
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? I'm sorry, but that ought to sound stupid to even your ego. 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? 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. 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? 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. 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. 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. 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. Get it now? -- "Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar territory." --G. Behn |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Leaning tower of falcon 9
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. 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. 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? 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. 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. 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. Certification is not inspection, which is on going maintenance. 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. 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. When it is done is 100 hours or 12 months. 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. -- Jim Pennino |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Leaning tower of falcon 9
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 |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Leaning tower of falcon 9
In sci.physics Fred J. McCall wrote:
Hogwash. I am tired of your blowhard nonsense. Show anything in 14 CFR that is contrary to what I've said or STFU. snip 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. Perhaps to someone that knows nothing about aviation, but that is not how it works at all. For aircraft, there is an operational manual, a maintenane manual, and a repair manual. In the operational manual, and in FAA regulations, there is the requirement that the pilot of an aircraft do a pre-flight inspection before every flight. In the operational manual you find things like how much oil you have to have and how to check how much you actually have. You also have to calculate, by law, how much fuel will be required for the flight plus a contingancy reserve and ensure you actually have that much fuel. Pilots, unlike drivers, do not just jump into the airplane and go. In a car if the "check engine soon" light comes on, the driver thinks about when he might bother to do something about it. In an airplane if somehing flags a warning, the pilot thinks about where is the closest place to land. A pilot is REQUIRED to understand EVERYTHING about what is required to keep the airplane safely flying and much like the captain of a ship has the final responibility for safe flight. And again, show anything in 14 CFR that is contrary to what I've said or STFU. 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. No one in the industry has any problems with the FAA when in comes to parts. Aircraft innovation is not about parts, it is about aircraft performance. Many in the industry do feel the requirements of certification under Part 23, which basically applies to airplanes less than 12,500 pounds, to be onerous, particularly in the area of avionics and non-required safety of flight equipment, and there is movement within the FAA to rewrite it. But again, this has nothing to do with parts. No one in the industry has any desire to change 100 hour and annual inspection requirments. The companies that make airplanes know what 14 CFR says and when they desgin an airplane, they design it to comply with the requirements of 14 CFR from the start. Certification is not an after thought. -- Jim Pennino |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Leaning tower of falcon 9 | Robert Clark[_5_] | Astronomy Misc | 162 | July 13th 16 04:14 AM |
Leaning tower of falcon 9 | Fred J. McCall[_3_] | Policy | 17 | July 13th 16 04:14 AM |
Leaning tower of falcon 9 | Jonathan | Policy | 2 | July 5th 16 11:06 AM |
Leaning tower of falcon 9 | Vaughn Simon | Policy | 4 | June 21st 16 04:17 AM |