X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from [207.189.223.49] (HELO email3.peakpeak.com) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.0.4) with ESMTPS id 886271 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Sat, 17 Dec 2005 12:57:24 -0500 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=207.189.223.49; envelope-from=billdube@killacycle.com Received: (qmail 3741 invoked by uid 513); 17 Dec 2005 17:56:08 -0000 Received: from 207.189.221.3 by email3 (envelope-from , uid 504) with qmail-scanner-1.23 ( Clear:RC:1(207.189.221.3):. Processed in 1.293975 secs); 17 Dec 2005 17:56:08 -0000 Received: from 3-221-189-207.dyn.peakpeak.com (HELO tigger.killacycle.com) ([207.189.221.3]) (envelope-sender ) by email3.peakpeak.com (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP for ; 17 Dec 2005 17:56:07 -0000 Message-Id: <4.3.1.0.20051217104755.01fbaa68@mail.chisp.net> X-Sender: billdube@mail.chisp.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1 Date: Sat, 17 Dec 2005 10:50:36 -0700 To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" From: "BillDube@killacycle.com" Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: Fwd: COZY: DAR Update on my LED/Strobe lights for Phase II In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed I think this DAR is saving a few lives, actually. See my previous note. At 08:04 AM 12/17/2005, you wrote: >That really *&(&ing sucks. Just goes to show ya, we rarely make progress >or succeed because of our government.......if we are to progress and >succeed it usually is in spite of our government. I have those same >lights and they are REALLY Kewl and better than the Whelens, IMHO. I >really resent this type of head in the ground >bureaucracy. GEEEEESH. Can't these guys occasionally stay at a Holiday >Inn Express???? > >All the best, > >Chris > > >Christopher Barber"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /> > >Attorney and Counselor at Law > > > >"Serving the needs of Senior Texans" > >Barber Law Firm >10827 Tower Bridge St. > >Houston, Texas 77075-5032 >281-464-LAWS (5297) > > >CBarber@TexasAttorney.net >www.TexasAttorney.net > > >-----Original Message----- >From: Rotary motors in aircraft [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net]On >Behalf Of Bulent Aliev >Sent: Saturday, December 17, 2005 6:53 AM >To: Rotary motors in aircraft >Subject: [FlyRotary] Fwd: COZY: DAR Update on my LED/Strobe lights for >Phase II > > > >Begin forwarded message: > >>From: "iflycozy@bunchlaw.com" >><iflycozy@bunchlaw.com> >>Date: December 16, 2005 10:48:39 PM EST >>To: cozy_builders@mailman.qth.net >>Subject: COZY: DAR Update on my LED/Strobe lights for Phase II >> >>For all of you who have read my posts since June 05 relating to my very >>tough DAR on my wingtip LED/strobe lights, here is an update. >> >>As you will recall, I have non-TSO'ed lights from gs-air.com. They are >>really cool, bright and uses 4 amps for two strobes and four position >>lights. My DAR would not sign off Phase II with those lights with the >>language of "Unless appropriately equipped for night or IFR flight, ..." >>which would allow me to make a logbook entry to fly at night. My DAR >>would only give me Phase II with VFR day only restriction because he >>interpreted the words "approved anti-collision light system" in FAR >>91.205(c) to mean only approved by the Administrator. My DAR's boss in >>the Louisville FSDO office sent me an email saying that their position is >>that I must have "approved" anti-collision lights, i.e., TSO or PMA or a >>field approval. Since PMA does not exist for experimentals and Atlanta or >>any DER would not give me a field app roval, I was told that if I wanted >>to flight at night, all of which night equipment is required for IFR, I >>must have TSO'ed wingtip lights. Nat and everyone else said to get >>another DAR, so the following is my report. >> >>I have talked with EAA in Oshkosh (Joe Norris who was very helpful) and >>they put my in touch with a DAR in Illinois in the MIDO office, whose >>boss/Prinicipal Investigator (PI) is in Vadalia, OH. Vadalia is in my >>region or district. They told me today that although my analysis of the >>FARs and evidence showing that my wingtip lights meet or exceeds the >>airworthiness standard for approved position/anti-collision lights, that >>they would have issued me the above quoted language if I had originally >>applied for my airworthiness certificate from them, BUT that since I >>started out in FSDO, I am subject to their mercy as I can not escape from >>the FSDO office in Louisville. So, there you have it. I must change my >>very cool, slick LEDs for old technology which draws about 15 amps >>(strobes and nav lights) from Whelen as they are the only TSO'ed lights >>that I have found. Of course, Whelen lights are almost $900. So, the >>little man has lost and the moral to this story is GO TO THE NATIONAL EAA >>TO GET A DAR FROM YOUR LOCAL MIDO OFFICE BEFORE YOU APPLY FOR AN >>AIRWORTHINESS CERTIFICATE, even if a local FSDO DAR was recommended to >>you. After my problem with my lights, need I say more. All of you guys >>still building (which I am after flying 25 hours--you know, still >>tweaking) MUST learn from my mistake. Don't get involved with the FSDO >>office as you will be in a world of hurt ($$$$) very fast. >> >>Matt Bunch >>Lexington, KY >> >>______________________________________________________________ >>Cozy_builders mailing list >>Home: >>http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/cozy_builders >> >>Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.html >>Post: >>mailto:Cozy_builders@mailman.qth.net Bill Dube http://www.killacycle.com/Lights.htm