Sender: <marv@lancaironline.net>
To: lml
Date: Sat, 23 Dec 2006 16:04:44 -0500
Message-ID: <redirect-1704722@logan.com>
Received-SPF: pass
 receiver=logan.com; client-ip=66.90.130.73; envelope-from=mmcmanus@grandecom.net
From: mmcmanus@grandecom.net
Subject: Re: [LML] Re: Overhauled Engine now labeled "Experimental Only " ??
References: <list-1704355@logan.com>
In-Reply-To: <list-1704355@logan.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
User-Agent: Internet Messaging Program (IMP) 3.2.3

From my experience with the O-320 in my RV, the "real" answer comes down to the
(probably local) controlling authority.  The guy with the pen that signs it
off, assuming he will, is the one whose neck is on the block.

When I worked through the issues with oil pump gear AD, I found my A&P had one
understanding of experimental engine vs certified engine, the local FSDO (who
could make life hard for my A&P) had a different view, the FAA folks in
Washington had different view, and finally EAA added yet another view.

But the bottom line came down to what my A&P would do based on the way the local
FSDO might see it in a "what if" scenario, and I am sure that the DFW FSDO won't
see it the same way as the FSDO in another part of the country.

I went ahead and complied with the AD then sold the airplane a couple years
later (to get a Lancair).

Matt McManus
LNC2 360

Quoting VTAILJEFF@aol.com:

> Scott,
>
> What I am disagreeing with is Jim's statement that:
>
> 1) the engine  becomes "experimental" -- not true-- it becomes  "unairworthy"
> with regards to certificated installations and
>
> 2) the engine needs to be torn down-- again not true-- the engine needs an
> inspection by an IA to determine if it meets airworthiness standards (TCDS
> conformance).
>
> Jeff
>