"certified' parts

[Jimmy B.]

Yesterday, I attended a FAA safety seminar where the topic was
maintenance issues. I walked away with a few surprising nuggets of
information. These issues have been discussed here in the past and some
of the information posited here disagreed with what the FAA said. So, I
thought it would be useful to list them here.

Now, before everyone flames me and tells me I'm an idiot, these are not
my opinions, they are the opinions of the Safety Inspectors at
Washington - Dulles FSDO.

Manuals:
You must have current service manuals to do any (including preventative)
maintenance on your bird. That includes all service letters. A few
pilots grumbled that certain companies will not send the service letters
to the owners. The Safety Inspector said that didn't matter. Missing a
service letter makes the manual out of date and unusable.

Parts:
You must buy the parts from an aviation source. Someone brought up that
landing lights can be bought cheaper at automotive supply stores than
from aviation outlets at a fraction of the cost. The FAA wouldn't hear
of it. It does not matter if the part is made by the same company with
an identical part number, if you didn't get it from an aviation source,
then it is not an airworthy part. The Safety Inspector gave three
examples, the light bulb above, an alternator belt, and an air filter.

I guess that the alternator belt part number you would get in a
automotive store has fewer layers of material in it than the one
approved for aviation. The belts were the same dimensions, but there
was an extra layer in the aviation belt, but they both had the same part
numbers.

The air filter from some airplanes also fit some automobiles. Same Fram
part number. The Inspector used this as a uncertainty example. Are the
parts exactly the same, who knows?

I was going to ask him how do we know that we're getting approved parts
from aviation houses if the manufacturers use identical part numbers for
aviation approved and non approved parts. But by the end of this
discussion, he was getting kind of ticked by all the questions, so I
took a pass.

Logs:

All preventative maintenance must be logged, including updating the
database on your GPS unit. So, if you have updated your GPS database
and did not log it, you're not airworthy. This one caught a lot of pilots.

[[email protected]]

Jimmy B. > wrote:
: I guess that the alternator belt part number you would get in a
: automotive store has fewer layers of material in it than the one
: approved for aviation. The belts were the same dimensions, but there
: was an extra layer in the aviation belt, but they both had the same part
: numbers.

I call bull**** on this one. A part number from one manufacturer is a part
number. If its a different part, it's got a different number. Now, if someone says a
Wicks P/N-XYZPQ is the same as an Autolite P/N-XYZPQ, then I might believe it.

: I was going to ask him how do we know that we're getting approved parts
: from aviation houses if the manufacturers use identical part numbers for
: aviation approved and non approved parts. But by the end of this
: discussion, he was getting kind of ticked by all the questions, so I
: took a pass.

Sound about right. The FAA rules/regs sound ominous, and are written in
"airtight" legaleaze. If you try to corner someone on the details, however, the final
interpretation is done by the specific person you ask. The "ultimate authority" is
the *specific FAA person* at *YOUR* FSDO you asked at the time. They may be
right/wrong, but they're the one that interprets something as "legal." An immediate
corollary of this is that as soon as there's a problem, *SOMEONE* will find something
wrong, and since it's their interprettation, you are wrong.

: All preventative maintenance must be logged, including updating the
: database on your GPS unit. So, if you have updated your GPS database
: and did not log it, you're not airworthy. This one caught a lot of pilots.

Just remember that there isn't a single solitary aircraft currently flying
that's actually airworthy. I don't care if it just rolled off the manufacturer's lot.
The guy who pumped fuel into it last didn't clip the grounding lug on the 100LL truck
to the "approved ground," thus performing an illegal servicing of the craft and
rendering it unairworthy.

Running around crying "the sky is falling," tends to be a debilitating
proposition WRT flying. It's *IMPOSSIBLE* to keep an aircraft airworthy, because the
actual laws are subject to individual FAA interpretation. The GPS update may seem a
bit crazy, but in the highly unlikely case that an improper update causes a crash and
ensuing investigation, it will becoming immediately very important. A few bits I try
to remember when talking about issues like this:

- "Hi! We're the FAA and we're not happy until you're not happy"
- "Hi! We're the FAA. If you don't have a problem, we won't have any problems, but
if you have a problem, we'll find a problem."

I take that to mean that be smart WRT certified parts. Don't go to Ace
Hardware for your propeller bolts, but at the same time you don't need to buy nitrogen
to fill your struts directly from Piper, either.

-Cory (this $h*t really irritates me as it's still slowly killing GA)


************************************************** ***********************
* Cory Papenfuss *
* Electrical Engineering candidate Ph.D. graduate student *
* Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University *
************************************************** ***********************

[Darrel Toepfer]

Jimmy B. wrote:

> All preventative maintenance must be logged, including updating the
> database on your GPS unit. So, if you have updated your GPS database
> and did not log it, you're not airworthy. This one caught a lot of pilots.

You must be thinking panel mounted... There are lots of time line rules
in regards to IFR panels...

[[email protected]]

Some parts, like Timken tapered roller wheel bearings, carry the same
part number as the industrial bearings, but the Quality Testing as the
factory is different for the aviation bearings. They will test 1 out of
ten for aviation instead of 1 out of 500 for industry. The factory also
puts away a lot more money to cover their butts when we pilots act
stupid, crash an airplane, and our families sue everyone that had
anything at all to do with that airplane in the last 18 years.
Including Timken, who somehow was negligent because their bearing
allowed us to fly VFR in IMC.
In Canada, the government is working on a "Commercial
Equivalent" provision to allow us to use industrial stuff that carries
the same part number as the aviation version. In that case, I suppose,
we mechanics would carry the liability instead of the manufacturer and
vendors. It's always someone else's fault, see?

Dan

[Mike Rapoport]

> wrote in message
oups.com...
> Some parts, like Timken tapered roller wheel bearings, carry the same
> part number as the industrial bearings, but the Quality Testing as the
> factory is different for the aviation bearings. They will test 1 out of
> ten for aviation instead of 1 out of 500 for industry. The factory also
> puts away a lot more money to cover their butts when we pilots act
> stupid, crash an airplane, and our families sue everyone that had
> anything at all to do with that airplane in the last 18 years.
> Including Timken, who somehow was negligent because their bearing
> allowed us to fly VFR in IMC.
> In Canada, the government is working on a "Commercial
> Equivalent" provision to allow us to use industrial stuff that carries
> the same part number as the aviation version. In that case, I suppose,
> we mechanics would carry the liability instead of the manufacturer and
> vendors. It's always someone else's fault, see?
>
> Dan
>

The additional testing does nothing for the quality of the bearings it just
raises the cost.

Mike
MU-2

[Mike Granby]

> You must buy the parts from an aviation source. Someone
> brought up that landing lights can be bought cheaper at
> automotive supply stores than from aviation outlets at a
> fraction of the cost. The FAA wouldn't hear of it.

Indeed. That's why the FAA doesn't hear of it, even though everyone
does it.

> All preventative maintenance must be logged, including
> updating the database on your GPS unit. So, if you
> have updated your GPS database and did not log it, you're
> not airworthy. This one caught a lot of pilots.

An FAA guy has to say this. He can't go around saying that you don't
have to follow the rules. However, I'd be very surprised if you can
find anyone who has been busted for not logging database updates on
their GPS. (Someone will now pop-up and repeat the nonsence about how
not logging it will void your insurance...)

[John Kunkel]

"Jimmy B." > wrote in message
k.net...
> Yesterday, I attended a FAA safety seminar where the topic was maintenance
> issues. I walked away with a few surprising nuggets of information.
> These issues have been discussed here in the past and some of the
> information posited here disagreed with what the FAA said. So, I thought
> it would be useful to list them here.
>
> Now, before everyone flames me and tells me I'm an idiot, these are not my
> opinions, they are the opinions of the Safety Inspectors at Washington -
> Dulles FSDO.

Another in the list of excuses for mandating parts procurement from an
aviation supplier is the paper trail, a Fram filter from Autozone has no
paper trail to the source.

When confronting the FAA with the simple fact that anyone with a quality
printer can "create" a paper trail you'll be greeted with a shrug.

[OtisWinslow]

"Jimmy B." > wrote in message
k.net...
>
> Manuals:
> You must have current service manuals to do any (including preventative)
> maintenance on your bird.

What maintenance? (wink wink)

> Parts:
> You must buy the parts from an aviation source.

What parts? (wink wink)

>
> All preventative maintenance must be logged ...

What preventative maintenance? (wink wink)

[Denny]

Slick Willie wrote the book, "Don't ask. Don't tell." Listen to Uncle
Willie...

denny

[Mike W.]

OK, how 'bout this. Buy one landing light from Super-Duper-Spruce-Goose or
whoever. Keep the invoice. Now head down to NAPA and buy a dozen of the same
make and part number of lamp. Boy, that lamp I bought just seems to last and
last. Wonder when it will burn out?

[Mike Rapoport]

"Denny" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> Slick Willie wrote the book, "Don't ask. Don't tell." Listen to Uncle
> Willie...
>
> denny
>

Didn't he say that what goes on behind closed hanger doors is not the
government's business?

Mike
MU-2

[George Patterson]

"Jimmy B." wrote:
>
> You must buy the parts from an aviation source.

Did Mr. FAA say what reg requires me to retain all the receipts?

George Patterson
I prefer Heaven for climate but Hell for company.

[Paul Missman]

>> All preventative maintenance must be logged, including
>> updating the database on your GPS unit. So, if you
>> have updated your GPS database and did not log it, you're
>> not airworthy. This one caught a lot of pilots.

However, you don't have to update your database to be legal. This is per a
briefing we received from the FAA last month.

What is true is that you must be able to verify the latitude and longitude
of any waypoint you use for navigation.

So, if you checked the latitude and longitude of your GPS nav fixes by hand
before flight, even if your database is out of date, you can still use the
GPS for navigation.

Paul Missman

[Dave Butler]

Paul Missman wrote:
>>>All preventative maintenance must be logged, including
>>>updating the database on your GPS unit. So, if you
>>>have updated your GPS database and did not log it, you're
>>>not airworthy. This one caught a lot of pilots.
>
>
> However, you don't have to update your database to be legal. This is per a
> briefing we received from the FAA last month.
>
> What is true is that you must be able to verify the latitude and longitude
> of any waypoint you use for navigation.
>
> So, if you checked the latitude and longitude of your GPS nav fixes by hand
> before flight, even if your database is out of date, you can still use the
> GPS for navigation.

Some supplemental POHs require a current database for conducting a GPS
instrument approach. I'd be very surprised if that weren't considered a
violation of the airworthiness certificate if your supplemental POH has that
wording.

Maybe you intentionally made a distinction between approaches and "navigation"?

DGB

[joe]

Manuals:
You must have current service manuals to do any (including
preventative)
maintenance on your bird. That includes all service letters. A few
pilots grumbled that certain companies will not send the service
letters
to the owners. The Safety Inspector said that didn't matter. Missing
a
service letter makes the manual out of date and unusable.

Well ,I hate to bust the FAA's bubble but,For a part 91
operator,Service letters are NOT part of the maintenance manual. Nor
are mandatory service bulletins.. joe

[Robert M. Gary]

Give me a break. I can't imagine that there really exists aircraft
owners out there that don't already know this stuff. How could anyone
own an airplane and not already be familiar with this? If someone
really thinks its legal to buy a belt from an automotive shop and put
it on their plane, you wonder how they ever had the intelligence to
pass the PP written. I always bring my service manuals out to the plane
when I'm doing any kind of work (including oil changes).

-Robert, CFI and Mooney owner.

[Robert M. Gary]

So when you get brought into the FSDO, you raise your right hand, swear
to tell the truth, etc, you're going to just lie about where you bought
the part because you weren't required to produce a receipt? Give me a
break. Think is an empty argument.
-Robert

[Robert M. Gary]

If you're willing to lie to an FAA official, why stop there?

-Robert

[Ron Natalie]

Jimmy B. wrote:

> Now, before everyone flames me and tells me I'm an idiot, these are not
> my opinions, they are the opinions of the Safety Inspectors at
> Washington - Dulles FSDO.

What do you mean by "safety inspectors." If you're talking about our
Aviation safety counselors, they are idiots. Do not believe anything
they say is correct or has any regulatory signfiicance with the FAA.

>
> Manuals:
> You must have current service manuals to do any (including preventative)
> maintenance on your bird.

Bull****. You need those appropriate to what you are doing.

> Parts:
> You must buy the parts from an aviation source.

You must buy parts that meet the regulatory requirements. I'm not even
sure what an aviation source is supposed to mean. However, the point
about aviation parts vs. equivelent looking non-avaition parts is well
taken.

[Mike Granby]

As Dave says, this depends on the GPS and the associated AFM
supplement.

ISTR that Garmin allows you to check the waypoints, whereas King does
not.

[Jimmy B.]

Darrel Toepfer wrote:
> Jimmy B. wrote:
>
>> All preventative maintenance must be logged, including updating the
>> database on your GPS unit. So, if you have updated your GPS database
>> and did not log it, you're not airworthy. This one caught a lot of
>> pilots.
>
>
> You must be thinking panel mounted... There are lots of time line rules
> in regards to IFR panels...
Yeah, sorry. This referred to panel mounted units only.

It was kind of interesting because the same question came up in the
seminar. Someone asked about a hand held GPS running on its own
batteries. Then about a hand held running off of the cigarette lighter.
Then about being Velcro mounted, Then bracket mounted. It was kind of
funny.

[Jimmy B.]

OtisWinslow wrote:
> "Jimmy B." > wrote in message
> k.net...
>
>>Manuals:
>>You must have current service manuals to do any (including preventative)
>>maintenance on your bird.
>
>
> What maintenance? (wink wink)
>
>
>>Parts:
>>You must buy the parts from an aviation source.
>
>
> What parts? (wink wink)
>
>
>>All preventative maintenance must be logged ...
>
>
> What preventative maintenance? (wink wink)
>
>
>
Um, are you flirting with me? :-)

[Jimmy B.]

George Patterson wrote:
>
> "Jimmy B." wrote:
>
>>You must buy the parts from an aviation source.
>
>
> Did Mr. FAA say what reg requires me to retain all the receipts?
>
> George Patterson
> I prefer Heaven for climate but Hell for company.


I thought of that question after we left. I am curious, because the
only way you could prove that you bought it from an aviation source is
with a receipt.

[Michael]

Robert M. Gary wrote:
> So when you get brought into the FSDO, you raise your right hand,
swear
> to tell the truth, etc, you're going to just lie about where you
bought
> the part because you weren't required to produce a receipt? Give me a
> break. Think is an empty argument.

Absolutely. How could you even consider lying to your government?
After all, it has never lied to you.

Michael

[Mark Hansen]

On 3/15/2005 15:22, Michael wrote:

> Robert M. Gary wrote:
>> So when you get brought into the FSDO, you raise your right hand,
> swear
>> to tell the truth, etc, you're going to just lie about where you
> bought
>> the part because you weren't required to produce a receipt? Give me a
>> break. Think is an empty argument.
>
> Absolutely. How could you even consider lying to your government?
> After all, it has never lied to you.
>
> Michael
>

The difference is that they don't often go to jail for lying to us,
while we often go to jail for lying to them...

--
Mark Hansen, PP-ASEL
Sacramento, CA

[Rip]

I think that the start of this thread stated that there was a
requirement to log IFR certified GPS database updates. The logging
requirement is met by the fact that the software displays the latest
update cycle when the unit is booted. No PAPER work is required.

Ron Natalie wrote:
> Jimmy B. wrote:
>
>> Now, before everyone flames me and tells me I'm an idiot, these are
>> not my opinions, they are the opinions of the Safety Inspectors at
>> Washington - Dulles FSDO.
>
>
> What do you mean by "safety inspectors." If you're talking about our
> Aviation safety counselors, they are idiots. Do not believe anything
> they say is correct or has any regulatory signfiicance with the FAA.
>
>>
>> Manuals:
>> You must have current service manuals to do any (including
>> preventative) maintenance on your bird.
>
>
> Bull****. You need those appropriate to what you are doing.
>
>> Parts:
>> You must buy the parts from an aviation source.
>
>
> You must buy parts that meet the regulatory requirements. I'm not even
> sure what an aviation source is supposed to mean. However, the point
> about aviation parts vs. equivelent looking non-avaition parts is well
> taken.

[Newps]

Robert M. Gary wrote:
I always bring my service manuals out to the plane
> when I'm doing any kind of work (including oil changes).

Then you're the only one.

[George Patterson]

"Robert M. Gary" wrote:
>
> So when you get brought into the FSDO, you raise your right hand, swear
> to tell the truth, etc, you're going to just lie about where you bought
> the part because you weren't required to produce a receipt? Give me a
> break. Think is an empty argument.

Uh... Ok, just where does it say that I'm going to be placed under oath when I
talk to the FSDO?

George Patterson
I prefer Heaven for climate but Hell for company.

[George Patterson]

"Robert M. Gary" wrote:
>
> I always bring my service manuals out to the plane
> when I'm doing any kind of work (including oil changes).

Neat. Mine only saw the light of day when I handed it to the IA at annual time.

George Patterson
I prefer Heaven for climate but Hell for company.

[Mike Granby]

> I always bring my service manuals out to the
> plane when I'm doing any kind of work (including
> oil changes).

Do you stand on them to better reach the oil spout?

[[email protected]]

Jimmy B. > wrote:
: It was kind of interesting because the same question came up in the
: seminar. Someone asked about a hand held GPS running on its own
: batteries. Then about a hand held running off of the cigarette lighter.
: Then about being Velcro mounted, Then bracket mounted. It was kind of
: funny.

See my previous rant about the rules sounding airtight.... until you try to
nail one down. Then you see that it's often open to interpretation.

-Cory

************************************************** ***********************
* Cory Papenfuss *
* Electrical Engineering candidate Ph.D. graduate student *
* Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University *
************************************************** ***********************

[[email protected]]

: > Now, before everyone flames me and tells me I'm an idiot, these are not
: > my opinions, they are the opinions of the Safety Inspectors at
: > Washington - Dulles FSDO.

: What do you mean by "safety inspectors." If you're talking about our
: Aviation safety counselors, they are idiots. Do not believe anything
: they say is correct or has any regulatory signfiicance with the FAA.

Exactly... an airplane is not made safe by its paperwork. Period.

-Cory

************************************************** ***********************
* Cory Papenfuss *
* Electrical Engineering candidate Ph.D. graduate student *
* Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University *
************************************************** ***********************

[Robert M. Gary]

Yes. :) The FAA says they need to be there, so they lie in the truck of
my car. However, my point is that when you get your private pilots
certificate you learn things like you need 3 landings in 90 days to
carry passengers, etc. People need to make the same effort when they
purchase an airplane. I'm sorry, but there is just no excluse for
buying a part at Autozone and thinking the FAA would bless it. If
you're going to invest the time/money in buying an airplane, and you're
going to do some of the work yourself, you really need to take the time
to learn the FARs associated with it.

-Robert, CFI

[Robert M. Gary]

If the FSDO charges you and you don't go along with their opinion, you
go before an administrative judge. Those procedures usually require you
be under oath. I'm sure you're an honest person and would only lie when
not under oath.

-Robert

[Mike Granby]

I agree there's no excuse for buying something from AutoZone. Not
having the service manual with you when you change the oil is more
forgivable.

[Newps]

Mike Granby wrote:
> I agree there's no excuse for buying something from AutoZone.

Baloney. I get my landing lights from the Auto store. I hardwired my
GPS power cable and used a 1 amp fuse from Radio Shack. The list goes on.

[Robert M. Gary]

So what, no one ever said anything about that. However, if you were to
do that and not KNOW that its not an FAA approved part you would be an
idiot. The point is that if anyone says "Oh, wow, auto store parts are
not approved!!" is just an idiot. As I said... "I'm sorry, but there is
just no excluse for buying a part at Autozone and thinking the FAA
would bless it."

-Robert

[John Clonts]

"Newps" > wrote in message ...
>
>
> Mike Granby wrote:
>> I agree there's no excuse for buying something from AutoZone.
>
> Baloney. I get my landing lights from the Auto store. I hardwired my GPS power cable and used a 1 amp fuse
> from Radio Shack. The list goes on.

Hey, can you tell me how to find out what auto bulb would substitute for a #4591 (24 volt 100w I believe)? I'm
sick of replacing $30 bulbs every 30 hours!

Thanks!
John Clonts
Temple, Texas
N7NZ

[George Patterson]

"Robert M. Gary" wrote:
>
> If the FSDO charges you and you don't go along with their opinion, you
> go before an administrative judge. Those procedures usually require you
> be under oath. I'm sure you're an honest person and would only lie when
> not under oath.

Now you've switched things around to a court. Yesterday the FSDO was putting me
under oath. Make up your mind. Ok, we're in court -- and I take the 5th. End of
discussion.

In any case, the regs state that the parts must be approved. There is no reg
that states that I must buy my approved parts from a vendor such as Aircraft
Spruce. If there is no reg, not even the FAA can charge me with violating it.
There is also no reg that states that I must tell the FAA where I bought my
parts.

George Patterson
I prefer Heaven for climate but Hell for company.

[[email protected]]

George Patterson wrote:
>
> "Robert M. Gary" wrote:
>
>>If the FSDO charges you and you don't go along with their opinion, you
>>go before an administrative judge. Those procedures usually require you
>>be under oath. I'm sure you're an honest person and would only lie when
>>not under oath.
>
>
> Now you've switched things around to a court. Yesterday the FSDO was putting me
> under oath. Make up your mind. Ok, we're in court -- and I take the 5th. End of
> discussion.
>
> In any case, the regs state that the parts must be approved. There is no reg
> that states that I must buy my approved parts from a vendor such as Aircraft
> Spruce. If there is no reg, not even the FAA can charge me with violating it.
> There is also no reg that states that I must tell the FAA where I bought my
> parts.
>
> George Patterson
> I prefer Heaven for climate but Hell for company.

Gee, i guess i'm really in trouble for buying aeroshell at Sams. I know
for sure that Sams is not an airplame company.
It looks like the same stuff that's at the airplane store.
Can't be approved for use in aircraft then.

[Newps]

Robert M. Gary wrote:
> So what, no one ever said anything about that. However, if you were to
> do that and not KNOW that its not an FAA approved part you would be an
> idiot. The point is that if anyone says "Oh, wow, auto store parts are
> not approved!!" is just an idiot. As I said... "I'm sorry, but there is
> just no excluse for buying a part at Autozone and thinking the FAA
> would bless it."

It is blessed, because I asked my local FSDO when they came here for a
PACE program. In many places you can buy your oil and filters at Walmart.

[Newps]

John Clonts wrote:

> "Newps" > wrote in message ...
>
>>
>>Mike Granby wrote:
>>
>>>I agree there's no excuse for buying something from AutoZone.
>>
>>Baloney. I get my landing lights from the Auto store. I hardwired my GPS power cable and used a 1 amp fuse
>>from Radio Shack. The list goes on.
>
>
> Hey, can you tell me how to find out what auto bulb would substitute for a #4591 (24 volt 100w I believe)? I'm
> sick of replacing $30 bulbs every 30 hours!

Yep, see if there is a Q4591. That is the quartz halogen version of
your bulb. It's the same wattage but uses the much more durable halogen
bulb. It's also brighter.

[[email protected]]

wrote:
> George Patterson wrote:
> >
> > "Robert M. Gary" wrote:
> >
> >>If the FSDO charges you and you don't go along with their opinion,
you
> >>go before an administrative judge. Those procedures usually require
you
> >>be under oath. I'm sure you're an honest person and would only lie
when
> >>not under oath.
> >
> >
> > Now you've switched things around to a court. Yesterday the FSDO
was putting me
> > under oath. Make up your mind. Ok, we're in court -- and I take the
5th. End of
> > discussion.
> >
> > In any case, the regs state that the parts must be approved. There
is no reg
> > that states that I must buy my approved parts from a vendor such as
Aircraft
> > Spruce. If there is no reg, not even the FAA can charge me with
violating it.
> > There is also no reg that states that I must tell the FAA where I
bought my
> > parts.
> >
> > George Patterson
> > I prefer Heaven for climate but Hell for company.
>
> Gee, i guess i'm really in trouble for buying aeroshell at Sams. I
know
> for sure that Sams is not an airplame company.
> It looks like the same stuff that's at the airplane store.
> Can't be approved for use in aircraft then.

Touche! Well done sir.

[Dave Stadt]

"Robert M. Gary" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> So what, no one ever said anything about that. However, if you were to
> do that and not KNOW that its not an FAA approved part you would be an
> idiot. The point is that if anyone says "Oh, wow, auto store parts are
> not approved!!" is just an idiot. As I said... "I'm sorry, but there is
> just no excluse for buying a part at Autozone and thinking the FAA
> would bless it."
>
> -Robert


Boy oh boy, I'm glad I get my landing lights in boxes labeled "aircraft
lamp" at Farm and Fleet and not Autozone.

[Robert M. Gary]

Boy, you are pretty confused aren't you. The discussion concerns people
buying FAA disapproved parts at an auto store and not knowing the FAA
may have a problem with it. Parts that the FAA approves are not part of
this discussion. I would suggest starting at the top of the thread in
order to obtain proper context before jumping into the middle of a
thread without an understanding of the discussion.

-Robert

[Robert M. Gary]

You change topics so fast, you're having trouble keeping up with
yourself. This thread is about disapproved parts at autozone. If you'd
like to discuss where to purchase approved parts, I would recommend
startnig another thread.

-Robert

[George Patterson]

"Robert M. Gary" wrote:
>
> You change topics so fast, you're having trouble keeping up with
> yourself. This thread is about disapproved parts at autozone. If you'd
> like to discuss where to purchase approved parts, I would recommend
> startnig another thread.

No, this thread is about buying *approved* parts at Autozone.

From the original post --
"You must buy the parts from an aviation source. Someone brought up that
landing lights can be bought cheaper at automotive supply stores than from
aviation outlets at a fraction of the cost. The FAA wouldn't hear of it. It
does not matter if the part is made by the same company with an identical part
number, if you didn't get it from an aviation source, then it is not an
airworthy part. The Safety Inspector gave three examples, the light bulb above,
an alternator belt, and an air filter."

George Patterson
I prefer Heaven for climate but Hell for company.

[Newps]

How about giving us a heads up as to what you're replying to.



Robert M. Gary wrote:
> You change topics so fast, you're having trouble keeping up with
> yourself. This thread is about disapproved parts at autozone. If you'd
> like to discuss where to purchase approved parts, I would recommend
> startnig another thread.
>
> -Robert
>

[[email protected]]

SO what your saying is that any part that is bought from other than an
aviation store is a bogus part, regardless of the part number on the part.
I guess this means that all parts bought at an aviation junk yard are
not approved to use in aircraft since there is no verification of the
traceability of the part.
A part bought on Ebay can not be used on a certificated aircraft.
This appears to be a Very Narrow view of whats allowed.

Please show me the regulations which back your statements.

I've never seen a "Aviation Disapproved Part" before.
Is that in the small print somewheres?

Dave

Robert M. Gary wrote:

> Boy, you are pretty confused aren't you. The discussion concerns people
> buying FAA disapproved parts at an auto store and not knowing the FAA
> may have a problem with it. Parts that the FAA approves are not part of
> this discussion. I would suggest starting at the top of the thread in
> order to obtain proper context before jumping into the middle of a
> thread without an understanding of the discussion.
>
> -Robert
>

[Dude]

>
> Absolutely. How could you even consider lying to your government?
> After all, it has never lied to you.
>
> Michael
>

I agree. Ask any indian for verification :)

[RST Engineering]

Yeah, that's what makes women witchy once a month, isn't it?

Jim


>
> You know what PMA means, don't you?

[Mike Granby]

> Baloney.

You know what I meant!