From the very first sentence that the guy wrote:

"I had this Audio Panel assembled by a professional. He charged $100.00 but
said it ended up taking 40 hours.The work inside is first class."

Reading that sentence, can you POSSIBLY construe "owner built part" from the
process? He PAID somebody to do the work that the owner was supposed to do
himself. We are VERY CLEAR that the owner of the aircraft must do the
assembly or the part cannot be legally installed on a certificated airplane.

Now, 504 hasn't been produced for almost ten years. Without a serial, the
unit might possibly be 20 years old or so. So for ten to twenty annuals,
this guy has been just fine, and all of a sudden the FAA "busts" him? I
think there is more to the story than this.

Not only that, but he then hires some amateur sparky that knifes off the
connections INSIDE the audio panel when all he had to do is simply
disconnect three nylon connectors? Wait a minnit...this one smells fishy.
I remember fifteen years ago or thereabouts some idiot sending me back an
audio panel that he had made "better" by some convoluted connector scheme
that couldn't have been undone by Houdini. We sent that one back with a
note that we didn't consider this an airworthy modification and that we
wanted no part of the product. I don't know that this is that unit, but the
time frame and reason for unairworthiness may somehow be connected.

However, he is correct that at this time this is NOT a certified or
certifiable part under 21.303(b)(2) as an owner produced part and is only
good for an experimental aircraft. And if anybody wants to start "splicing"
30 or so small gauge wires to make this sucker work, more power to you.

Youse guyzes have to start learning how the game is played...and out of ten
thousand RST audio panels out in the field, for one guy to goof up and not
follow directions doesn't speak too poorly of us.

Jim


wrote in message
ups.com...
Jim Weir,
See link. Why would the FAA get involved?
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eB...9498 097&rd=1
tw