Wed Sep 16, 2020 11:21 am
#1796530
Sad that the aircraft came out of maintenance with more wrong than when it went in.
ChrisRowland wrote:Sad that the aircraft came out of maintenance with more wrong than when it went in.
Crash one wrote:Doesn’t say much about the quality of “aviation” components if it is necessary to fit a “test the guage” device.
Perhaps aviation should take a closer look at the automotive industry.
Peter Kelly wrote:Why would you not repair the errant fuel gauge? It's going to have to be done at the next annual so the cost is only delayed not eliminated. And if you do it now, you have the benefit of its use for the next 'N' months.
robert79 wrote:Peter Kelly wrote:Why would you not repair the errant fuel gauge? It's going to have to be done at the next annual so the cost is only delayed not eliminated. And if you do it now, you have the benefit of its use for the next 'N' months.
In this example, it's not like PA28 fuel gauges are at all accurate even when they are "working" is it?
Crash one wrote:Doesn’t say much about the quality of “aviation” components if it is necessary to fit a “test the guage” device.
Perhaps aviation should take a closer look at the automotive industry.
Crash one wrote:Perhaps aviation should take a closer look at the automotive industry.Socata (or whomsoever, in the TB 9, 10, 20 range) used French automotive gauges; these were certificated on all their models in both EASA- and FAA-lands.
Crash one wrote:......
And people wonder why I have no faith in maintenance outfits.
Rob L wrote:Crash one wrote:......
And people wonder why I have no faith in maintenance outfits.
It's not necessarily their fault; I think your summation is unfair. They are bound by the system to which the aircraft owners subscribe.
Your Emeraude hopefully has a placard stating "This aircraft is not certificated to an International Requirement".
Theirs doesn't.