Sport Pilot Talk

3Dreaming wrote:

Hambone wrote:

drseti wrote:
I'm a firm believer that no condition inspection done by the seller's mechanic is ever a substitute for a prebuy examination done by the buyer's. I invite you to invest an hour and a half in viewing my webinar "how to buy a used LSA" before proceeding further:

http://avsport.org/webinars/videos/prebuy.mp4

Thanks! I'll watch that.

I have already planned to have another mechanic do a prebuy after the annual is complete.

Experimental aircraft don't get Annual inspections, they get condition inspections.

Thanks for the info. So much to learn!

3Dreaming wrote: Experimental aircraft don't get Annual inspections, they get condition inspections.

To be really pedantic, any aircraft that doesn't have a standard airworthiness certificate gets a "condition inspection within the previous 12 calendar months"!

It's almost impossible to have a discussion here anymore. Not referring to you Paul.

http://www.wordinfo.info/words/images/pedantic-1.jpg

TimTaylor wrote:Not referring to you Paul.

That's OK, Tim. I wear the label proudly.

Pedantic can be good, especially to us newbies.

It reminds me of the old "measure it with a micrometer, mark it with a grease pencil, chop it with an axe" analogy!

Hambone wrote:Pedantic can be good, especially to us newbies.

It was kind of a shock to find that my E-LSA will never be airworthy again!

Eddie, it was never airworthy when it was an S-LSA.

TimTaylor wrote:It's almost impossible to have a discussion here anymore. Not referring to you Paul.

http://www.wordinfo.info/words/images/pedantic-1.jpg

I don't agree. And you will say of course you don't. Discussions are easy when the participants are not unyielding, and get upset when someone doesn't agree with thier views.

3Dreaming wrote: I don't agree.

It's fine that many of us disagree (even on this forum) - as long as we're all respectful about it.

drseti wrote:

3Dreaming wrote: Experimental aircraft don't get Annual inspections, they get condition inspections.

To be really pedantic, any aircraft that doesn't have a standard airworthiness certificate gets a "condition inspection within the previous 12 calendar months"!

To be really really pendantic, it is any aircraft that has other than a standard airworthiness certificate requires a condition inspection. The FAA does regulate aircraft that don't have a standard airworthiness certificate that do not require condition inspections.


Edited to change what I wanted to say.

3Dreaming wrote:

TimTaylor wrote:It's almost impossible to have a discussion here anymore. Not referring to you Paul.

http://www.wordinfo.info/words/images/pedantic-1.jpg

I don't agree. And you will say of course you don't. Discussions are easy when the participants are not unyielding, and get upset when someone doesn't agree with thier views.

their views.

TimTaylor wrote:

3Dreaming wrote:

TimTaylor wrote:It's almost impossible to have a discussion here anymore. Not referring to you Paul.

http://www.wordinfo.info/words/images/pedantic-1.jpg

I don't agree. And you will say of course you don't. Discussions are easy when the participants are not unyielding, and get upset when someone doesn't agree with thier views.

their views.

Sure pick on the guy with a disability. I can't help it if I have a little dyslexic tendency when typing. At least I didn't use there instead of thier.

So I've decided to use ForeFlight for my adventure. I had a Stratux in my CT, but the Sentry and Sentry Mini are looking better to me. The Levil BOM looks great, but seems a bit pricey for what it does.

Anyone using a Sentry or Sentry Mini? https://flywithsentry.com/

drseti wrote:Eddie, it was never airworthy when it was an S-LSA.

Interesting fact!

I had assumed that a Light Sport that left the manufacturer with a Special Light Sport Airworthiness Certificate was “airworthy” as long as it continued to comply with the ASTM specifications, and that only changed when it became EXPERIMENTAL. Confusing, because even my EXPERIMENTAL Sky Arrow still has an “airworthiness” certificate. I was, of course, aware of the “condition for safe flight” language for EXPERIMENTAL Annual Condition Inspection signoffs.

Seems almost intentionally confusing. But thanks for setting me straight.

The FAA definition of Airworthy is: complies with its Type Certificate, and is in a condition for safe flight. So, any aircraft that does not have a TC (that would include SLSA, ELSA, and E-AB) can technically never be airworthy (but must be safe).

Possible corollary: maybe aircraft with a TC can never be safe (but must be airworthy)?