Welcome! Becoming a registered user of ShortWingPipers.Org is free and easy! Click the "Register" link found in the upper right hand corner of this screen. It's easy and you can then join the fun posting and learning about Short Wing Pipers!
Funny. Then does that include the Ford Tractor store too ?? They don't have Ford Tractor Stores and NAPA stores in Scottsdale, they have Porshe and Mercedes ones though.
Anyway I think I will stick to the PMA route. It really isn't that hard.
That's your choice and if you want to go that direction I'll support you in it.
I get frustrated when other people are acting within the regulations but are argued against their actions because of personal preference, loosely veiled in quotes of other, non-applicable regulations.
Right, there's nothing wrong with using a part that is stamped FAA/PMA, but if I can put in a landing light that's not marked up 300% I'm going to use an "acceptable part" and use the rest for gas. That goes the same for my wheel bearings too.
Funny. Then does that include the Ford Tractor store too ?? They don't have Ford Tractor Stores and NAPA stores in Scottsdale, they have Porshe and Mercedes ones though.
Anyway I think I will stick to the PMA route. It really isn't that hard.
Hard? No! Expensive..Yep! I do not and would not condone using non-aircraft parts in many places. But, when it comes to a light bulb or something such as that, I am going to put in the $6.00 bulb (acceptable part) and use the surplus funds to buy the fuel to get me to breakfast!
It is much the same with the electrical systems in our early planes. Does anyone actually believe that there is some magic difference in the Delco generator or regulator that came attached to our planes in the 1950's? What about the trim handle that is surely the same part serving as a window crank for a '48 DeSoto?
It all comes down to common sense that keeps us safe. Not stacks of inane regulations promulgated by bureaucrats.
If the FAA in general and inspectors in particular put as much thought into this issue as has been placed in this thread, they probably still wouldn't get it right.
Hard? No! Expensive..Yep! I do not and would not condone using non-aircraft parts in many places. But, when it comes to a light bulb or something such as that, I am going to put in the $6.00 bulb (acceptable part) and use the surplus funds to buy the fuel to get me to breakfast!
It is much the same with the electrical systems in our early planes. Does anyone actually believe that there is some magic difference in the Delco generator or regulator that came attached to our planes in the 1950's? What about the trim handle that is surely the same part serving as a window crank for a '48 DeSoto?
It all comes down to common sense that keeps us safe. Not stacks of inane regulations promulgated by bureaucrats.
OK, Attached for the conservation of Bits and Bytes, is a text treatise that summarizes and makes somewhat editorial comments relative to TSO and PMA, and TCDS issues. Thanks to all for the comments on the thread:
OK, Attached for the conservation of Bits and Bytes, is a text treatise that summarizes and makes somewhat editorial comments relative to TSO and PMA, and TCDS issues. Thanks to all for the comments on the thread:
Still not applicable to the subject of this thread, changing the landing light. If no requirement for certification exists, why would I need to justify whether a part meets any sort of certification requirements?
I can see if we were talking about the position lights mentioned earlier in this thread, where in CAR 3 a certification performance standard was clearly identified. Maybe I want to install something that meets that performance standard but isn't specifically certified that it does so. Then your text file would be applicable. But we're not talking about that.
We're talking about a landing light, which must "be acceptable." There's no certification performance standard in CAR 3 for an acceptable landing light, so its up to the owner and IA to determine what acceptable is. If it was my plane and my IA determined that only a TSO part manufactured by a PMA to meet regulations that did not exist when my airplane was certified was an "acceptable" landing light, I'd either get a new IA and install a light that provided sufficient light for landing or I'd install a TSO part manufactured by a PMA. Either choice is legal under CAR 3, and either choice should be acceptable. Applying regulations that don't exist to situations that don't require them makes zero sense.
I hate to burst your argumentative "GOTCHA" based bubble, but you really just illustrated my exact point. CAR 3 said use an acceptable light, if the light you found was determined to be acceptable CAR 3 was satisfied. If your IA replaced it with an unacceptable light then he didn't comply with CAR 3 because he used an unacceptable part, didn't he ? Anyway if it makes you happy that you think you nailed me then that is OK by me.
I hate to burst your argumentative "GOTCHA" based bubble, but you really just illustrated my exact point. CAR 3 said use an acceptable light, if the light you found was determined to be acceptable CAR 3 was satisfied. If your IA replaced it with an unacceptable light then he didn't comply with CAR 3 because he used an unacceptable part, didn't he ? Anyway if it makes you happy that you think you nailed me then that is OK by me.
Not trying to nail anyone here, I'm happily married to a beautiful woman
Back to my point though, in CAR 3 "acceptable" as it relates to landing lights wasn't defined. You can either use common sense to define what "acceptable" means, or you can use newer regulations. Either should be acceptable options, driven by the opinions of the folks actually buying/replacing the parts. Requiring someone to use a regulation that didn't exist to determine a part's acceptability is where my beef lies. Not with you specifically as a person, so my apologies if I came across that way.
Just got off the phone with a maintenance inspector at my FSDO. He can find no regulation that he can hang his hat on to violate me for installing said landing light in a CAR 3 airplane. To quote him "CAR 3 definition of acceptable type was a part you got at NAPA".
Ill take what Steve's PMI said and get on with life.
Thanks: 
Likes: 
Re: Changing Landing Light?
Originally Posted by Homer Landreth
Reply With Quote
