NON aviation parts in NTCA aircraft??

[Boet]

I have owned and flown the same airie for 22 years. I bought here in boxes and bits and pieces, and lovingly rebuilt and modified here back to more than her old glory. As an old generation homebuilder at heart, we took pride in using something strange, non aviation parts to do the job. Some of these "non aviation" parts has been doing their job now for 22 years and well over 1600 hours. I do not deem my aeroplane unsafe. Now the powers to be are growling about "non aviation parts" in NTCA aitcraft. Where does this put the lonely tinkerer, that spends counless nights, weekends and holidays, building his own plane. Fitting a car engine, and even making his own propellor? Will he still be able to register and legally fly his cration?

[Massimo]

Boet it seems there is so much confusion in the industry right now that nobody can even attempt to answer your question.

[Arnulf]

If you look at the bigger picture, then you understand why this all happens. Our brothers are not interested in aviation. Not enough bling that goes with it. There is no enthusiasm for aviation. With all the affirmative action, the CAA has been filled with brothers and sisters that are only there for the job, in no way are they aviation minded people.
Now the brothers and sisters at the CAA sit with a big problem. Every now and then the baas comes to have a look at what the brothers and sisters are doing at the CAA. Unfortunately the baas is generally very unhappy at what he sees. What makes this very unpleasant is that the baas wields a very big stick.
The baas comes in the guise as the American FAA, and ICAO holding inspections. The stick they wield is that if the CAA does not function the way they want it, they can put severe limitations on South African registered aircraft and licensed pilots flying to other ICAO states. Very embarassing!
The FAA and ICAO are primarily concerned with airline operations and aircrew licencing. Not really interested in sport and recreational flying, ie. NTCA aircraft. Our brothers and sisters would only be too happy to rid themselves of the burden and chaos of NTCA aircraft, and focus on keeping the baas happy. So the easy way to do this is by legislating the NTCA scene to death. The next guys in the firing line are the PPLs.
The ideal world for our brothers and sisters would be if they only have to deal with commercial aviation. Oh, by the way, see how active private aviation is in the rest of Africa. In many countries it is plain and simply verboten!

Regards,
Arnulf

[The Agent]

You are right Arnulf and when they are rid of those two cat's then less work for them and more free time.

What will be next on their list Airlines.

[skybound®]

I beg to differ - I think it is perhaps worse.

Micros and NTCA do not form part of the ICAO inspection, hence we cannot blame that. Which means it is more suspect and the problem even deeper than the external forces you have suggested.

We are probably on the firing line. MPL and PPL as NTCA affects both camps.

[Arnulf]

Agent wrote:

You are right Arnulf and when they are rid of those two cat's then less work for them and more free time.

Correct, but the amount of sisters and brothers they employ will shoot up inversely proportional to the amount of work they do.

skybound wrote:

Micros and NTCA do not form part of the ICAO inspection,

Exactly, that is the point. If they can get rid of that chaotic bunch, they only have to focus on the ICAO inspections, and all will be pretty much plain sailing. Airline stuff is clean and clinical, you deal with dudes in pin stripe suits, and everybody bows and scrapes when the all mighty sisters and brothers (also clad in pinstripe suits) pitch for whatever reason. Airliners generally also don't crash, so you don't have to go to funny places in the bundus and pick your nose and figure out what happened, especially if you don't have a clue about aviation, and also couldn't give a shit.

Regards,
Arnulf

[skybound®]

Arnulf - don't wish for things that may happen

CAA may indeed get rid of a large portion of the chaotic bunch. That is what RASA may at some stage take over. With what is happening I would consider that to be a positive step. :D

[Duck Rogers]

...... filled with brothers and sisters that are only there for the job....

Quite right. Not there for the wêk, only the job

[John Young]

Now the powers to be are growling about "non aviation parts" in NTCA aircraft.

Hi Guys,

Just exactly “When does a part become classified as an aviation part”?

The Bombardier Rotax 503 and 582 engines were developed by British Racing Products (BRP) for use in snow mobiles. In my opinion then they are no more aviation than VW.

The wheel bearings that we use are general commercial and the NGK BR8ES plugs are specifically not for flying.

The same goes for the Mercedes Benz fuel filter and the tyre manufacturers never had microlights in mind in the first place. And so on …..

If you buy a part at Midas, it’s “non-aviation”. If you buy the same part at Solo Wings, is it then an “aviation part”?

Perhaps then, only my Warp Drive prop and some instruments specific to flying are “aviation parts”. What else

Regards
John ZU-CIB

[skybound®]

Perhaps then, only my Warp Drive prop and some instruments specific to flying are “aviation parts”.

Warp was specifically made for movie wind machines Please remove from aircraft immediately

[Morph]

Yeah, even though officially Rotax recommend only NGK BR8ES for use in their "aviation engines that can stop at any time and therefore should not be used in anything that aviates" NGK say "not a F@k , don't use our products they are not recommended for flying" even though they are more than happy for you to buy 4 from them every 25hours for "non-disclosed uses"

They are all scared that some darwin award winner's family is going to sue them.