Message-ID: <367C4CD8.40EA@ibm.net>
Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1998 19:03:20 -0600
From: Snowbird <snbird@ibm.net>
Reply-To: snbird@ibm.net
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.student
Subject: Re: Carb Heat Comment
References: <367C294A.429AF37@catalina-inter.net> <367C375E.9FA91BFC@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
NNTP-Posting-Host: 129.37.111.225
X-Trace: 20 Dec 1998 01:55:53 GMT, 129.37.111.225
Organization: IBM.NET
Lines: 26
X-Notice: Items posted that violate the IBM.NET Acceptable Use Policy
X-Notice: should be reported to postmaster@ibm.net
X-Complaints-To: postmaster@ibm.net
Path: news.jprc.com!dca1-feed2.news.digex.net!dca1-hub1.news.digex.net!digex!cyclone.news.idirect.com!island.idirect.com!newsm.ibm.net!ibm.net!news1.ibm.net!129.37.111.225
Xref: news.jprc.com rec.aviation.student:42377

njoy_life@hotmail.com wrote:

> In God we trust, Check everything else.

Well, it sounds good, but in practice "checking everything
else" on even a small aircraft takes several hours of removing
access covers, cowling, and interior and then a couple of days 
of crawling in, under, and around peering and touching and 
testing.

Makes a short hop around the pattern a touch impractical, not?

My point:
You really *have* to trust someone else (the mechanics and the
owner) when you fly a small aircraft.  Yet how many people who
rent aircraft take the time to get to know the mechanics?  Or
who continue to rent even when it's clear the owner (manager's)
philosophy is penurious towards maintenance?  Many of the superficial
signs of penury (cracked interior panels, shabby upholstery) don't
matter a whit wrt safety while an aircraft with nice looking paint
and interior may have been given a "paper annual" where ADs were 
not really complied with etc.  It's very hard to tell.

Snowbird


