If it works, fair enough.
That mag has one interesting article near the end which says that paper air filters are likely to become impermeable to air when they get wet.
That is quite an interesting revelation, especially given that I nearly installed an STC for the K&N air filter replacement some years ago, and these use paper elements!
Peter wrote:
I am not going to spend time finding out whether your email is really bogus so if it is, I suggest you change it.
It is NOT! I’m starting having doubts if I`m a robot now 
BTW, Peter, thank you for your hospitality…
Without putting too fine a point on it, BF, the problem with bogus email addresses is that if they get an email sent to them, not only the email (obviously) doesn’t get delivered but the sender gets blacklisted, which is really nice (not) for the wider community here which then finds that PMs etc do not get delivered. If you know something about SPF, DKIM, RBL, etc, you will know… Accordingly we remove such email addresses, which has the secondary effect that the person cannot login anymore. I am not going to spend time finding out whether your email is really bogus so if it is, I suggest you change it.
Peter wrote:
BTW, Bingo_Fuel, looking at your email address I very much doubt you will ever get any forum notifications or PMs delivered, and it’s no use me emailing you about it
Thx for the Heads-up but I have control
If you take it to a court, sure
If I got busted for busting CAS and it wasn’t my fault, I would obviously opt for the court. But what if you can’t afford a good lawyer?
It’s a bit like tax investigations. HMRC doesn’t want you to take it to the Commissioners because they might lose, whereas without that they will get a nice fat settlement from you with a 100% certainty, and the whole thing will leave a nasty taste in your mouth which is the other main objective
But even if “guilty until proven innocent”, once you’ve shown an avionics fault, you’re proven innocent, no?
Based on my own experience, as I wrote in the link above, I think the 2 or 3 people in charge of deciding the pilot’s fate are not particularly interested in discussing the details…
Because the current system in the UK wrt airspace infringement is “guilty until proven innocent” once it has been decided that your infringement is significant.
But why would you be even “sentenced” to doing the tutorial and exam if it turned out to be an avionics problem and the pilot was not actually busting anything? And transponder problems do happen, I was once called by Ronaldsway asking about another aircraft based at our airfield (apparently Scottish Control were trying to get hold of them) after the transponder in their Cherokee 180 had somehow reported them at FL380…
