Revalidation of used parts e.g. removed from other aircraft

It’s a pity however that some contributing people have left EuroGA.

People leave for all sorts of reasons e.g.

• they get bored
• they lost their license/medical
• they stopped flying due to family pressures
• it is a moderated forum (in a particular country, any moderation is an extremely hot topic, so their national forum is run to appear unmoderated so e.g. they leave spam in place, while having several pilots with covert mod privileges) and this was tied to the biggest toy chucking out of the pram cases
• they came here from an aggressive forum (most of the others, in fact) and don’t like the fact they can’t do the same here
• it is insufficiently moderated (several left because a very high volume drivel poster would toss in posts all over the place)
• one guy left because a very high volume drivel poster would toss in a post after almost every one of his (so he claimed)
• it has a mod who also posts (I did invite that complainant to pay the salary of a non involved moderator)
• it isn’t a type specific “church of scientology” site
• they like to attack me, knowing I can’t respond because what I know I got by private communication, but eventually I do have to react
• they find the content too technical (hence we invite them to contribute what they like to see more of) and this is a valid point
• not enough VFR (a valid point, which is why VFR contributions are really welcome)
• too male (the solution is for the ladies, and there are quite a few reading EuroGA, to start posting) and this is a valid point

Sometimes, one could be running a kindergarten. But I assure you most people who do move on do so for pretty boring reasons. And most of them come back after a while. Also most of those who “leave” are on the forum afterwards; they just don’t post. And only one poster has been banned thus far. So life is a lot less exciting than you might think.

The bit about me being negative on French pilots (in particular) is pure bullshit – chucked at me by a few people, one of whom invited supporting responses and got none. I wasn’t surprised, given the amount of stuff I have by email on that and other topics an how much of the same has been posted here before by others. It is hilarious that when I write that some 90% of UK PPLs give up within a year (some CAA data) nobody is bothered.

Like I said before, we can implement a Paypal donate button, and when the donations reach say €30k a year, you can have a mod who doesn’t post and just quietly deletes stuff and occassionally bans people.

Happy new year to all.

I have to say I find Jessie, wigglyamp and A&C posts very informative.

And if they do get any extra work from euroga I would of thought it’s because people are impressed with not only how knowledgeable they are also how helpful they are.

I don’t for one minute see them advertising on euroga.

Bathman wrote:

I have to say I find Jessie, wigglyamp and A&C posts very informative.

And if they do get any extra work from euroga I would of thought it’s because people are impressed with not only how knowledgeable they are also how helpful they are.

I second that. Thank you for your contributions and for providing some balance in the EASA viewpoints. Thanks to Michael as well for taking the time to contribute.

By accident I met a guy who has a complete tail of a crash landed SR22, same year as mine and only some serial numbers apart. The elevators, rudder and many other parts are in perfect condition, not even light dents, there’s also the pitch trim motor and many small parts of course.

Could these parts be declared airworthy spare parts? How does that work?

See M.A.613:

Thanks a lot! Just what i was looking for.

I merged a couple of threads on the same topic.

I can see many clauses in the above why this MA613 concession is worthless in real life. For example

The organisation should ensure that the component was removed from the aircraft by an appropriately qualified person.

The aircraft component may only be deemed serviceable if the last flight operation with the component fitted revealed no faults on that component or related system.

The aircraft record should be researched for any unusual events that could affect the serviceability of the aircraft component such as involvement in accidents, incidents, heavy landings or lightning strikes. Under no circumstances may an EASA Form 1 be issued in accordance with this paragraph 2.6 if it is suspected that the aircraft component has been subjected to extremes of stress, temperatures or immersion which could affect its operation.

A maintenance history record should be available for all used serialised aircraft components.

each separately render most aircraft parting-out sources worthless.

It seems to me that this procedure is useful only if the donor aircraft is being dismantled at an EASA 145 facility which also used to maintain it.

So I am sure other processes are also used in reality – as described earlier in this thread and perhaps not too different from the N-reg process

This is also relevant.

I have been struggling to get a specific door latch part from Daher for my TB10. They have it in their pipeline, but production keeps getting delayed. Meanwhile I found several complete assemblies on eBay, and I asked my mechanic if I could purchase one of these and use the relevant part. I was informed that this is not possible, because eBay is not an approved EASA supplier and I cannot supply parts directly for the same reason. I was very surprised by this, and wonder how the used aircraft parts market functions if this is the case.

I asked about this, and used the example of supply problems such as the infamous V35 ruddervator, which at this point can only be obtained from a salvaged aircraft. I was told that whoever buys the rights to supply parts is obligated to do so, yet I hear stories (like the ruddervator) where this isn’t happening. Can someone shed light on this whole situation?

dutch_flyer wrote:

eBay is not an approved EASA supplier

This is totally irrelevant there is no such requirement in part-ML. A requirement for an EASA form 1 could in principle be relevant, but if the parts on eBay are original TB10 parts, it should be possible to use them as owner-approved parts even with the recent restrictions.