I took these photos the other day.
Is there some justifiable human factor e.g. somebody just got a PPL and thus doesn’t know anything about maintenance, and either bought the plane without a prebuy or bought into a syndicate in which everyone is the same? The aircraft is a PA28 Arrow…. G-reg.
I’d be quite comfortable flying that……………………… Because I’d be 100% confident that the gear would never go up and it would just be a fixed gear aircraft 
Is it actually flying? Or just a ramp mummy?
Bit of WD40 and it will be fine.
Is it actually flying? Or just a ramp mummy?
It is actually flying.
Well, it was on the ground when I took the photo
I wouldn’t post a windup post from some graveyard
Bit of WD40 and it will be fine.
Prob99 that’s how it got there, but my Q was on the human side of it. It is a genuine Q.
Peter wrote:
but my Q was on the human side of it. It is a genuine Q.
And my genuine answer would be: No. If it is a bit dirty or greasy or the paint comes off I wouldn’t mind (otherwise I could not fly as an instructor ) but rust and corrosion like that? No way. I would not even step into a car which looks like that… even if my soon 18 year old Fiat has some spots which come close.
If it passes the annual inspection… shouldn’t it be OK?
I think it’s a UK thing, and I’m not surprised. When I was a mechanic in the air Force, we had NATO aircraft from many countries coming and leaving. Norwegian aircraft was nice and clean, and so where most others. Swedish Viggen also, even though they were “nutreal” during the cold war The US aircraft were always super clean, real first class condition. But the UK planes, full of oil and dirt and corrosion, they looked awful. We used to joke about it, and it was legendary. That’s the way they liked it, the veterans told us.
The question is how a plane like that can pass an annual or a CAA inspection. Which maintenance signs off something like this.
