Guest pokey Posted October 17, 2016 Report Share Posted October 17, 2016 (edited) The law judge concluded, among other things, that respondent, as alleged, had replaced the life-limit expired TT pins from helicopter N62361 with TT pins from helicopter N22SP, and he had installed the worn out pins from helicopter N62361 into helicopter N22SP. He further concluded that respondent had performed this maintenance without making required entries in the records of either helicopter and without updating helicopter N62361’s maintenance records to indicate the current life status of the pins taken from helicopter N22SP, that is, the number of hours remaining before they, too, would require replacement. i just realized that some may think these are MY words, NO ! they are the words of "the administrator" (you know, the "authority" that we all live by.(and try to avoid at all cost,, why? well read),,,,,,,,,,,,,, were these TT pins worn out? or time expired,,, oh ? they must have, yes. Any helicopter mechanic that is worth his can of beans knows the difference between a worn out part and one that looks brand new and has 'timed out'..... again,, my title of this post,,: blah, blah blaaah Edited October 17, 2016 by pokey Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.