PLT OPERATED AN SMA SEL WITHOUT A FERRY PERMIT AFTER IT HAD BEEN GNDED FOR A WING FLAP PROB. SUBSEQUENTLY; THE RPTR CARRIED SKY DIVERS FOR HIRE WITHOUT THE ACFT BEING SIGNED OFF FOR FLAP REPAIR NOT ACCEPTABLE TO THE FAA; STRIPPED THE PAINT OFF THE ACFT WITHOUT SUPERVISION FROM A MECH AND THEN FLEW THE ACFT WITHOUT A CURRENT WT AND BAL DATA.

Narrative

ON MAY/MON/95 I WAS HIRED BY A PARACHUTE CTR AS A JUMP PLT. I WAS ASKED TO FLY THE COMPANY C182 FROM MENDOTA TO THE MADERA ARPT TO HAVE A MECH REPAIR THE INOP FLAPS. I FOUND OUT LATER THAT THE FAA HAD GNDED THE AIRPLANE BECAUSE OF THIS. I WAS NOT SHOWN OR TOLD ABOUT THIS. I WAS TOLD THAT I DIDN'T NEED ANY PAPER WORK (SUCH AS A FERRY PERMIT) EXCEPT FOR THE ACFT LOGS; SO I COMPLETED THE FLT. ON MAY/FRI/95 I WAS ASKED BY MY EMPLOYER TO RETURN THE AIRPLANE TO THE MENDOTA ARPT. THE MECH REPAIRED THE FLAPS AND SAID IT WAS GOOD TO GO; BUT I NEVER VERIFIED THIS IN THE ACFT'S LOGBOOKS. ON MAY/SUN/95 THE AIRPLANE WAS FLOWN AND PAX WERE CARRIED FOR THE PURPOSE OF PARACHUTING. ON MAY/TUE/95 MY EMPLOYER ASKED ME TO STRIP THE POINT OFF THE AIRPLANE AND INSISTED THAT I COULD DO IT LEGALLY. BEING THAT MY EMPLOYER IS A LAWYER I FELT HE HAD A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF AVIATION LAW THAN I; SO I PROCEEDED TO STRIP THE AIRPLANE. ON MAY/WED/95; I ASKED TO TAPE N-NUMBERS ON THE ACFT SO IT COULD BE LEGALLY FLOWN BACK TO MADERA. WHEN I ASKED ABOUT THE ACFT'S AIRWORTHINESS IN REGARDS TO THE STRIPPED PAINT AND THE ACFT'S N-NUMBERS; I WAS TOLD THAT THE FAA WAS AWARE OF THIS AND APPROVED THE ACFT TO BE FERRIED AND THE PERMIT WAS FAXED TO THE MECH. WHEN I DID GET TO MADERA; THE FERRY PERMIT WAS FOR THE FOLLOWING DAY. IN ADDITION; WHEN I QUESTIONED THE MGR ON THESE ISSUES HE ADDED THAT THE PLANE WASN'T SUPPOSED TO HAVE LEFT MADERA TO START WITH; AS THE ACFT HAD NOT YET BEEN REPAIRED TO THE FAA'S SPECS. ON MAY/THU/95 I TALKED WITH A NON-LCL SAFETY INSPECTOR (FAA) TO ADVISE ME ON THE FARS REGARDING THESE ISSUES. NOT ONLY WERE THE FERRY PERMITS REQUIRED TO BE IN THE ACFT; BUT THE FAA'S GNDING NOTICE WAS ALSO REQUIRED TO BE SHOWN TO THE PLT. IN ADDITION; THE N-NUMBERS WERE NOT THE CORRECT SIZE WHEN I TAPED THEM ON THE ACFT AND I VIOLATED PART 43 WHEN I STRIPPED; THE PAINT WITHOUT THE SUPERVISION OF A MECH AND ITS NEW WT AND BAL AND ITS RETURN TO SVC AUTH. MY JUDGEMENT WAS EXTREMELY POOR. I WILL NEVER TAKE THE WORD OF AN EXPERT WITHOUT FIRST CHKING THE LEGALITY ISSUES FIRST. A CONTRIBUTING FACTOR TO MY POOR JUDGEMENT WAS MY UNEMPLOYMENT PRIOR TO THIS JOB. BECAUSE I WANTED TO PLEASE MY EMPLOYER AND OBTAIN A PAYCHK I RISKED MY CERTIFICATES; FLYING RECORD; AND LIVES. NO JOB IS WORTH THIS RISK; SO I HAVE QUIT THE JOB. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: RPTR HAS NOT BEEN CONTACTED BY THE FAA AS YET; APPROX 3 1/2 MONTHS AFTER THE INCIDENT AND HAS TEMPORARY EMPLOYMENT FLYING FOR ANOTHER OPERATOR. HE LEARNED OF HIS MANY INFRACTIONS BY STUDYING THE FARS. HE PLANS TO BE VERY CAREFUL IN THE FUTURE. HE NOW BELIEVES THAT HE SHOULD HAVE KNOWN BETTER AS AN INSTRUCTOR PLT.