dtuuri
Final Approach
Can you think of something that might affect airworthiness, then? Substitute that. Maybe a hole in the muffler caused during a botched mag check?
If it's a calendar item, sure. Tire pressures, for one thing.
dtuuri
A question for the FAR Gods
- Thread starter Tom-D
- Start date
dtuuri
My answer ... it depends. Every situation is different. As much as I like or anyone else likes a black or white answer, I don't think there is one in this case. I would be cautious about such a situation, so I would err on the conservative side.
My licence, my judgement, the consequences are mine to hold.
I can see both sides to this scenario. Not sure there is a black or white answer to it that I can readily see.
Why not pose this to the FAA legal counsel for their opinion? Or maybe Mike Busch - he seems to have a pretty good reputation about such matters.
Tom-D
Taxi to Parking
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2005
- Messages
- 34,740
- Display Name
Display name:
Tom-D
In our part 91 little aircraft I can't think of a single thing that would deteriorate to a point of unairworthiness in a month.
Tire pressure? that's an owner do, when it happens.
When I see a tire that is leaking to the point of airworthiness during my inspection, I'm fixing it.
Tom-D
Taxi to Parking
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2005
- Messages
- 34,740
- Display Name
Display name:
Tom-D
Have you ever taken more that one day to complete an annual? what harm does it do to inspect in segments, and allow the owner to fly between those segments?
Checkout_my_Six
Touchdown! Greaser!
because the operation of the aircraft just nullifies your previous inspection.......
Do we really need to eliminate all opportunity for the person signing off the annual to exercise judgement by getting the Chief Counsel involved? In the past, we've gotten saddled with some pretty ridiculous de facto rule making as a result of people pursuing that route.
Tom-D
Taxi to Parking
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2005
- Messages
- 34,740
- Display Name
Display name:
Tom-D
I have the same qualifications as Mike. he is simply a A&P-IA like me.
I don't like to have FSDO spot light things like this. Would you like to have the FAA over react like they have on other occasions. They could say that any and all inspections must take 2 months to complete. that would drop your usage to 10 months per year.
Tom-D
Taxi to Parking
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2005
- Messages
- 34,740
- Display Name
Display name:
Tom-D
Got a reference for that?because the operation of the aircraft just nullifies your previous inspection.......
What previous inspection, you wouldn't sign off the inspection until it's complete. So there is no previous inspection.
Checkout_my_Six
Touchdown! Greaser!
no....but I got a phone number for ya.
Tom-D
Taxi to Parking
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2005
- Messages
- 34,740
- Display Name
Display name:
Tom-D
Be careful who you call, you might not like what they say.no....but I got a phone number for ya.
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2005
- Messages
- 11,210
- Location
- Lone Jack, MO
- Display Name
Display name:
Greg Bockelman
GlennAB1
Ejection Handle Pulled
- Joined
- Oct 5, 2015
- Messages
- 4,889
- Location
- Home will always be Vandalia, OH
- Display Name
Display name:
GlennAB1
One month?
In Jim's scenario the "motor" annual inspection could conceivably go two years until it's accomplished again. Do you think that's what the FAA has in mind for an "Annual"?
Last edited:
FastEddieB
Touchdown! Greaser!
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2013
- Messages
- 11,576
- Location
- Lenoir City, TN/Mineral Bluff, GA
- Display Name
Display name:
Fast Eddie B
This morning I emailed a DAR whose opinion and knowledge I respect on this topic.
He summarized it thusly:
*When an annual INSPECTION (or for an EAB, ELSA, or SLSA, a condition INSPECTION done annually) is begun, the aircraft is officially "removed from service" in the words of the FAA.
*The person authorized to do the INSPECTION (A&P/IA for standard category; A&P or certificated repairman for EAB, ELSA, or SLSA) must do so personally; that is he/she is not allowed to delegate the INSPECTION tasks to somebody else.
*Once the airplane is "removed from service," it may not be legally flown until it is "returned to service" by making the appropriate logbook entry.
*The only person authorized to "return the aircraft to service" (here again, FAA words) is the person who is authorized and who performed the INSPECTION.
He said references for the above are “scattered through Parts 43, 65, and 91”.
He summarized it thusly:
*When an annual INSPECTION (or for an EAB, ELSA, or SLSA, a condition INSPECTION done annually) is begun, the aircraft is officially "removed from service" in the words of the FAA.
*The person authorized to do the INSPECTION (A&P/IA for standard category; A&P or certificated repairman for EAB, ELSA, or SLSA) must do so personally; that is he/she is not allowed to delegate the INSPECTION tasks to somebody else.
*Once the airplane is "removed from service," it may not be legally flown until it is "returned to service" by making the appropriate logbook entry.
*The only person authorized to "return the aircraft to service" (here again, FAA words) is the person who is authorized and who performed the INSPECTION.
He said references for the above are “scattered through Parts 43, 65, and 91”.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2005
- Messages
- 11,210
- Location
- Lone Jack, MO
- Display Name
Display name:
Greg Bockelman
Which is almost exactly what I said in post # 46. Nice to know someone “official” confirms my view in the matter.
timwinters
Ejection Handle Pulled
Interesting, I interpret this to be saying the exact opposite of what you said in post #46.
It sounds to me like he’s saying once you start an annual inspection it can’t be flown until it’s completed. What am I missing?
Additionally, Tom said he doesn’t plan to make a logbook entry until the inspection is completed. So how is the plane repeatedly "returned to service" and flown during the process?
Checkout_my_Six
Touchdown! Greaser!
yes...which is what I said....so, I'm right and Tom is wrong.
Fast:
Interesting point of view your DAR has. But I cannot recall ever seeing such reference(s) to “remove from service” in 43, 65, or 91. In an AD from Part 39 sure. Now if your DAR is quoting from his yearly DAR recurrent handbook that might be possible. While that handbook would be the “words of the FAA,” at best they would be only acceptable data and not regulatory. If you can, ask your DAR for one specific FAR reference.
From a maintenance standpoint Part 91 has what needs to be done, 65 has who can do it, and 43 has how it must be done. So we can remove 65 from the equation.
If your friend is implying “remove from service” is regulatory then it would apply to all inspections regardless of operations type. And that would in effect apply/invalidate a number of OEM programs especially those with tolerance windows that permit flying and inspecting with in specific limits. If it was in fact specifically directed to annual inspections it would need to be part of 91.409(a)(1) or 43 Appendix D and it is not there.
As for experimental conditional inspections Part 43 is not applicable at all.
Also, I’m sure you were just paraphrasing your friend, but an aircraft is not “returned to service” by a logbook entry but rather is “approved for return to service” by the entry. The next actual flight by a pilot officially returns the aircraft to service. In some cases the pilot must enter “returned to service” in the logbook after the flight per 91.407.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2005
- Messages
- 11,210
- Location
- Lone Jack, MO
- Display Name
Display name:
Greg Bockelman
The key word is "inspection". Inspecting doesn't take all that much time. It's the maintenance that takes the time. Do the maintenance in stages throughout the month and at the end all it takes is a relatively quick look for the actual inspection and you are good to go. That is what I was trying to say.
In Tom's scenario, each maintenance item would require a sign off for the work done. I don't see a way around that.
Greg:
I think in Tom’s original post he did state there would be a sign off for each portion.
In my opinion, I don’t see any regulatory issue that would prevent complying with an annual over the course of a month provided it was the calendar month due. Outside of that I think you would be treading in a gray area.
If an IA were to start on the 1st day of the annual due month and made an entry:
“Performed inspection items per Part 43 Appendix D(b) Fuselage and Hull group. No defects noted. TT: 123.4; 10/01/2017. Mike Mechanic AP/IA 1234567”
Then continued through the month as the aircraft flew:
“Performed inspection items per Part 43 Appendix D(c) Cabin and Cockpit group. Replaced torn pax seat belt with P/N 09876 belt. TT: 130.4; 10/07/2017. Mike Mechanic AP/IA 1234567”
Etc.. Etc…
Then on November 1st made his:
“I certify that this aircraft has been inspected in accordance with an annual inspection and was determined to be in airworthy condition. TT: 140.1; 11/01/2017….”
I don’t see anything that would prevent that. And since there is no apparent direct FAR violation, it would fall to the Feds to supply the burden of proof it wasn’t legal.
GlennAB1
Ejection Handle Pulled
- Joined
- Oct 5, 2015
- Messages
- 4,889
- Location
- Home will always be Vandalia, OH
- Display Name
Display name:
GlennAB1
Thats essentially a progressive inspection.
Checkout_my_Six
Touchdown! Greaser!
yup....we had that discussion a few pages ago.
Glenn:
Not by definition per 91.409(d): “The frequency and detail of the progressive inspection shall provide for the complete inspection of the aircraft within each 12 calendar months.” It doesn't state within one calendar month.
This is one of those anomalies in the FARs and I doubt any current blue badge would understand it.
If the last annual was signed on 10/01/2016, per the FARs it is due on 10/31/2017. However, the IA could start the annual on the 1st or the 31st and still be legal. So the question is what specific FAA guidance prevents him from starting on the 1st and finishing on the 31st---if he meets the requirements of Part 43 and approves the aircraft for return to service after each inspection event and the aircraft flies?
Part 91 is an operational regulation so the pilot doesn’t get busted as the annual is due on the 31st. Part 43 is a performance regulation but the IA doesn’t get busted because he performs maintenance/inspection per 43.13 and signs off per 43.9 or 43.11. He also gets a little backup from 43.15(a)(1): “Perform the inspection so as to determine whether the aircraft, or portion(s) thereof under inspection, meets all applicable airworthiness requirements…”
As I said before, I don’t see any advantage to do this or to attempt outside the annual due month, but definitely a unique opportunity to push the envelope.
GlennAB1
Ejection Handle Pulled
- Joined
- Oct 5, 2015
- Messages
- 4,889
- Location
- Home will always be Vandalia, OH
- Display Name
Display name:
GlennAB1
I didn't say it was a legal progressive inspection.
Tarheelpilot
Final Approach
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2010
- Messages
- 7,524
- Location
- North Carolina once again.
- Display Name
Display name:
Tarheelpilot
The issue I have is not the time that passes, it’s the time the aircraft flys between inspection events. Ask yourself why progressive inspections were created. That might help you answer the question you’ve asked without having to find chapter and verse guidance in the regs
The potential answers from the FAA to this scenario do not bother me in the least!
timwinters
Ejection Handle Pulled
Ummm...no he didn’t. He said:
And:
And the DAR clearly said once the inspection starts the aircraft is out of service until the inspection is complete and the aircraft is signed off. I don’t see any gray area here unless I’m really misinterpreting something in his opinion.
timwinters
Ejection Handle Pulled
Except that he’s lying when he makes that last logbook entry because the plane had been flown 16.7 hours since he made his first entry so he can’t possibly determine that the airplane was airworthy on 11/1.
It likely doesn’t matter until something happens but, heaven forbid, should something happen, I wouldn’t want my azz hanging over that fence waiting to be chopped off. I suspect the feds would have your azz for lunch...and dinner...
Tim:
I’ll answer all your questions in one post.
1) “Ummm...no he didn’t.”
Yes he did:
“I start an annual on the first of the month. I do the engine group of required items of FAR 43-D.
This aircraft's annual does not expire until the end of the month.
Can I release this aircraft return to flight status?”
To release an aircraft to flight status requires a signature…
2) “And the DAR clearly said once the inspection starts the aircraft is out of service until the inspection is complete and the aircraft is signed off. I don’t see any gray area here unless I’m really misinterpreting something in his opinion.”
And who is a DAR? Only a designee who’s very limited abilities do not include making official interpretations or opinions of the FARs outside his function codes. A DAR’s abilities are very specific FAA authorizations--unlike the FAA privileges we enjoy under our pilot and mechanics certificates--that require pre-approval and oversight by an FAA employee from either the local FSDO or district MIDO offices.
A DAR can lose his authorizations at the whim of the FAA. Pilots and mechanics must go through a regulatory process to have their privileges suspended or revoked. But you can voluntarily surrender them at any time.
So he is not the Administrator when it comes to our discussion here. His opinion, while interesting, carries no more clout than anyone's here, unless you’ve hired him to issue or renew an airworthiness certificate or any other requirement for which he is authorized. Nothing more
3)” Except that he’s lying when he makes that last logbook entry because the plane had been flown 16.7 hours since he made his first entry so he can’t possibly determine that the airplane was airworthy on 11/1.”
You are quoting flight hours in a discussion on a calendar month inspection. If the last annual was completed on the 1st and is due on the 31st and the aircraft operates 744 hours that month, what’s the difference. That is my whole point in this exercise. The flight hours do not affect the annual within its due month provided he records the work per Part 43. So how is that falsifying a record?
4)”It likely doesn’t matter until something happens but, heaven forbid, should something happen, I wouldn’t want my azz hanging over that fence waiting to be chopped off. I suspect the feds would have your azz for lunch...and dinner...”
The whole point was not the “what if” but “why not.” It would make for an interesting conversation with the local ASI on why it couldn’t be done. Nothing more.
Tom-D
Taxi to Parking
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2005
- Messages
- 34,740
- Display Name
Display name:
Tom-D
Show me the DAR's reference, where it requires the aircraft be out of service.
Tom-D
Taxi to Parking
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2005
- Messages
- 34,740
- Display Name
Display name:
Tom-D
I did not say that. I said any maintenance that was done would be documented
The Inspection would be signed off when completed.
The DAR quoted here is mistaken in reading the FARs.
Ask the DAR if any inspection can be stopped/by one inspector and finished by another, and how that is documented?
GlennAB1
Ejection Handle Pulled
- Joined
- Oct 5, 2015
- Messages
- 4,889
- Location
- Home will always be Vandalia, OH
- Display Name
Display name:
GlennAB1
So, when does the 100 hr. clock start?
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2005
- Messages
- 11,210
- Location
- Lone Jack, MO
- Display Name
Display name:
Greg Bockelman
For Tim and Tom and anyone else:
Let me clarify what I was trying to say. An inspection is an inspection. Open things up and have a look see to see if everything is still within specs. Granted, on an engine, things like a compression check has to be done, but if anything needs to be fixed, that falls under the category of maintenance.
In Tom’s original post, after having gone back and re-read it, what he proposes is probable not legal by the letter of the law, but if he logs it as maintenance and returns the aircraft to service after each event, that would be legal. At the end of the month, if he does the inspection and has the final look see and THEN signs off the annual, I think that would be legal.
Let me clarify what I was trying to say. An inspection is an inspection. Open things up and have a look see to see if everything is still within specs. Granted, on an engine, things like a compression check has to be done, but if anything needs to be fixed, that falls under the category of maintenance.
In Tom’s original post, after having gone back and re-read it, what he proposes is probable not legal by the letter of the law, but if he logs it as maintenance and returns the aircraft to service after each event, that would be legal. At the end of the month, if he does the inspection and has the final look see and THEN signs off the annual, I think that would be legal.
Tom-D
Taxi to Parking
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2005
- Messages
- 34,740
- Display Name
Display name:
Tom-D
How/ where does that LOI state that an annual must be completed once started and the aircraft not be used during the inspection.
GlennAB1
Ejection Handle Pulled
- Joined
- Oct 5, 2015
- Messages
- 4,889
- Location
- Home will always be Vandalia, OH
- Display Name
Display name:
GlennAB1
Greg, obviously, there are people doing it that way without repercussions.
Tom-D
Taxi to Parking
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2005
- Messages
- 34,740
- Display Name
Display name:
Tom-D
Nailed it !
all maintenance completed was logged as it was done.
when complete the annual was signed off.
Your maintenance records on 34v are a prime example, all the work completed as the restoration came first, then the annual. To be legal to fly.
Bottom line here is many believe that an aircraft must be down Then the inspection starts and the inspection must be completed all at once. When there simply no FARs to support that theory.
That would be correct if you allowed the annual to expire. but had the IA started completing the items of 43-D in the 11th month, had them all completed by the time the annual expired, they could save you a bunch of down time.
GlennAB1
Ejection Handle Pulled
- Joined
- Oct 5, 2015
- Messages
- 4,889
- Location
- Home will always be Vandalia, OH
- Display Name
Display name:
GlennAB1
Again, when does the 100 hr. clock start?
Tom-D
Taxi to Parking
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2005
- Messages
- 34,740
- Display Name
Display name:
Tom-D
Believe me this was a exercise in the legal aspect of an annual.
All of my customers have aircraft of the quality that the annual inspection requires less than a day.
Most simply give me the key to their hangar and don't care when the logs come back.
So don't think this is a normal routine with me.
but it is something you can discuss with your IA
nice discussion folks.
except for the few.
All of my customers have aircraft of the quality that the annual inspection requires less than a day.
Most simply give me the key to their hangar and don't care when the logs come back.
So don't think this is a normal routine with me.
but it is something you can discuss with your IA
nice discussion folks.
except for the few.
Checkout_my_Six
Touchdown! Greaser!
yeah....yeah....we knew that. 
GlennAB1
Ejection Handle Pulled
- Joined
- Oct 5, 2015
- Messages
- 4,889
- Location
- Home will always be Vandalia, OH
- Display Name
Display name:
GlennAB1
In other words, don't try this at home, your results may vary, and, not all part 91 operators may be able to do this.