A question for the FAR Gods

http://www.aviationpros.com/article/12008205/faa-feedback-annual-sign-off

"An “aircraft,” a type certificated aircraft, must be equipped with all pertinent appliances and components including the engine and propeller to accomplish flight. An “aircraft” according to the regs is the sum total of its parts."

"So what are the FARs actually saying? The FARs say an annual inspection is a complete inspection of all the aircraft’s individual parts, the airframe, the engine(s), the propeller(s) and everything else listed on the aircraft’s type certificated data/specification sheet and equipment list. The annual inspection must also be completed within the preceding 12 calendar months, and accomplished in accordance with Part 43."

"So since you are performing a single inspection covering the entire aircraft, you are required to make only a single entry."
 
Tom-D said:
tell me a year out, what the weather will be, can you tell me what the weather will be Oct.26.2018. CFIs work around the weather all the time.
I'll work with them when I can.
Click to expand...

I'm willing to bet there will be 2 or 3 days that are flyable sometime in the entire month of October, 2018. :rolleyes:
 
FastEddieB said:
No, I actually copied and pasted his response, with his permission, of course.

No dog in this fight. I was just repeating what I remembered learning in an FAA-sanctioned course.

And to me, it’s logical. An airplane that remains in service during an annual continues to compile wear and is susceptible to damage within the interval from beginning to end. That would render a sign-off at the end of said “progressive” inspection speculative at best as to its airworthiness at that time.
Click to expand...
Do you believe there are items on the 43-D that will go from airworthy to unairworthy in a few day/hours flight time?
IF so tell us what?

And when you start inspecting the items of FAR 43-D and then things change are you going to change too?
When you repack bearings, reline brake pucks, change oil, filter, do a compression check, clean and gap plugs, what on that list in -D will change enough to make the aircraft unairworthy in a few hours/days?
Why is it different than doing them all at once? wouldn't they fail as soon after you signed of the annual anyway?
 
JAWS said:
http://www.aviationpros.com/article/12008205/faa-feedback-annual-sign-off

"An “aircraft,” a type certificated aircraft, must be equipped with all pertinent appliances and components including the engine and propeller to accomplish flight. An “aircraft” according to the regs is the sum total of its parts."

"So what are the FARs actually saying? The FARs say an annual inspection is a complete inspection of all the aircraft’s individual parts, the airframe, the engine(s), the propeller(s) and everything else listed on the aircraft’s type certificated data/specification sheet and equipment list. The annual inspection must also be completed within the preceding 12 calendar months, and accomplished in accordance with Part 43."

"So since you are performing a single inspection covering the entire aircraft, you are required to make only a single entry."
Click to expand...

When it is finished "YES"
Question, When is an annual inspection finished?
Answer, when the IA says it is.
 
JAWS said:
I'm willing to bet there will be 2 or 3 days that are flyable sometime in the entire month of October, 2018. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Probably !! but when it turns out VFR why loose the days laid up in maintenance when you have students waiting?
I and many other IAs can get the major portion of the inspection done in one night, and the rest the next night. What's the problem with that?
 
Here is a question for ya.. who would dare to tell your FBO to button up your aircraft in the middle of a annual so you could go fly?
 
JAWS said:
How long is a maintainer held responsible for an annual inspection?
How long is a maintainer held responsible for a repair?

Bill O'brien's take:
http://www.aviationpros.com/article/10387626/signing-my-life-away
Click to expand...
And that is exactly what he told us at several of his IA renewal seminars I attended.
You make that decision at the time you are signing the annual off.
it make no matter when you do the work to determine if it is or not.
 
Tom-D said:
Probably !! but when it turns out VFR why loose the days laid up in maintenance when you have students waiting?
I and many other IAs can get the major portion of the inspection done in one night, and the rest the next night. What's the problem with that?
Click to expand...

It is the idea that the required maintenance for their aircraft takes a backseat to their other pur$uit$. And then maintenance has to bend to meet their wants, possibly putting the maintainer's licence at risk. I am sure they will take time out of their busy schedules to stand up for you at the FAA investigation and the NTSB hearing.

Two night's work does not equal "days laid up in maintenance"!
 
JAWS said:
It is the idea that the required maintenance for their aircraft takes a backseat to their other pur$uit$. And then maintenance has to bend to meet their wants, possibly putting the maintainer's licence at risk. I am sure they will take time out of their busy schedules to stand up for you at the FAA investigation and the NTSB hearing.

Two night's work does not equal "days laid up in maintenance"!
Click to expand...
My point exactly, why lay it up t all?

Why can't A&Ps work around the flight schedule ? the military does it the airlines do it. why not us?

Back to the question..... How would that place the A&P-IAs certificate at risk.. WHAT FAR WAS Violated?
When we A&P-IAa cater to our customers it is just good business.
Were the Maintenance taken a back seat they would just ignore the inspection.
 
Why is it? we are reluctant to use the rules to our advantage?
 
I respect your right to do what you want with your licence. And you do have a point in that the regs do not specifically prevent this scenario. I actually have done some reading on this and feel it is playing in the "grey zone". I am very cautious when dealing with grey areas. And the argument that the internet says it is ok isn't compelling enough for me to join in.
 
Tom-D said:
Do you believe there are items on the 43-D that will go from airworthy to unairworthy in a few day/hours flight time?
Click to expand...

Well, do YOU believe that it is not possible that “there are items on the 43-D that will go from airworthy to unairworthy in a few day/hours flight time?”
 
Tarheelpilot said:
If you have been in this business for 37 years and have never heard of ethics please let me know how to make sure you never work on my equipment.
I’ve been in this industry for twenty years and ethics have been an integral part from the beginning.
Click to expand...

Tar:
My reply was to a specific person, but I believe you misread my post. I said “heard the term ethics.” This is the first time in 37 years I had someone state in discussion my opinion was not ethical because he didn’t agree with it. Nothing more. If you had read further I offered to show him the ethical side of maintenance.

What I take issue with is when someone touts moral self-righteousness in a discussion about interpreting and using established rules and regulations when they represent a group of people whose culture and moral principal (ethics) is to not follow them. I’m still waiting on his response to my inquiry unless you would like to provide the requested explanation?

And we don’t have to look far for examples. On the 1st page of this forum alone more than a dozen individuals have described instances that are a direct violation of the FARs. One even quite honestly stated they don’t worry about the regulations and another provided pictures of the issue along with a detailed explanation.

I can assure you that when it comes to ethical practices in aviation I would gladly stack mine against most others.
 
JAWS said:
I agree that this is an interesting scenario and has been a decent discussion. :)
Click to expand...

JAWS:
I am very familiar with the attachments and quotes you provided. As I stated to Tarheel above, my reply was specific to one person and was taken out of context.

And as you provided in another post, I too was a huge fan of Bill O’Brien and had the pleasure to meet and chat with him on several occasions. I also believe he was the last true mechanic left in the FAA prior to his untimely death.

But to continue on topic, as I’ve stated before, and you recently stated, we both respect Tom’s right to interpret the FARs as he sees them. In this case there is nothing specific that prevents this type of annual practice.

As for gray areas, the FARs are far grayer than black or white. I personally enjoy working through the gray areas. I’ve learned the most in those areas. And when it looks like I can’t get out of a gray area then I seek assistance at the FSDO, a colleague, or even a forum like this.

And this discussion is right up there at the top of the gray area.
 
Bell206 said:
What I take issue with is when someone touts moral self-righteousness........ I’m still waiting on his response to my inquiry
Click to expand...

Tim just loves it when that gets pointed out. :mad:
 
91f00b9ae1d5e537b9305481d23ac1a7.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top