Annual on plane missing logbooks

D

Danny Dub

Pre-Flight
Joined
Feb 7, 2018
Messages
80
Display Name
Display name:
Danny Dub
Hi guys,

I have a "friend" (no really) who has a Navion that he has owned for probably 25 years but for the last 10 it has not flown. During that time, the airframe and engine logbooks have gone missing.

We have a new mission where we would love to get this old bird flying again. We started with getting the AD on the prop completed so next will be a ferry permit to get it to an A&P to do some heavy lifting.

The real question I have is how big of a problem is it that we have basically no log books any more? I ordered the CD from the feds, but other than owner history and a couple 337s over the years, it doesn't really paint much of a picture.

I understand that the value of the plane is diminished but what will be the procedure to get this thing legally flyable again?

Thanks as always!

Dan
 
Excerpt from AC 43-9C:
...
12.LOST OR DESTROYED RECORDS. Occasionally, the records for an aircraft are lost or destroyed. In order to reconstruct them, it is necessary to establish the total time in service of the airframe. This can be done by reference to other records that reflect the time in service; research of records maintained by repair facilities; and reference to records maintained by individual mechanics, etc. When these things have been done and the record is still incomplete, the owner/operator may make a notarized statement in the new record describing the loss and establishing the time in service based on the research and the best estimate of time in service.a.The current status of applicable ADs may present a more formidable problem. This may require a detailed inspection by maintenance personnel to establish that the applicable ADs have been complied with. It can readily be seen that this could entail considerable time, expense, and in some instances, might require the AD being performed again to establish compliance.b.Other items required by § 91.417(a)(2), such as the current status of life-limited parts, time since last overhaul, current inspection status, and current list of major alterations, may present difficult problems. Some items may be easier to reestablish than others, but all are problems. Losing maintenance records can be troublesome, costly, and time consuming. Safekeeping of the records is an integral part of a good recordkeeping system.
...
 
Thanks for the exact answer! I appreciate it. Sounds like a lot of hassle is in our future.
 
JAWS said:
...
12.LOST OR DESTROYED RECORDS. In order to reconstruct them, it is necessary to establish the total time in service of the airframe.
Click to expand...
This is not true.
With the exception of life limited parts.
 
Bell206 said:
???
Total time is a required record by regulation. As the AC states, even a best guess by the owner is acceptable.
Click to expand...
Manu old aircraft like my F-24 there was no recording Tach thus no way to track it other than the journey logs that stopped many years ago.
The FAA does not enforce this, Simply because they know in many cases it would be impossible.

"this aircraft under went a total restoration this date, total time unknown.
 
Tom-D said:
"this aircraft under went a total restoration this date, total time unknown.
Click to expand...
Curious. Without a total time how did you comply with Part 43.11(a)(2) when you signed the annual or 91.417(a)(2)(i) as owner or 91.417(b)(2) when you sold it?
Tom-D said:
Simply because they know in many cases it would be impossible.
Click to expand...
Without a logbook time-in-service the aircraft is technically unairworthy since it doesn't meet the above requirements. As to being impossible, no. That is why there is guidance for the owner to make a best guess and enter the assumed aircraft TIS via a notarized logbook entry. It is what it is.
 
Bell206 said:
Curious. Without a total time how did you comply with Part 43.11(a)(2) when you signed the annual or 91.417(a)(2)(i) as owner or 91.417(b)(2) when you sold it?

Without a logbook time-in-service the aircraft is technically unairworthy since it doesn't meet the above requirements.
Click to expand...
nope,, total time is never mentioned in the definition of airworthiness.
 
Tom-D said:
nope,, total time is never mentioned in the definition of airworthiness.
Click to expand...
Interesting. Never mentioned it was part of the definition. But non-compliance with Part 43 or 91 kind of leans the equation to unairworthy. Right?
 
Bell206 said:
Interesting. Never mentioned it was part of the definition. But non-compliance with Part 43 or 91 kind of leans the equation to unairworthy. Right?
Click to expand...
Show me the requirement of TOTAL time in FAR 43.9
 
91.417 makes the only reference to Total time in an entry, but they are referring t o inspections.
 
Tom-D said:
Show me the requirement of TOTAL time in FAR 43.9
Click to expand...
Ha. Didn't mention 43.9. See 43.11 question in post #9 for further details.
Tom-D said:
91.417 makes the only reference to Total time in an entry, but they are referring t o inspections.
Click to expand...
Your getting close. Answer the specific 91.417 questions in post #9 and we'll go from there.
 
Bell206 said:
Without a logbook time-in-service the aircraft is technically unairworthy since it doesn't meet the above requirements. As to being impossible, no. That is why there is guidance for the owner to make a best guess and enter the assumed aircraft TIS via a notarized logbook entry. It is what it is.
Click to expand...
You have got to be joking, If you believe that.
under your view many aircraft would be un-airworthy.
Antique and classic aircraft never had any means of tracking, And the FAA has no problem with the first entry in the new log as " Total Time Unknown" Two of the OSH Trophy winners I know of have that entry.
Thinking with out a number in that block, that the aircraft is unairworty, is preposterous.
 
Tom-D said:
You have got to be joking, If you believe that.
under your view many aircraft would be un-airworthy.
Antique and classic aircraft never had any means of tracking, And the FAA has no problem with the first entry in the new log as " Total Time Unknown" Two of the OSH Trophy winners I know of have that entry.
Thinking with out a number in that block, that the aircraft is unairworty, is preposterous.
Click to expand...

It is illegal in Canada.

If you have nothing to start with, how are you expected move on? Start over at zero?
 
Tom-D said:
You have got to be joking, If you believe that.
under your view many aircraft would be un-airworthy.
Antique and classic aircraft never had any means of tracking, And the FAA has no problem with the first entry in the new log as " Total Time Unknown" Two of the OSH Trophy winners I know of have that entry.
Thinking with out a number in that block, that the aircraft is unairworty, is preposterous.
Click to expand...

Maybe your local gas but mine had a stroke with total time unknown. Fellow IA in Ohio had the same problem, they won’t issue an airworthiness because there was no way to verify total time. On a j3. Ridiculous I know.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
JAWS said:
It is illegal in Canada.

If you have nothing to start with, how are you expected move on? Start over at zero?
Click to expand...
When there is verifiable time on it you use that number. Way too simple.
 
Tom-D said:
Antique and classic aircraft never had any means of tracking,
Click to expand...
Never said they did. How TIS is tracked is solely up to the owner/operator whether by a watch, hobbs, sun dial, or hour glass.
Tom-D said:
that the aircraft is unairworty, is preposterous.
Click to expand...
Call it want you want. I don't make the rules. The FARs and other guidance are pretty clear on this topic. Perhaps you can provide other guidance to support you claim or maybe answer the questions in post 9 how you personally addressed the FARs concerning TIS we might be able to discuss this further??
 
Bell206 said:
Never said they did. How TIS is tracked is solely up to the owner/operator whether by a watch, hobbs, sun dial, or hour glass.

Call it want you want. I don't make the rules. The FARs and other guidance are pretty clear on this topic. Perhaps you can provide other guidance to support you claim or maybe answer the questions in post 9 how you personally addressed the FARs concerning TIS we might be able to discuss this further??
Click to expand...
The amount of aircraft that is in service with this entry is proof enough. Re-read pots 8 & 10
 
Tom-D said:
Re-read pots 8 & 10
Click to expand...
So when you signed off the annual on the Fairchild it went something like this?
“I certify that this aircraft has been inspected in accordance with an annual inspection and was determined to be in airworthy condition. 01/01/2019, Total Time: UNKNOWN.”
 
Bell206 said:
So when you signed off the annual on the Fairchild it went something like this?
“I certify that this aircraft has been inspected in accordance with an annual inspection and was determined to be in airworthy condition. 01/01/2019, Total Time: UNKNOWN.”
Click to expand...
No when I did the annual, It had Time on it, That's a year after the restoration return to service.
 
Tom-D said:
No when I did the annual, It had Time on it, That's a year after the restoration return to service.
Click to expand...
OBYW the F-24 had a journey Log, and existing logs with time continuing.
Poor example.
 
Tom-D said:
Poor example.
Click to expand...
I thought it was the perfect example as it was your aircraft so there shouldn't be much confusion on your side. Yet...

Per your words was the total time in service for the F24 unknown?
Tom-D said:
Manu old aircraft like my F-24 there was no recording Tach thus no way to track it other than the journey logs that stopped many years ago.
The FAA does not enforce this, Simply because they know in many cases it would be impossible. "this aircraft under went a total restoration this date, total time unknown.
Click to expand...

Or...

Did the aircraft have a continuous total time in service per this??:
Tom-D said:
OBYW the F-24 had a journey Log, and existing logs with time continuing.
Click to expand...
Tom-D said:
No when I did the annual, It had Time on it,
Click to expand...
 
Did you read the part that said it had journey log.
But you still can depend upon that number.
Plus, the maintenance logs that box was simply left blank.
 
Tom-D said:
Did you read the part that said it had journey log.
Click to expand...
I also read the part where you state the journey logs ended long ago and you quoted restoration total time unk.

So which is it? Did you use an actual time in your 1st annual sign off after restoration or the word unknown as you indicate in several posts above?? It shouldn't be a difficult question to answer since it's your write up and plane.;)
 
Last edited:
Bell206 said:
I also read the part where you state the journey logs ended long ago and you quoted restoration total time unk.

So which is it? Did you use an actual time in your 1st annual sign off after restoration or the word unknown as you indicate in several posts above?? It shouldn't be a difficult question to answer since it's your write up and plane.;)
Click to expand...
When the journey ended and the maintenance logs don't continue the tracking, Isn't the total time unknown?
I guess you'd just make up a number and falsify the logs, I see that as a bigger violation than saying. "I don't know"
 
Tom-D said:
falsify the logs,
Click to expand...
Not hardly. It's actually the other way around especially when the FAA gives you acceptable guidance to do just that. You either have a continuous record of TIS from original AWC issuance to present or someone takes responsibility for the missing parts by making a write up in the aircraft logs. One such method was shown back in Post #2 from AC 43-9C:
"the owner/operator may make a notarized statement in the new record describing the loss and establishing the time in service based on the research and the best estimate of time in service."

I believe there are several other FAA docs also, but every FSDO I've inquired with always points you to the AC. Without that statement for the missing time technically the listed time would not meet the requirements of Part 91.417. I know you won't believe that, but I've assisted dozens of owners with this issue to include discussing same with the Feds. But to each their own.
 
Bell206 said:
Curious. Without a total time how did you comply with Part 43.11(a)(2) when you signed the annual or 91.417(a)(2)(i) as owner or 91.417(b)(2) when you sold it?
Click to expand...
Total time since restoration?
 
bluerooster said:
Total time since restoration?
Click to expand...
One can write whatever they choose in the logbooks, but the only regulatory "time" reference in this case is "total time in service" with TIS defined in Part 1.
 
Bell206 said:
One can write whatever they choose in the logbooks, but the only regulatory "time" reference in this case is "total time in service" with TIS defined in Part 1.
Click to expand...

Time in service, with respect to maintenance time records, means the time from the moment an aircraft leaves the surface of the earth until it touches it at the next point of landing.

And when that is not tracked?
The only thing you can do is say you can't track it.
total time unknown, or falsify the records
 
Tom-D said:
total time unknown, or falsify the records
Click to expand...
Ha. And right on queue. Like I said, you won't believe something even when Mr. FAA puts it in black and white. Classic. But it makes for good banter.;)
 
JAWS said:
Wow! How about using the guidance given by the regulator?
Click to expand...
Regulations, Do you understand the consequences for making false entries in Log books?
What guidance do you find on that?
 
Tom-D said:
Regulations, Do you understand the consequences for making false entries in Log books?
What guidance do you find on that?
Click to expand...

Excerpt from AC 43-9C:
...
12.LOST OR DESTROYED RECORDS. Occasionally, the records for an aircraft are lost or destroyed. In order to reconstruct them, it is necessary to establish the total time in service of the airframe. This can be done by reference to other records that reflect the time in service; research of records maintained by repair facilities; and reference to records maintained by individual mechanics, etc. When these things have been done and the record is still incomplete, the owner/operator may make a notarized statement in the new record describing the loss and establishing the time in service based on the research and the best estimate of time in service.a.The current status of applicable ADs may present a more formidable problem. This may require a detailed inspection by maintenance personnel to establish that the applicable ADs have been complied with. It can readily be seen that this could entail considerable time, expense, and in some instances, might require the AD being performed again to establish compliance.b.Other items required by § 91.417(a)(2), such as the current status of life-limited parts, time since last overhaul, current inspection status, and current list of major alterations, may present difficult problems. Some items may be easier to reestablish than others, but all are problems. Losing maintenance records can be troublesome, costly, and time consuming. Safekeeping of the records is an integral part of a good recordkeeping system.
...

Also:

1. PURPOSE. This advisory circular (AC) describes methods, procedures, and practices that have been determined to be acceptable means of showing compliance with the General Aviation (GA) maintenance record-making and recordkeeping requirements of Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) parts 43 and 91. This material is not mandatory, nor is it regulatory, and it acknowledges that the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) will consider other methods that may be presented. It is issued for guidance purposes and outlines several methods of compliance with the regulations.
 
Sooooo, if you cannot meet any of the described above in ac43-9c 12.— you are basically screwed.?
 
1RTK1 said:
Sooooo, if you cannot meet any of the described above in ac43-9c 12.— you are basically screwed.?
Click to expand...

"When these things have been done and the record is still incomplete, the owner/operator may make a notarized statement in the new record describing the loss and establishing the time in service based on the research and the best estimate of time in service."

Also:

"Losing maintenance records can be troublesome, costly, and time consuming. Safekeeping of the records is an integral part of a good recordkeeping system." A scanner or digital camera to create a back-up record wouldn't be all that hard and could save your bacon someday.
 
1RTK1 said:
you are basically screwed.?
Click to expand...
Have assisted in rebuilding a number of aircraft records. Never had one we couldn't complete per the AC. Even several with zero logbooks. Determining TTIS is the easiest part, rebuilding the AD list or status of life-limited parts is the hardest and most expensive part.
 
JAWS said:
Excerpt from AC 43-9C:
...
12.LOST OR DESTROYED RECORDS. Occasionally, the records for an aircraft are lost or destroyed.
Click to expand...
You seem to not understand, many records never existed, They were not lost or destroyed.
 
What I learned from this thread: If you can't comply with a reg, it's ok to just ignore it.


/Sarcasm
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top