Can an IA perform a 100-hour inspection?

Doc Holliday said:
And your guess is totally wrong.

Witmo gave the correct response.
Click to expand...

No, Shuswap was right. We're in Canada and things work a bit differently here. If the mechanic finds defects that affect airworthiness, he snags them and consults the owner. If the owner chooses to defer those, that's his right, but records are kept, with signatures, of that sort of thing. It's also entered in the logs as being deferred by owner. If he has an accident, especially if due to the defect, he's in trouble.

Still, there have been a time or two I simply refused to sign the annual off just because there were defects far too serious to let the guy fly it away.

Items to be entered in the Journey Log as per CAR 605 Schedule I:

10. Except where a technical dispatch procedure is in place in accordance with section 706.06, the particulars of any defect in any part of the aircraft or its equipment that is not rectified before the next flight

[When] Before the next flight

[By] The person who discovered the defect


Canadian airplanes carry a Journey Log, something US aircraft don't. It records the details of every flight. Who did what and went where and how long and so on. It's used to track total time (air time) and flight time (start to shutdown) and maintenance of all sorts is mentioned there, though the details don't need to be; they go into the tech logs (engine/airframe/prop/record of installations and ADs and so on). The pilot is supposed to check the log before he flies to make sure it's within its annual or other maintenance period and that no defects have been entered by previous pilots or mechanics.

Or, indeed, anyone knowledgeable that found something serious as they walked past it. In theory, anyway.

In Canada the mechanic does not certify the airplane as "Airworthy." He certifies the work he did, that's all. The Airworthiness is a given provided that the airplane is maintained in accordance with the regulations and conforms to its type design and whatever relevant STCs. Airworthiness is the responsibility of the owner and pilot.
 
Last edited:
Can an IA perform a 100-hour inspection?
YES!

a 100 hour is a 100 hour, no matter how it is signed it, is still a 100 hour.

 
Silvaire said:
Not for me, although the writing is real big and in boldface type.
Click to expand...
Ok...not all caps but big fonts and bold. But, I'm hard of hearing.....so, it's OK and I'm not that sensitive to be offended. :D

And....I'm hopeful Tom is feeling better and on the mend. ;) It's kinda boring around here without him.
 
Last edited:
Tom-D said:
Can an IA perform a 100-hour inspection?
YES!

a 100 hour is a 100 hour, no matter how it is signed it, is still a 100 hour.
Click to expand...
Hi Tom!
Glad to see you back! How are you doing?
So if I sign off the inspection, it is still a hundred hour inspection?
 
Ah jeez.... :D
I can explain it for you
I cannot understand it for you

The bottom line is simple.
If the mechanic vacuumed the carpet it is a Condition Inspection and has to be signed by an IA
If he didn't vacuum it's a 100 hour and has to be signed by AT LEAST an AP
 
Shoot - fat finger sent before I was through - to continue:

The Condition Inspection resets the Date and the Tachometer Reading to ZERO
The 100 Hour only reswets the Tachometer Reading
 
I once had a pair of FAA inspectors go over my ships logbooks. The young one was appalled to find that I had flown the aircraft with no annual inspection in the engine logbook. He commented that it was not legal to fly because it only had a 100 hour inspection in the engine log. He also noted that the airframe logbook had a valid annual inspection sign off. I told him that the annual inspection was done on the airframe as required and the engine had a 100 hr because there is no annual inspection requirement for the engine. He was starting to tell me that I had broken the law when his supervisor stepped in and said I was correct. There is supposed to be some written guidance on this somewhere.
 
Arnold said:
I once had a pair of FAA inspectors go over my ships logbooks. The young one was appalled to find that I had flown the aircraft with no annual inspection in the engine logbook. He commented that it was not legal to fly because it only had a 100 hour inspection in the engine log. He also noted that the airframe logbook had a valid annual inspection sign off. I told him that the annual inspection was done on the airframe as required and the engine had a 100 hr because there is no annual inspection requirement for the engine. He was starting to tell me that I had broken the law when his supervisor stepped in and said I was correct. There is supposed to be some written guidance on this somewhere.
Click to expand...
....and that my friends is why we can't have anything nice around here. ;)
 
Arnold said:
He also noted that the airframe logbook had a valid annual inspection sign off. I told him that the annual inspection was done on the airframe as required and the engine had a 100 hr because there is no annual inspection requirement for the engine.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't doubt that you got hassled telling them a pair of errors. The annual inspection was NOT done on the airFRAME. The annual inspection was done on the airPLANE, and there most certainly is an annual inspection requirement for the engine, as it is an integral part of the airPLANE.

Jim
 
weirdjim said:
I wouldn't doubt that you got hassled telling them a pair of errors. The annual inspection was NOT done on the airFRAME. The annual inspection was done on the airPLANE, and there most certainly is an annual inspection requirement for the engine, as it is an integral part of the airPLANE.
Click to expand...
-----------------------------------------
§ 91.409 Inspections.
(a) Except as provided in paragraph (c) of this section, no person may operate an aircraft unless, within the preceding 12 calendar months, it has had -

(1) An annual inspection in accordance with part 43 of this chapter and has been approved for return to service by a person authorized by § 43.7 of this chapter;
---------------------------------------- emphasis added -----------------------

You did catch me being imprecise the regulatory language is neither airframe (my word) nor airplane (your word). Therefore is it not adequate to place an entry in the aircraft log for the annual inspection and make no entry in the engine log so long as the entry states "this aircraft has been inspected . . .? "
 
An annual inspection is required to be documented in the aircraft maintenance record. A single entry, usually annotated in the airframe logbook when separate logs for airframe, engine and prop exist, suffices. Separate annual or 100 hour entries in engine, prop, avionics or any other maintenance log are not needed. If extraneous redundant entries in multiple logbooks make you happy, so be it. Any maintenance done to the engine and prop needs documentation in their respective records but no reference to annual or 100hr is required separately from the annual entry in the airframe record.
 
Arnold said:
Why the derisive

comment?
Click to expand...
It wasn't meant to be derisive. If someone pays me to do maintenance on their aircraft, I am required to comply with the regulations. A single annual completion entry in the airframe log meets the minimum requirement by regulation documenting the annual inspection. If an owner insists I put multiple entries in other places, I'm fine with that as it's on his dime. I often find extraneous information in logbooks; as long as the required actions are documented, the FAA doesn't care what else is documented .
 
Arnold said:
-----------------------------------------
§ 91.409 Inspections.
(a) Except as provided in paragraph (c) of this section, no person may operate an aircraft unless, within the preceding 12 calendar months, it has had -

(1) An annual inspection in accordance with part 43 of this chapter and has been approved for return to service by a person authorized by § 43.7 of this chapter;
---------------------------------------- emphasis added -----------------------

You did catch me being imprecise the regulatory language is neither airframe (my word) nor airplane (your word). Therefore is it not adequate to place an entry in the aircraft log for the annual inspection and make no entry in the engine log so long as the entry states "this aircraft has been inspected . . .? "
Click to expand...

That is bu!!$#i+. Yes, the reg says AIRCRAFT, and since this AIRCRAFT happens to be an AIRPLANE, the two terms are interchangeable.

The other part is WRONG. It **IS** adequate to put the entry into the aircraft/airplane log and make no entry in the engine log. So long as the paper trail shows THAT engine being on THAT airplane at the time of the annual.

JIm
 
weirdjim said:
That is bu!!$#i+. Yes, the reg says AIRCRAFT, and since this AIRCRAFT happens to be an AIRPLANE, the two terms are interchangeable.

The other part is WRONG. It **IS** adequate to put the entry into the aircraft/airplane log and make no entry in the engine log. So long as the paper trail shows THAT engine being on THAT airplane at the time of the annual.

JIm
Click to expand...
So what happens when THAT engine becomes separated from THAT airframe for whatever reason?
 
Greg Bockelman said:
So what happens when THAT engine becomes separated from THAT airframe for whatever reason?
Click to expand...
The same thing that happens in your turbine world, Greg. The engine is hung on the new airframe and is given a 100 hour inspection. If it passes, then it is inspected at the next annual with the documentation of when it was hung on the airframe, TBO, Service bulletings. ADs and all the rest of it. No big deal. We do it all the time.

P.S. You still hanging around Clow?

Jim
 
weirdjim said:
The same thing that happens in your turbine world, Greg. The engine is hung on the new airframe and is given a 100 hour inspection. If it passes, then it is inspected at the next annual with the documentation of when it was hung on the airframe, TBO, Service bulletings. ADs and all the rest of it. No big deal. We do it all the time.

P.S. You still hanging around Clow?

Jim
Click to expand...
Thanks for the answer. I was genuinely curious.

Clow? You confusing me with Grant? LOL

I am flying 737s in Guam these days.
 
Greg Bockelman said:
Thanks for the answer. I was genuinely curious.
Click to expand...
And just to add to Jim's reply, in some larger ops especially turbine based, engine inspections are usually tracked to the engine serial number. So if you were to perform an engine swap in the field, once the paperwork was complete and the tracking (status) sheet is updated the TSI from the original aircraft will follow to the new aircraft install. Also in some ops if an engine is sent out from the shop, it will come with inspection form blocks signed by the shop personnel, leaving the field mechanic to simply finish the form and apply it to the current aircraft.
 
If a different engine is installed into an airplane currently in annual, the installing mechanic has to ensure the engine is airworthy just like anything else that he installs. How he does that is up to him. The point is, the new engine does not have to have a current "annual" or "100 hour" inspection listed in its maintenance record. The aircraft remains in annual and the mechanics signature on the return to service after the engine installation certifies that it is an airworthy engine. If the engine has an uncomplied with AD or has some other discrepancy that makes it unairworthy, that's on him.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top