Do you need a new W&B after paint?

Morne

Line Up and Wait
Joined
Sep 18, 2011
Messages
699
Display Name

Display name:
Morne
My 182 is currently getting stripped and repainted. I have heard differing points of view as to whether or not a new weight and balance is needed.

I'm thinking that it is not needed, since the paint is being removed and simply reapplied. Maybe it would be needed for a cheap "scratch and paint" that doesn't completely strip the old finish.

Thoughts? Experience?
 
There's no hard and fast answer because of the many possible variations due to paint type, thickness of application, etc. If the shop applying the paint is sufficiently sure that any change in empty weight or cg is "negligible" (and there are FAA definitions for that), then they can say so in the log entry for the work and release the plane for flight with the old data. If not, then they'll have to re-weigh the plane and recompute empty cg. However, a good paint shop should have the equipment, certifications, and skills to do that, and given the necessary level of effort in relation to the rest of the job, the effect on your bill should be "negligible."
 
My 182 is currently getting stripped and repainted. I have heard differing points of view as to whether or not a new weight and balance is needed.

I'm thinking that it is not needed, since the paint is being removed and simply reapplied. Maybe it would be needed for a cheap "scratch and paint" that doesn't completely strip the old finish.

Thoughts? Experience?

It's not required.
 
It's not required.
True, but it might not be a bad idea to get a fresh one depending on how long it has been.

I got a new one after I had the 170 painted. I think the last time it had been up on the scales was probably in the 60's.

My airplane gained 45 lbs compared to all the years of just calculating changes. YMMV.
 
It's not required.
So if the shop strips off a paper-thin coat of enamel and lays on a double-thick coat of urethane, the shop can legally return the aircraft to service without updating the empty weight/cg data? I think not. Or are you just suggesting in a terse manner that there are other "weighs" to accomplish that update?

BTW, here's "negligible" from AC 43.13-1B:

c. Negligible Weight Change​
is any
change of one pound or less for aircraft whose
weight empty is less than 5,000 pounds; two
pounds or less for aircraft whose weight empty
is more than 5,000 and 50,000 pounds; and
five pounds or less for aircraft whose weight
empty is more than 50,000 pounds. Negligible
c. g. change is any change of less than 0.05%
MAC for fixed wing aircraft, 0.2 percent of the
maximum allowable c. g. range for rotary wing

aircraft.
 
True, but it might not be a bad idea to get a fresh one depending on how long it has been.

I got a new one after I had the 170 painted. I think the last time it had been up on the scales was probably in the 60's.

My airplane gained 45 lbs compared to all the years of just calculating changes. YMMV.

It's either a personal preference to have it done, as you mentioned above, or if the facility doing the repaint feels they need to do one.

Refinishing an airplane falls under preventive maintenance:

14 CFR Part 43, Appendix A

(9) Refinishing decorative coating of fuselage, balloon baskets, wings tail group surfaces (excluding balanced control surfaces) fairings, cowlings, landing gear, cabin, or cockpit interior when removal or disassembly of any primary structure or operating system is not required.

While the removal and reinstallation of the control surfaces will require a sign off by a rated A&P (as well as following the balance procedure in the MM if required) the rest of the painting can be done by the owner and signed off as preventative maintenance.

In my personal experience repainting an aircraft, the W&B change is negligible.
 
Last edited:
I think every one in thread needs to read the 100 service manual and the Cessna structural repair manual.
 
I don't have one available, but if they recommend a procedure I would advise following it.

So would I. who ever is refinishing the aircraft had best read the whole section #20 in the 100 S/M, and see what it requires they may or may not like what they read.

I'd also think that a complete refinish will involve removing the flight controls to be done correctly, that isn't preventive maintenance.

Plus let's keep in mind that a generic AC is not a good reference for any aircraft that has a complete set of M/Ms like Cessna has.
 
My 1974 C-172 had never been weighed as I understand. So, the last time it was in for the annual, they had scales available and we weighed her, expecting to see the weight go up because of the mods over the last 40 years. In fact, her weight had decreased below the calculated weight by about 5 lbs and the CG had moved forward. We'll get her weighed again after we paint.
 
There's no hard and fast answer because of the many possible variations due to paint type, thickness of application, etc. If the shop applying the paint is sufficiently sure that any change in empty weight or cg is "negligible" (and there are FAA definitions for that), then they can say so in the log entry for the work and release the plane for flight with the old data. If not, then they'll have to re-weigh the plane and recompute empty cg. However, a good paint shop should have the equipment, certifications, and skills to do that, and given the necessary level of effort in relation to the rest of the job, the effect on your bill should be "negligible."

How exactly does a "paint shop" release an aircraft for flight? Can a "paint shop" make a valid Weight & Balance sheet?

I suspect you really mean at least and A, if not an IA, not "paint shop" since anybody can paint an aircraft.
 
My 1974 C-172 had never been weighed as I understand. So, the last time it was in for the annual, they had scales available and we weighed her, expecting to see the weight go up because of the mods over the last 40 years. In fact, her weight had decreased below the calculated weight by about 5 lbs and the CG had moved forward. We'll get her weighed again after we paint.

That's a very good idea, safe than sorry every time.
 
The LoPrestis recently repainted the Fury prototype. In the process, they stripped off multiple layers of old paint and after painting the airplane ended up 80 pounds lighter than when they started.
 
How exactly does a "paint shop" release an aircraft for flight? Can a "paint shop" make a valid Weight & Balance sheet?

I suspect you really mean at least and A, if not an IA, not "paint shop" since anybody can paint an aircraft.

Several paint shops around here have neither, they hire a certified person to come inspect the work and return it to service.

When I am asked to do that, they can expect to show me:
1. how they did the re-weighing and the results of it.
2. how they balanced the flight controls.
3. how they checked the throws of each after re-installation.
5. The entry in the maintenance records.
6. how they verified the static system still works.
7. where they recorded the color codes for the paint they used.
 
The LoPrestis recently repainted the Fury prototype. In the process, they stripped off multiple layers of old paint and after painting the airplane ended up 80 pounds lighter than when they started.
This is a very good idea, If you don't re-weigh, how can you prove you didn't change the W&B?
 
Several paint shops around here have neither, they hire a certified person to come inspect the work and return it to service.

Thank you for verifying my point. Paint shops are not certified but an employee or contractor will have to be.
 
Thank you for verifying my point. Paint shops are not certified but an employee or contractor will have to be.

most are CRSs, because they do it all.
 
You'll probably need it re-rigged, too. Why? Because the flaps, ailerons, rudder & such have been removed for painting.
 
I don't know about the legalities and the FARs, but from a practical perspective watch out for sludge or sandblast media that may have collected into the tailcone area. That's an area with a long lever arm on CG and small weights have a magnified effect.
 
In my personal experience repainting an aircraft, the W&B change is negligible.
I've seen weights go up 20 lb on light planes, and that is not, as noted above, "negligible" in the FAA's eyes. YMMV. In any event, the shop employee or contractor sigining off the job is the party putting their ticket on the line when they return the aircraft to service with a "negligible" weight change in that log entry, so they are likely to be the one deciding whether or not it's necessary.
 
Last edited:
How exactly does a "paint shop" release an aircraft for flight? Can a "paint shop" make a valid Weight & Balance sheet?

I suspect you really mean at least and A, if not an IA, not "paint shop" since anybody can paint an aircraft.
I've never seen an aircraft paint shop that didn't have an A&P available to take care of the required removal, rebalancing, and replacement of the flight controls and to sign the return to service after the painting. That A&P can, if necessary, take care of the weighing and new W&B. And while "anybody" can paint an airplane, somebody with the appropriate FAA authorization has to sign the return to service after the painting, including either new W&B or certification that the change in W&B is "negligible" as defined above by the FAA.
 
I've seen weights go up 20 lb on light planes, and that is not, as noted above, "negligible" in the FAA's eyes. YMMV. In any event, the shop sigining off the job is the party putting their ticket on the line when they return the aircraft to service with a "negligible" weight change in that log entry, so they are likely to be the one deciding whether or not it's necessary.

When a manufacturer such as Cessna, Piper or Beech produces an aircraft they do not weigh each and every aircraft that comes off the assembly line. They do a base line analysis on each model and weigh an example. Then each model that is produced has it's weight adjusted according to options added. On a predetermined occasion one will be pulled off the line and weighed for quality control to insure the weights are indeed common.

If an airplane, such as a C-182 is painted at the factory, then a number of years later is stripped and repainted the difference between the 2 paintjobs are negligible.

The 20 pounds is more likely the result of a factory aircraft with a factory weight that was repainted, then reweighed and the difference happened not due to paint, but small changes over the history of the aircraft.

In any event, the shop sigining off the job is the party putting their ticket on the line when they return the aircraft to service with a "negligible" weight change in that log entry, so they are likely to be the one deciding whether or not it's necessary.

Very true. And since you don't have the ratings to return an aircraft to service it's not your judgment call.
 
Very true. And since you don't have the ratings to return an aircraft to service it's not your judgment call.
Well, I suppose that if I, as an owner/pilot, did it myself as preventive maintenance on my plane, and had an A&P do the flight control rebalancing and replacement and sign only for that, I do have the rating to return that aircraft to service after it's painteed. But if I take it to a shop for them to do and sign, as most folks do, the shop's authorized party makes that decision, not me. But to go back to my original point, way up at the top of this thread, there's no hard and fast answer to the original question -- it's a judgement call for the party returning the aircraft to service.
 
And since you don't have the ratings to return an aircraft to service it's not your judgment call.
I thought the mechanic, et al, repairs the aircraft IAW TCDS and it is the "operator", ie, pilot who returns the aircraft to service.
 
... I do have the rating to return that aircraft to service after it's painteed. But if I take it to a shop for them to do and sign, as most folks do, the shop's authorized party makes that decision, not me. But to go back to my original point, way up at the top of this thread, there's no hard and fast answer to the original question -- it's a judgement call for the party returning the aircraft to service.
Who gives that authorization? If it is not the original mfg providing that authorization, how is that "shop's authorized party" even equally as authorized as the owner/pilot (to return to service)?
 
Who gives that authorization? If it is not the original mfg providing that authorization,
The FAA, in the form of a pilot, mechanic, repairman, or repair station certificate.
how is that "shop's authorized party" even equally as authorized as the owner/pilot (to return to service)?
Read 14 CFR Part 43.7. Generally speaking, that shop's "authorized party" holds more authority than a pilot to return aircraft to service, as they can approve maintenance, rebuilding, and alterations, not just preventive maintenance, and can approve work done by others, which a pilot cannot.
 
Last edited:
I thought the mechanic, et al, repairs the aircraft IAW TCDS and it is the "operator", ie, pilot who returns the aircraft to service.
First, repairs are performed IAW with approved data, and generally speaking, that is found in places other than the aircraft's Type Certificate Data Sheet. Second, the aircraft is only returned to service by the pilot/owner if the work does is preventive maintenance performed by that pilot. There is no provision in 43.3 for a pilot to supervise preventive maintenance performed by anyone else, nor in 43.7 for a pilot to return an aircraft to service after preventive maintenance performed by another person.
 
http://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Order/8620_2A.pdf

FAA Order 8620.2A

SUBJ:
Applicability and Enforcement of Manufacturer’s Data
1.
Purpose of This Order. This order provides information and guidance to aviation safety inspectors (ASI) regarding the applicability and enforcement of Original Equipment Manufacturer’s (OEM) data listed on the Federal Aviation Administration’s (FAA) type certificate data sheet (TCDS). Information and guidance is also provided regarding OEM maintenance manual material, Service Letters (SL) and Service Bulletins (SB), and other maintenance or flight operations information including any material that has been identified or labeled by an OEM as “Mandatory.”
2.
Audience. The primary audience is Flight Standards District Office (FSDO) ASIs. The secondary audience includes Flight Standards regional and headquarters branch and division personnel.
3.
Where You Can Find This Order. ASIs can access this order through the Flight Standards Information Management System (FSIMS) at http://fsims.avr.faa.gov. Operators and the public can find this order at http://fsims.faa.gov.
4.
Background. Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 43, §§ 43.13(a) and 43.13(b) outline the performance standards for accomplishing non-air carrier maintenance, preventive maintenance, and alterations on U.S.-registered aircraft. This order provides clarification and guidance about the applicability of those regulatory performance standards when maintenance documents and maintenance requirements have been identified and labeled as mandatory by the OEM.
5.
Related Guidance (current editions).
a.
14 CFR part 43;
b.
14 CFR part 91; and
c.
FAA Order IR-M-8040.1A, Airworthiness Directives Manual.
Distribution: A-W(VR)-1; A-W(SI)-2; A-W(FS/IR/VN); Initiated By: AFS-300
A-X(FS/SI/CD)-3; A-FFS/FIA/FAC-0(LTD);
AMA-200 (12 cys)
11/5/07 8620.2A
6.
Applicability.
a.
Section 43.13(a) states, in part, “Each person performing maintenance, alteration, or preventive maintenance on an aircraft, engine, propeller, or appliance shall use the methods, techniques, and practices prescribed in:
1)
The current manufacturer’s maintenance manual or;
2)
Instructions for Continued Airworthiness prepared by its manufacturer, or;
3)
Other methods, techniques, and practices acceptable to the Administrator.”
b.
The language of § 43.13(a) clearly provides a person with three permissible options when performing maintenance, alterations, or preventive maintenance on a product. Section 43.13(a) does not provide an order of precedence for these three options. Further, although § 43.13(a) does not specifically address SB’s or SL’s, an OEM may legitimately incorporate an SB or SL into one of its maintenance manuals by reference. If it does so, the data specified, and the method, technique, or practice contained therein, may be acceptable to the Administrator. However, unless any method, technique, or practice prescribed by an OEM in any of its documents is specifically mandated by a regulatory document, such as Airworthiness Directive (AD), or specific regulatory language such as that in § 43.15(b); those methods, techniques, or practices are not mandatory.
7.
TCDS. Consistent with 14 CFR, a TCDS is part of a product’s type certificate (TC). A TCDS is a summary of the product’s type design. It is used primarily by authorized persons during initial or recurrent issuance of a Standard Airworthiness Certificate. It is neither a regulation, a maintenance requirements document, or a flight manual document. As such, for aircraft holding a valid and current airworthiness certificate, a TCDS should not be used as a sole source to determine what maintenance is required or what the flight operations requirements are. Any language on a TCDS, by itself, is not regulatory and is simply not enforceable. There must be a corresponding rule to make any language on the TCDS mandatory. For example, there is a mention of “operating limitations” on most TCDS. The corresponding rule for “operating limitations” is 14 CFR § 91.9(a) which states, “Except as provided in paragraph (d) of this section, no person may operate a civil aircraft without complying with the operating limitations specified in the approved Airplane or Rotorcraft Flight Manual, markings, and placards, or as otherwise prescribed by the certificating authority of the country of registry.” Without § 91.9, the TCDS requirement to comply with operating limitations would not be enforceable.
8.
TCDS Notes. TCDS notes are intended primarily to provide information on the various requirements for issuing an airworthiness certificate as well as the type and location of various technical documents used to operate and maintain the product. Some OEM’s have placed mandatory language such as “shall,” “must,” and “will” on their TCDS that imply that compliance with TCDS notes is mandatory. However, in the absence of regulatory language, or an AD that makes such TCDS notes mandatory, compliance with such notes is not mandatory. It would mean that FAA regulations effectively authorize OEMs to issue “substantive rules,” i.e., it would enable an OEM to impose legal requirements on the public that differ from the 14 CFR requirements. This would be objectionable for two reasons. First, the FAA does not have the
2
11/5/07 8620.2A
3
authority to delegate its rulemaking authority to an OEM. Second, “substantive rules” can be adopted only in accordance with the notice and comment procedures of the Administrative Procedures Act (APA), which does not apply to an OEM.
9.
Life Limits and Placarding. Adherence to component life limit retirement times listed on a TCDS is required by §§ 43.16 or 91.409(e), and a requirement to follow placard instructions is required by § 91.9(a).
10.
Summary. Consistent with 14 CFR, a TCDS is part of a product’s TC. As such, for aircraft holding a valid and current airworthiness certificate, a TCDS should not be used as a sole source to determine what maintenance is required or what the flight operations requirements are. Any language on a TCDS, by itself, is not regulatory and is simply not enforceable.
11.
Distribution. This order is distributed to the division levels at the Washington Headquarters of Flight Standards Service (AFS); to the branch levels at the Aircraft Certification Service; to the branch levels at the regional Flight Standards Divisions and Aircraft Certification Directorates; to all FSDOs; to all Aircraft Certification Offices (ACO), Aircraft Certification Field Offices, and all Satellite Offices and Manufacturing Inspection District Offices (MIDO); to the Aircraft Certification and Flight Standards Branches at the FAA Academy; to the Brussels Aircraft Certification and Flight Standards Staff; to applicable Representatives of the Administrator; and to all International Field Offices (IFO).
ORIGINAL SIGNED BY
James J. Ballough
Director, Flight Standards Service
 
Yes, in the context I mentioned the TCDS I should have also mentioned "approved data".

Let's say a pilot brought his aircraft to a reputable overhauler. The pilot does not supervise any of the work. Who returns the aircraft to service?

Is "return to service" an event or a process? To wit: would the break-in period following engine o/h constitute a return to service?

A rereading of 43.3 begats a Q: Why was supervision by pilot even mentioned? ("...no provision of pilot to supervise...")
 
Last edited:
http://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Order/8620_2A.pdf

FAA Order 8620.2A

SUBJ:
Applicability and Enforcement of Manufacturer’s Data
1.
Purpose of This Order. This order provides information and guidance to aviation safety inspectors (ASI) regarding the applicability and enforcement of Original Equipment Manufacturer’s (OEM) data listed on the Federal Aviation Administration’s (FAA) type certificate data sheet (TCDS). Information and guidance is also provided regarding OEM maintenance manual material, Service Letters (SL) and Service Bulletins (SB), and other maintenance or flight operations information including any material that has been identified or labeled by an OEM as “Mandatory.”
2.
Audience. The primary audience is Flight Standards District Office (FSDO) ASIs. The secondary audience includes Flight Standards regional and headquarters branch and division personnel.
3.
Where You Can Find This Order. ASIs can access this order through the Flight Standards Information Management System (FSIMS) at http://fsims.avr.faa.gov. Operators and the public can find this order at http://fsims.faa.gov.
4.
Background. Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 43, §§ 43.13(a) and 43.13(b) outline the performance standards for accomplishing non-air carrier maintenance, preventive maintenance, and alterations on U.S.-registered aircraft. This order provides clarification and guidance about the applicability of those regulatory performance standards when maintenance documents and maintenance requirements have been identified and labeled as mandatory by the OEM.
5.
Related Guidance (current editions).
a.
14 CFR part 43;
b.
14 CFR part 91; and
c.
FAA Order IR-M-8040.1A, Airworthiness Directives Manual.
Distribution: A-W(VR)-1; A-W(SI)-2; A-W(FS/IR/VN); Initiated By: AFS-300
A-X(FS/SI/CD)-3; A-FFS/FIA/FAC-0(LTD);
AMA-200 (12 cys)
11/5/07 8620.2A
6.
Applicability.
a.
Section 43.13(a) states, in part, “Each person performing maintenance, alteration, or preventive maintenance on an aircraft, engine, propeller, or appliance shall use the methods, techniques, and practices prescribed in:
1)
The current manufacturer’s maintenance manual or;
2)
Instructions for Continued Airworthiness prepared by its manufacturer, or;
3)
Other methods, techniques, and practices acceptable to the Administrator.”
b.
The language of § 43.13(a) clearly provides a person with three permissible options when performing maintenance, alterations, or preventive maintenance on a product. Section 43.13(a) does not provide an order of precedence for these three options. Further, although § 43.13(a) does not specifically address SB’s or SL’s, an OEM may legitimately incorporate an SB or SL into one of its maintenance manuals by reference. If it does so, the data specified, and the method, technique, or practice contained therein, may be acceptable to the Administrator. However, unless any method, technique, or practice prescribed by an OEM in any of its documents is specifically mandated by a regulatory document, such as Airworthiness Directive (AD), or specific regulatory language such as that in § 43.15(b); those methods, techniques, or practices are not mandatory.
7.
TCDS. Consistent with 14 CFR, a TCDS is part of a product’s type certificate (TC). A TCDS is a summary of the product’s type design. It is used primarily by authorized persons during initial or recurrent issuance of a Standard Airworthiness Certificate. It is neither a regulation, a maintenance requirements document, or a flight manual document. As such, for aircraft holding a valid and current airworthiness certificate, a TCDS should not be used as a sole source to determine what maintenance is required or what the flight operations requirements are. Any language on a TCDS, by itself, is not regulatory and is simply not enforceable. There must be a corresponding rule to make any language on the TCDS mandatory. For example, there is a mention of “operating limitations” on most TCDS. The corresponding rule for “operating limitations” is 14 CFR § 91.9(a) which states, “Except as provided in paragraph (d) of this section, no person may operate a civil aircraft without complying with the operating limitations specified in the approved Airplane or Rotorcraft Flight Manual, markings, and placards, or as otherwise prescribed by the certificating authority of the country of registry.” Without § 91.9, the TCDS requirement to comply with operating limitations would not be enforceable.
8.
TCDS Notes. TCDS notes are intended primarily to provide information on the various requirements for issuing an airworthiness certificate as well as the type and location of various technical documents used to operate and maintain the product. Some OEM’s have placed mandatory language such as “shall,” “must,” and “will” on their TCDS that imply that compliance with TCDS notes is mandatory. However, in the absence of regulatory language, or an AD that makes such TCDS notes mandatory, compliance with such notes is not mandatory. It would mean that FAA regulations effectively authorize OEMs to issue “substantive rules,” i.e., it would enable an OEM to impose legal requirements on the public that differ from the 14 CFR requirements. This would be objectionable for two reasons. First, the FAA does not have the
2
11/5/07 8620.2A
3
authority to delegate its rulemaking authority to an OEM. Second, “substantive rules” can be adopted only in accordance with the notice and comment procedures of the Administrative Procedures Act (APA), which does not apply to an OEM.
9.
Life Limits and Placarding. Adherence to component life limit retirement times listed on a TCDS is required by §§ 43.16 or 91.409(e), and a requirement to follow placard instructions is required by § 91.9(a).
10.
Summary. Consistent with 14 CFR, a TCDS is part of a product’s TC. As such, for aircraft holding a valid and current airworthiness certificate, a TCDS should not be used as a sole source to determine what maintenance is required or what the flight operations requirements are. Any language on a TCDS, by itself, is not regulatory and is simply not enforceable.
11.
Distribution. This order is distributed to the division levels at the Washington Headquarters of Flight Standards Service (AFS); to the branch levels at the Aircraft Certification Service; to the branch levels at the regional Flight Standards Divisions and Aircraft Certification Directorates; to all FSDOs; to all Aircraft Certification Offices (ACO), Aircraft Certification Field Offices, and all Satellite Offices and Manufacturing Inspection District Offices (MIDO); to the Aircraft Certification and Flight Standards Branches at the FAA Academy; to the Brussels Aircraft Certification and Flight Standards Staff; to applicable Representatives of the Administrator; and to all International Field Offices (IFO).
ORIGINAL SIGNED BY
James J. Ballough
Director, Flight Standards Service

For the lay person, what this order is saying is, if your aircraft manufacturer places a requirement on the type certificate that one brand of battery is to be used, you need not adhere to that requirement, as long as the brand you like meets the type design of the OEM.

or in this thread if Cessna painted the C-182 it does not need to stay painted in service, plus if the maintenance manual requires an enamel paint, you can use a ura product.

manufacturers data is only mandatory when the FAA says it is. Think AD and or ICAs
 
I've seen weights go up 20 lb on light planes, and that is not, as noted above, "negligible" in the FAA's eyes. YMMV. In any event, the shop employee or contractor sigining off the job is the party putting their ticket on the line when they return the aircraft to service with a "negligible" weight change in that log entry, so they are likely to be the one deciding whether or not it's necessary.

What happens when you throw it on the scales and it shows less than a pound difference than the most resent W&B sheet.
 
You'll probably need it re-rigged, too. Why? Because the flaps, ailerons, rudder & such have been removed for painting.
R&R of a flight control does not require a re-rig of any thing, in fact you should leave it alone. strip and paint will not change any thing, a rebalance of the flight control may even make it fly better.
 
I've never seen an aircraft paint shop that didn't have an A&P available to take care of the required removal, rebalancing, and replacement of the flight controls and to sign the return to service after the painting. That A&P can, if necessary, take care of the weighing and new W&B. And while "anybody" can paint an airplane, somebody with the appropriate FAA authorization has to sign the return to service after the painting, including either new W&B or certification that the change in W&B is "negligible" as defined above by the FAA.

You need to get out in the real world more often.

The best and most sought after Cessna wing repair person in the world holds no FAA certifications. yet does about 2 wings a month and they are as legal as it gets.

the best mag overhauler in the world is repairing and overhauling war bird mags every day and is swamped with work, and he holds no FAA certifications either.

when you buy parts from E-bay or any other place, on line or not, who declares airworthiness?
 
Let's say a pilot brought his aircraft to a reputable overhauler. The pilot does not supervise any of the work. Who returns the aircraft to service?
The maintenance certificate holder who did supervise the work.

Is "return to service" an event or a process?
It's an event which occurs when the authorized certificate holder signs the log entry for the work performed.

A rereading of 43.3 begats a Q: Why was supervision by pilot even mentioned? ("...no provision of pilot to supervise...")
Because you asked "how is that 'shop's authorized party' even equally as authorized as the owner/pilot (to return to service)?" Because in addition to all the things a pilot is authorized to do under preventive maintenance, the holder of a mechanic or repairman certificate can supervise others and sign off their work for return to service; a pilot cannot, even under preventive maintenance. Thus, such a person's authority is not only equal to, but greater than a pilot's.
 
What happens when you throw it on the scales and it shows less than a pound difference than the most resent W&B sheet.
If that should occur, I suppose the mechanic involved has the choice of using the new weight or signing off on "negligible" -- if that should occur. JOOC, how many times have you seen that happen upon weighing an aircraft after a full strip and repaint? Or do you just routinely sign it off as "negligible" without further thought?
 
I offer that perhaps weighing the plane BEFORE it gets painted then after might be a good data point...
 
Back
Top