Extention to exhaust, should the renter (me) care?

U

Unregistered

Guest
I rent a plane from a friend.
He recently added about 6" to the exhaust, should I be concerned as a renter about the airworthiness?

What do I say to the FAA guy if he ramp-checks me?
 
Did he do it himself, or have it done?
Is there a logbook entry?

I think the question is "is the airplane airworthy", which means 2 things (R&W, PLEASE correct me if I get this wrong as I want to get it right):

The airplane is in conformance with it's Type certificate (which means the original type certificate, all supplemental type certificates, and any other approved mods like field approvals). All changes to the airplane should have corresponding log entries and those entries should say something about the mod being done in accordance with STC XYZ or Field Approval 123 or that it's a minor alteration. The Owner/Operator is responsible for this portion of airworthiness.

The airplane is in a condition for safe flight, and the PIC is responsible for this.

Now, in your case, now that you know what's required, you can determine if you think the airplane is airworthy. If you think it isn't then you could be held accountable for flying an airplane you thought was unairworthy. The owner could be held accountable for the mod.

Hope this is useful.

Oh, and if you get ramp-checked, you can say that you inspected the airplane and it seemed safe to you. If it's an airworthiness conformance issue (as opposed to a "safe to fly" issue) the inspector will probably want to deal with the owner.
 
Last edited:
TMetzinger said:
Did he do it himself, or have it done?
Is there a logbook entry?

I think the question is "is the airplane airworthy", which means 2 things (R&W, PLEASE correct me if I get this wrong as I want to get it right):

The airplane is in conformance with it's Type certificate (which means the original type certificate, all supplemental type certificates, and any other approved mods like field approvals). All changes to the airplane should have corresponding log entries and those entries should say something about the mod being done in accordance with STC XYZ or Field Approval 123 or that it's a minor alteration. The Owner/Operator is responsible for this portion of airworthiness.

The airplane is in a condition for safe flight, and the PIC is responsible for this.

Now, in your case, now that you know what's required, you can determine if you think the airplane is airworthy. If you think it isn't then you could be held accountable for flying an airplane you thought was unairworthy. The owner could be held accountable for the mod.

Hope this is useful.

Oh, and if you get ramp-checked, you can say that you inspected the airplane and it seemed safe to you. If it's an airworthiness conformance issue (as opposed to a "safe to fly" issue) the inspector will probably want to deal with the owner.
Click to expand...

Seems OK to me.
 
Thanks! I've always felt that CFIs don't get the training we should about airworthiness. We get the basics and the information is out there to be found but it's often a case of not knowing what we don't know.
 
Photo?

Perhaps it is a short-stack Powerflow exhaust, in which case there should be a STC and alog book entry.

-Skip
 
We had some on a 172 for years, chromed too. They kept the cowling a lot cleaner. Not particularly legal but not particularly dangerous. Sort of like the camera attached to the strut, I can't get too wrapped around the axle about these things....but I am not the f.a.r.-mongering type.
 
Let'sgoflying! said:
We had some on a 172 for years, chromed too. They kept the cowling a lot cleaner. Not particularly legal but not particularly dangerous. Sort of like the camera attached to the strut, I can't get too wrapped around the axle about these things....but I am not the f.a.r.-mongering type.
Click to expand...


There ya go...

"What extension? Oh, that? Looks OK to me..."

You are not required to be an A&P with inspection Authorization to fly an airplane.
 
Some extensions can and have caused trouble. A friend of a friend died when the exhaust stack on his 185 broke off and the exhaust started a fire in the cowling. The extra weight of the extension did it. The muffler moves with the engine (which vibrates a lot) and adding weight to the stack makes it flex more where it's welded to the muffler.

Dan
 
Since you know the extension was added by the owner, you would have to lie to the FAA in order to say, "What extension?" Of course, the inspector who ramp checks you and sees that alteration isn't going to polygraph you, so you might well get away with lying about your "surprise" at learning the exhaust system has been altered, and I know that would be good enough for many who post here.

However, given the possible effects of an improperly altered exhaust system, you have to ask yourself whether you're sufficiently certain that the aircraft really is "in a condition for safe flight" with that modified exhaust system, and since you probably aren't qualified to make that judgement yourself, the way to do that is as stated above -- examine the aircraft records to determine whether or not it is in an "approved altered state."

And you don't have to be an A&P to be held accountable for something like this. This is a basic issue on even a PP practical test -- see Area I, Task B.
 
Dan Thomas said:
Some extensions can and have caused trouble. A friend of a friend died when the exhaust stack on his 185 broke off and the exhaust started a fire in the cowling. The extra weight of the extension did it. The muffler moves with the engine (which vibrates a lot) and adding weight to the stack makes it flex more where it's welded to the muffler.
Dan
Click to expand...

Can we be sure the muffler was not aged or neglected?
Or that it was adequately inspected?
(One cannot, for example attach an extension to a 'tissue paper' muffler and hope it won't cause problems. )
Sorry to hear about your friend Dan but I really have to wonder if the stack caused this failure.
 
Ron Levy said:
Since you know the extension was added by the owner,
Click to expand...

That is assuming facts that aren't really in evidence. You are assuming that the owner actually did the work when the phrase used COULD mean that the owner caused it to be done by legal means.
 
Greg Bockelman said:
That is assuming facts that aren't really in evidence. You are assuming that the owner actually did the work when the phrase used COULD mean that the owner caused it to be done by legal means.
Click to expand...
You're right, which is why I said the answer is to check the aircraft's maintenance records to find out if it was done legally before you fly the plane, not after the FAA ramps you. If you do that, you have no problem at all telling the truth to the FAA. The problem is when you know it was done but don't know if it's legal. In that case, the pilot has failed his/her regulatory responsibility to assure airworthiness even if it was done legally, because then the fact that it is legal is a matter of luck, not doing what one is supposed to do.
 
You're right, which is why I said the answer is to check the aircraft's maintenance records to find out if it was done legally before you fly the plane, not after the FAA ramps you. If you do that, you have no problem at all telling the truth to the FAA. The problem is when you know it was done but don't know if it's legal. In that case, the pilot has failed his/her regulatory responsibility to assure airworthiness even if it was done legally, because then the fact that it is legal is a matter of luck, not doing what one is supposed to do.
Click to expand...
Well said.
 
Unregistered said:
I rent a plane from a friend.
He recently added about 6" to the exhaust, should I be concerned as a renter about the airworthiness?

What do I say to the FAA guy if he ramp-checks me?
Click to expand...

How do you know if it was or was not in compliance with out them?

you may have been flying the unairworthy aircraft all along, and now it is legal.

Did you see a entry in the logs? engine or airframe ?


did you make any effort to comply with 91.7 ?
 
Last edited:
Old Thread: Hello . There have been no replies in this thread for 365 days.
Content in this thread may no longer be relevant.
Perhaps it would be better to start a new thread instead.
Back
Top