Is a DG a requirement of Airworthyness?

[teamcoltra]

I just finished my annual and today my mechanic flew to sun n fun. Problem is that when I was taxing around, making sure everything worked I noticed that my DG doesn't "lock" when I adjust it.

It's an AN style DG and basically if I twist the knob and then pull out it will just keep spinning. If I stop on the number I want, it will just slowly start drifting around.

This is actually a "new" DG that was installed during the annual because my old DG kept drifting (not as bad as this, but it was drifting). My instructor and I still flew it around, but my instructor did keep reminding me that I really need to get it fixed, I was just waiting for a month until this annual.

Anyway, mechanic wont be back from Sun n Fun for a week, and I want to fly at least in the pattern with an instructor... my primary instructor is at Sun n Fun but got the number of another instructor at the same school who will be free... but I don't want to call him out to the airport and schedule a flight if the plane isn't actually airworthy.

 

[write-stuff]

Did you check your vacuum pump? DG isn't required for VFR flight.

 

[poadeleted20]

An operating gyroscopic direction indicator is not required for VFR operations, but it is required for IFR. However, if you have one installed, it must be working properly for the aircraft to be legally airworthy even for Day VFR unless you go through the 91.213(d) procedures and deactivate/placard it as inoperative.

 

[kyleb]

An operating gyroscopic direction indicator is not required for VFR operations, but it is required for IFR. However, if you have one installed, it must be working properly for the aircraft to be legally airworthy even for Day VFR unless you go through the 91.213(d) procedures and deactivate/placard it as inoperative.

Which means writing "inop" on a post-it note and covering the unit, right?

 

[frfly172]

Placard it inop until you get it repaired,stay out of the clouds.

 

[Tom-D]

Which means writing "inop" on a post-it note and covering the unit, right?

close but not quite, 91.213 (2) (d)

 

[Tom-D]

This is actually a "new" DG that was installed during the annual because my old DG kept drifting

the new DG didn't fix it? I'd look for a bad hose.

Venturi system? or vac pump?

Does the Attitude indicator work?

 

[teamcoltra]

the new DG didn't fix it? I'd look for a bad hose.

Venturi system? or vac pump?

Does the Attitude indicator work?

Vacuum pump, I believe. It's a PA28-140. The AI works fine.

 

[N801BH]

I just finished my annual and today my mechanic flew to sun n fun. Problem is that when I was taxing around, making sure everything worked I noticed that my DG doesn't "lock" when I adjust it.

It's an AN style DG and basically if I twist the knob and then pull out it will just keep spinning. If I stop on the number I want, it will just slowly start drifting around.

This is actually a "new" DG that was installed during the annual because my old DG kept drifting (not as bad as this, but it was drifting). My instructor and I still flew it around, but my instructor did keep reminding me that I really need to get it fixed, I was just waiting for a month until this annual.

Anyway, mechanic wont be back from Sun n Fun for a week, and I want to fly at least in the pattern with an instructor... my primary instructor is at Sun n Fun but got the number of another instructor at the same school who will be free... but I don't want to call him out to the airport and schedule a flight if the plane isn't actually airworthy.

And the A&P and IA signed off on the annual....

I would find a new mechanic.... SOON... IMHO..

 

[poadeleted20]

Which means writing "inop" on a post-it note and covering the unit, right?

Basically, yes. One might argue that the vacuum line should be pulled from the DG and the connector ends both capped so it is truly "deactivated", but it don't think that's really necessary.

 

[poadeleted20]

close but not quite, 91.213 (2) (d)

There is no such paragraph. You have your citation scrambled.

 

[Tom-D]

There is no such paragraph. You have your citation scrambled.

(2) The inoperative instruments and equipment are not—

(i) Part of the VFR-day type certification instruments and equipment prescribed in the applicable airworthiness regulations under which the aircraft was type certificated;

(ii) Indicated as required on the aircraft's equipment list, or on the Kinds of Operations Equipment List for the kind of flight operation being conducted;

(iii) Required by §91.205 or any other rule of this part for the specific kind of flight operation being conducted; or

(iv) Required to be operational by an airworthiness directive; and

(3) The inoperative instruments and equipment are—

(i) Removed from the aircraft, the cockpit control placarded, and the maintenance recorded in accordance with §43.9 of this chapter; or

(ii) Deactivated and placarded “Inoperative.” If deactivation of the inoperative instrument or equipment involves maintenance, it must be accomplished and recorded in accordance with part 43 of this chapter; and

(4) A determination is made by a pilot, who is certificated and appropriately rated under part 61 of this chapter, or by a person, who is certificated and appropriately rated to perform maintenance on the aircraft, that the inoperative instrument or equipment does not constitute a hazard to the aircraft.

An aircraft with inoperative instruments or equipment as provided in paragraph (d) of this section is considered to be in a properly altered condition acceptable to the Administrator.

 

[Tom-D]

Basically, yes. One might argue that the vacuum line should be pulled from the DG and the connector ends both capped so it is truly "deactivated", but it don't think that's really necessary.

It is considered deactivated if you can't see the face.

 

[poadeleted20]

(2) The inoperative instruments and equipment are not—

(i) Part of the VFR-day type certification instruments and equipment prescribed in the applicable airworthiness regulations under which the aircraft was type certificated;

(ii) Indicated as required on the aircraft's equipment list, or on the Kinds of Operations Equipment List for the kind of flight operation being conducted;

(iii) Required by §91.205 or any other rule of this part for the specific kind of flight operation being conducted; or

(iv) Required to be operational by an airworthiness directive; and

(3) The inoperative instruments and equipment are—

(i) Removed from the aircraft, the cockpit control placarded, and the maintenance recorded in accordance with §43.9 of this chapter; or

(ii) Deactivated and placarded “Inoperative.” If deactivation of the inoperative instrument or equipment involves maintenance, it must be accomplished and recorded in accordance with part 43 of this chapter; and

(4) A determination is made by a pilot, who is certificated and appropriately rated under part 61 of this chapter, or by a person, who is certificated and appropriately rated to perform maintenance on the aircraft, that the inoperative instrument or equipment does not constitute a hazard to the aircraft.

An aircraft with inoperative instruments or equipment as provided in paragraph (d) of this section is considered to be in a properly altered condition acceptable to the Administrator.

Your citation is still wrong even if you know what the relevant paragraph says.

 

[poadeleted20]

It is considered deactivated if you can't see the face.

And that is written where? I can certainly think of some really bad things which can happen if you just paper over a malfunctioning instrument.

 

[Tom-D]

And the A&P and IA signed off on the annual....

I would find a new mechanic.... SOON... IMHO..

And why wouldn't they? The annual would have been signed off prior to the flight, and then the Gyro noticed.

It is up to the owner to get the discrepancies repaired between inspections.

My question would be why didn't the A&P test the installation prior to making the maintenance entry and returning to service as safe to fly.

 

[Tom-D]

And that is written where? I can certainly think of some really bad things which can happen if you just paper over a malfunctioning instrument.

Just guidance given at the IA seminars.

there are a lot of stuff that can happen for a lot less.

 

[RotorAndWing]

And that is written where? I can certainly think of some really bad things which can happen if you just paper over a malfunctioning instrument.

Depends. On some aircraft per MEL you can deactivate something by turning it off. On the A320 you can "deactivate" a PFD or ND by simply turning it off and putting a placard on it.

As far as a stand alone DG? I think it could be done either way.

 

[Tom-D]

Vacuum pump, I believe. It's a PA28-140. The AI works fine.

you have a blockage between the DG and the filter. the system from filter to the AI is working means the vac pump is working, but the DG can't get air from the filter.

If the hose was off between the DG and the vac pump, it would relieve the vac pressure and the AI would quit.

 

[poadeleted20]

Depends. On some aircraft per MEL you can deactivate something by turning it off. On the A320 you can "deactivate" a PFD or ND by simply turning it off and putting a placard on it.

As far as a stand alone DG? I think it could be done either way.

I agree with what you said. I do not agree with Tom's blanket statement.

 

[poadeleted20]

Just guidance given at the IA seminars.

In other words, just your memory of what someone may have actually said. I wouldn't want to defend myself before the FAA based on that.

 

[Tom-D]

(3) The inoperative instruments and equipment are—

(i) Removed from the aircraft, the cockpit control placarded, and the maintenance recorded in accordance with §43.9 of this chapter; or

(ii) Deactivated and placarded “Inoperative.” If deactivation of the inoperative instrument or equipment involves maintenance, it must be accomplished and recorded in accordance with part 43 of this chapter; and

(4) A determination is made by a pilot, who is certificated and appropriately rated under part 61 of this chapter, or by a person, who is certificated and appropriately rated to perform maintenance on the aircraft, that the inoperative instrument or equipment does not constitute a hazard to the aircraft.

Any pilot doing maintenance better be authorized to make the return to service entry.

sticking a post it note over the glass is all they can do.

 

[Tom-D]

In other words, just your memory of what someone may have actually said. I wouldn't want to defend myself before the FAA based on that.

Out of the realm of reality.

 

[poadeleted20]

(3) The inoperative instruments and equipment are—

(i) Removed from the aircraft, the cockpit control placarded, and the maintenance recorded in accordance with §43.9 of this chapter; or

(ii) Deactivated and placarded “Inoperative.” If deactivation of the inoperative instrument or equipment involves maintenance, it must be accomplished and recorded in accordance with part 43 of this chapter; and

(4) A determination is made by a pilot, who is certificated and appropriately rated under part 61 of this chapter, or by a person, who is certificated and appropriately rated to perform maintenance on the aircraft, that the inoperative instrument or equipment does not constitute a hazard to the aircraft.

Any pilot doing maintenance better be authorized to make the return to service entry.

sticking a post it note over the glass is all they can do.

I agree, but the point you seem to be missing (but R&W clearly gets) is that contrary to your earlier blanket statement, sticking a cover over it may not always be enough to safely "deactivate" an instrument.

 

[Tom-D]

I agree, but the point you seem to be missing (but R&W clearly gets) is that contrary to your earlier blanket statement, sticking a cover over it may not always be enough to safely "deactivate" an instrument.

It would be for a DG in a light single with an old AN 1 gyro. because that is the only thing a pilot can do.

The aircraft will be in a properly altered condition.

Plus getting the discrepancy repaired is on the owner/operator.

In this case (post 1) this discrepancy should have been noted on the out of annual turn up. If I were the IA I would not sign it off as airworthy, I'd either get it repaired prior to completion of the annual, or go the unairworthy route.

 

[Tom-D]

Depends. On some aircraft per MEL you can deactivate something by turning it off. On the A320 you can "deactivate" a PFD or ND by simply turning it off and putting a placard on it.

As far as a stand alone DG? I think it could be done either way.

an aircraft equipped with an old AN1 gyro most likely doesn't have a MEL.

 

[poadeleted21]

It would be for a DG in a light single with an old AN 1 gyro. because that is the only thing a pilot can do.

The aircraft will be in a properly altered condition.

Plus getting the discrepancy repaired is on the owner/operator.

In this case (post 1) this discrepancy should have been noted on the out of annual turn up. If I were the IA I would not sign it off as airworthy, I'd either get it repaired prior to completion of the annual, or go the unairworthy route.

Would you not sign it off as airworthy with the post it note installed?

 

[RotorAndWing]

an aircraft equipped with an old AN1 gyro most likely doesn't have a MEL.

Why?

If it's a single engine airplane an MEL can be developed from the MMEL Single Engine list. Within the MEL it will say "Directional Gyro", number installed "1", number required "0".

Then it will list the conditions that must be met to defer the item, such as "VFR flight only" and "Instrument must be placarded Inop". The final item will be the category in which it's deferred, either "A", "B", "C" or "D".

 

[Tom-D]

Why?

If it's a single engine airplane an MEL can be developed from the MMEL Single Engine list. Within the MEL it will say "Directional Gyro", number

SO, what's the chances that the OP has one?

 

[Tom-D]

Would you not sign it off as airworthy with the post it note installed?

no...If you don't want it replaced/fixed or what ever, you get an unairworthy sign off.

Remember I live in the real world. you fix it or go some where else.

 

[RotorAndWing]

SO, what's the chances that the OP has one?

I have no clue. I've seen several over my life, it's no secret to write one and get FAA approval. A few of the aircraft I owned had one.

It's a fairly simple process. Flight schools like to use them.

 

[RotorAndWing]

. If I were the IA I would not sign it off as airworthy, I'd either get it repaired prior to completion of the annual, or go the unairworthy route.

Would you not sign it off as airworthy with the post it note installed?

You can, all the IA has to do is sign off the annual inspection as complete with a discrepancy list given to the owner.

March 22, 20XX
Total Aircraft Time 3,202.5 hours
Hobbs Meter Reading 975.5 hours
I certify that this aircraft has been inspected in accordance with an
annual inspection, and a list of discrepancies and unairworthy
items dated March 22, 20XX, have been provided for the aircraft
owner.
Joseph P. Kline
A&P 1123456789 IA

 

[Tom-D]

You can, all the IA has to do is sign off the annual inspection as complete with a discrepancy list given to the owner.

March 22, 20XX
Total Aircraft Time 3,202.5 hours
Hobbs Meter Reading 975.5 hours
I certify that this aircraft has been inspected in accordance with an
annual inspection, and a list of discrepancies and unairworthy
items dated March 22, 20XX, have been provided for the aircraft
owner.
Joseph P. Kline
A&P 1123456789 IA

He asked IF I WOULD, I answered him.

 

[Tom-D]

I have no clue.

Pretty much.

I've seen several over my life, it's no secret to write one and get FAA approval. A few of the aircraft I owned had one.

It's a fairly simple process. Flight schools like to use them.

The chances are very slim you will ever see a MEL in an aircraft that is old enough to have a AN 1 installed this late in life. I can't remember ever seeing one.

 

[RotorAndWing]

The chances are very slim you will ever see a MEL in an aircraft that is old enough to have a AN 1 installed this late in life. I can't remember ever seeing one.

You keep harping on the age of the aircraft as if it has a bearing on if a MEL can be issued for it or not. The age of the airplane has no bearing on the MMEL.

The Single Engine MMEL was developed to cover ALL single engine airplanes regardless of age. Because you have not seen one doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

Just curious, how many MEL's have you written for an aircraft?

 

[Tom-D]

You keep harping on the age of the aircraft as if it has a bearing on if a MEL can be issued for it or not. The age of the airplane has no bearing on the MMEL.

The Single Engine MMEL was developed to cover ALL single engine airplanes regardless of age. Because you have not seen one doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

I'm saying it is very remote that the OP has one, regardless of how easy they are to get or who else has one. The big clue was the style of the gyro, they haven't been installed in new aircraft in many a year. If in fact the aircraft that old that had a MEL is probably been junked by now

 

[RotorAndWing]

I'm saying it is very remote that the OP has one, regardless of how easy they are to get or who else has one. The big clue was the style of the gyro, they haven't been installed in new aircraft in many a year. If in fact the aircraft that old that had a MEL is probably been junked by now

Huh?

That makes no sense at all.

So you are saying a Cessna 195 with an AN style gyro installed cannot apply for or have an MEL for that particular airframe?

What about a Piper Tripacer? Many of them came with AN gyros.

 

[N801BH]

And why wouldn't they? The annual would have been signed off prior to the flight, and then the Gyro noticed.

It is up to the owner to get the discrepancies repaired between inspections.

My question would be why didn't the A&P test the installation prior to making the maintenance entry and returning to service as safe to fly.

..

You are arguing with yourself within two sentences of your own post....

 

[poadeleted21]

no...If you don't want it replaced/fixed or what ever, you get an unairworthy sign off.

Remember I live in the real world. you fix it or go some where else.

Why not? Is the plane not airworthy with an INOP post-it note stuck to the DG?

 

[Tom-D]

Huh?

That makes no sense at all.

So you are saying a Cessna 195 with an AN style gyro installed cannot apply for or have an MEL for that particular airframe?

What about a Piper Tripacer? Many of them came with AN gyros.

So, how many of those type of aircraft would be operating on a MEL in the real world ?

Very very few.