Owner maintenance

[Tom-D]

Can an owner remove parts like a prop from an aircraft with out prior arrangements with a A&P supervisor?

FAR 43 says
43.3 Persons authorized to perform maintenance, preventive maintenance, rebuilding, and alterations.
(a) Except as provided in this section and §43.17, no person may maintain, rebuild, alter, or perform preventive maintenance on an aircraft, airframe, aircraft engine, propeller, appliance, or component part to which this part applies. Those items, the performance of which is a major alteration, a major repair, or preventive maintenance, are listed in appendix A.

are owners that remove parts to send to repair facilities in violation of this reg?

 

[weirdjim]

Can an owner remove parts like a prop from an aircraft with out prior arrangements with a A&P supervisor?
are owners that remove parts to send to repair facilities in violation of this reg?

Nope. Removal and sending to fixit ain't maintenance. Putting the prop back on after fixit IS.

.

 

[Immelman]

My understanding is that anybody can make an airplane not-airworthy. But someone who can sign for the mx performed would need to sign for a return to service to make it airworthy again.

Now personally I would not go pulling something major without having a talk with the person you will ask to sign it off later!

 

[Tom-D]

Nope. Removal and sending to fixit ain't maintenance.

show me that in any rule.

I have an other web site that needs the link.

 

[flyingron]

Nope. Removal and sending to fixit ain't maintenance. Putting the prop back on after fixit IS.

.

Anybody can make a plane UNairworthy.

 

[Dr. O]

Do a Nancy Reagan

 

[Skip Miller]

show me that in any rule.

I don't think you will find a rule about this in the FARs, Tom.

The "magic" you A&Ps and IAs have is the ability to return a plane to service. That's why an owner can do any maintenance - including dismantling the plane down to the last rivet, and rebuilding it again - so long as the owner is under the supervision of the A&P. What would happen if this rebuild were two days from complete, and then the A&P dropped dead? Would the owner then be in violation of the FARs? I don't see that happening. (Now getting that plane declared airworthy is another issue, but that's not the question here....)

It would be foolish for an owner to take the prop off (your scenario now) without a conversation with the A&P first, because it is better to know your path back to a return-to-service in the logs.

FAR illegal to remove the prop? My vote is No.

-Skip

 

[Bob Noel]

While disassembly tasks are often required to perform maintenance tasks, is disassembly, in and of itself, maintenance? If so, why?

 

[Sgtmac]

If its not "preventive maintenance" then it is maintenance...doesn't matter if it is pulling something off. Let an FAA inspector catch you doing it.

 

[darrell]

If its not "preventive maintenance" then it is maintenance...doesn't matter if it is pulling something off. Let an FAA inspector catch you doing it.

Not true, the FAR defines maintenance right in Part 1:

Maintenance means inspection, overhaul, repair, preservation, and the replacement of parts, but excludes preventive maintenance.

It specifically excludes preventive maintenance, as you mentioned. But it only INCLUDES "inspection, overhaul, repair, preservation, and the replacement of parts". Therefore anything else is also excluded, such as removal of parts.

 

[Tom-D]

Not true, the FAR defines maintenance right in Part 1:



It specifically excludes preventive maintenance, as you mentioned. But it only INCLUDES "inspection, overhaul, repair, preservation, and the replacement of parts". Therefore anything else is also excluded, such as removal of parts.

There is the reason for the question.

Are you maintaing the aircraft during the removal process?

 

[DaleB]

There is the reason for the question.

Are you maintaing the aircraft during the removal process?

No, I'm disassembling it.

Remove.

Repair, inspect, rebuild or replace.

Re-install.


Think of it this way. Let's say I have decided that I'm done flying, and I'm not going to sell my plane to someone else. I feel it's lived out its useful life, and I'm going to have pieces made into wall art or pop cans. Am I violating FAA regulations when I cut it apart?

 

[Tom-D]

No, I'm disassembling it.

Remove.

Repair, inspect, rebuild or replace.

Re-install.


Think of it this way. Let's say I have decided that I'm done flying, and I'm not going to sell my plane to someone else. I feel it's lived out its useful life, and I'm going to have pieces made into wall art or pop cans. Am I violating FAA regulations when I cut it apart?

I agree there is no violation in removing stuff. my argument was, all the people removing parts from aircraft in the salvage yards are not A&Ps.

This thread is kinda like a poll, who believes maintenance includes removal?

 

[Bob Noel]

I agree there is no violation in removing stuff. my argument was, all the people removing parts from aircraft in the salvage yards are not A&Ps.

This thread is kinda like a poll, who believes maintenance includes removal?

nit-picking alert: it depends on the definition of removal. For example, I would consider removing rust to be maintenance. Removing an access panel would not be maintenance.

 

[Tom-D]

nit-picking alert: it depends on the definition of removal. For example, I would consider removing rust to be maintenance. Removing an access panel would not be maintenance.

Rust removal is maintenance and logged as corrosion treatment.

Removal of the panels is allowed as maintenance under 43-A, ( c) 1-31. It is preventive maintenance but still gets logged IAW FAR 43.

 

[Witmo]

Can an owner remove a prop? Sure, no problem. Can an owner take an axe and chop a hole into the wing? Absolutely, he owns the airplane and can do whatever he wants to make it unairworthy if that's his desire. Now if he wants to fly it again, he'll need the services of at least an A&P to make it airworthy again.

 

[Alexb2000]

This makes me chuckle. I have plumbers tell me that they believe a homeowner shouldn't be allowed to purchase a PVC fitting without a license. Electricians tell me anything above changing a light bulb should be illegal. This sounds similar.

 

[RotorAndWing]

This makes me chuckle. I have plumbers tell me that they believe a homeowner shouldn't be allowed to purchase a PVC fitting without a license. Electricians tell me anything above changing a light bulb should be illegal. This sounds similar.

Yep, use regulations to force business, it's become the American way.

My last house in the US I had to replace the hot water heater. Found out in my county you had to have a "license" and only plumbers had the license.

 

[timwinters]

My last house in the US I had to replace the hot water heater.

You mean a cold water heater, don't you? :wink2:

 

[RotorAndWing]

You mean a cold water heater, don't you? :wink2:

Hot water tank, heater, whatever.

Depends upon what part of the country you're from.

 

[timwinters]

Hot water tank, heater, whatever.

Depends upon what part of the country you're from.

No, really, almost everyone calls it a hot water heater. But as Carlin used to say, "if the water's hot, why do you need to heat it."

I miss George.

 

[Immelman]

So wait, if I gear-up an airplane and the prop comes off, did I perform illegal maintenance?

 

[weirdjim]

I miss George.

We all miss George. He wrote a prophetic book just before his death called "The Last Word". It is funnysadhilarious and just a great read.

.

 

[Ted]

This makes me chuckle. I have plumbers tell me that they believe a homeowner shouldn't be allowed to purchase a PVC fitting without a license. Electricians tell me anything above changing a light bulb should be illegal. This sounds similar.

This is why those people have won my lack of business.

 

[kenjr]

...just ask your A&P. We do a ton of owner maintenance and have worked with the same (well, the other Partners anyway...who have been in the plane a dozen plus years now...) A&P for the duration. So, he knows what we are capable of doing ourselves and he lets us know what he needs to sign off on.

Unless you just have a crapload of money - I can't imagine not doing as much owner assist maintenance as possible - if for anything, you learn/know more about the plane you are flying and exactly what's been done. But, you have to set the ground rules with your A&P and IA...they'll be able to assess what you can do without them there and what they need to be there for and sign off on.

 

[bnt83]

Yep, use regulations to force business, it's become the American way.

typing

<As a fire equipement contractor goes around testing the smoke detectors> <--- seems like every week...

 

[Ted]

Unless you just have a crapload of money - I can't imagine not doing as much owner assist maintenance as possible - if for anything, you learn/know more about the plane you are flying and exactly what's been done. But, you have to set the ground rules with your A&P and IA...they'll be able to assess what you can do without them there and what they need to be there for and sign off on.

I'm a fan of owner-assisted work and do a lot of it now, but I did very little for several years. I used to be a Jaguar mechanic and was an engineer at an engine company that used lots of gray paint, so I know how to turn a wrench.

The main reasons I didn't do much owner-assisted work for a while was that it didn't make sense. I have limited time I can commit. When the plane was flying a lot, I couldn't just let the maintenance wait until I had time.

Even still, I don't suspect I'll do much assistance on the annual, other than remove and reinstall the seats. I do most of the squawks in between annuals since they're minor and I can do them on weekends. Some squawks that come up during annual I'll handle, usually the ones that are less wrenching and more coordination or research, like fixing the de-ice relay/prop heat timer. If I can bring it home, even better.

Also, I do all the work on our cars (10 and 20 years old). That saves some very significant amount of money, and I don't have to go to the airport to do.

 

[bluerooster]

show me that in any rule.

I have an other web site that needs the link.

I doubt you will find it in any rule.

But removal of the prop is one thing, and installation is another.

 

[Skylane81E]

Just don't drop it on your toes

 

[kontiki]

The main reasons I didn't do much owner-assisted work for a while was that it didn't make sense. I have limited time I can commit. When the plane was flying a lot, I couldn't just let the maintenance wait until I had time.

I'm discovering this now. I used to fly about 7-8 hours a month. Now that I bought, I got about 5 hours in 2 months. It takes a week to order a part, get it and put it in, and that eats up all the flying time for any one week. The dilemma was that rentals were not really practical for cross country trips. I'm not giving up, but am finding it hard.

 

[kontiki]

show me that in any rule.

I have an other web site that needs the link.

I don't have a link, but I believe it's in the FAR verbiage. You technically suspend the airworthiness of the aircraft when you pull the prop, you need some one with an A&P to resotore the airworthiness through the log book entry.

 

[Tom-D]

I don't have a link, but I believe it's in the FAR verbiage. You technically suspend the airworthiness of the aircraft when you pull the prop, you need some one with an A&P to resotore the airworthiness through the log book entry.

The closest the argument can get is in the interpretation of the word "Maintenance"

I can find nothing that says removal is not included, nor can I find any thing that says that it is.

 

[jaybee]

I'm not a lawyer but I play one on the internet -

As stated part 1 gives definition of maintenance "...replacement..."

now the FAA doesn't give a definition of the word replacement but a look see in the dictionary says "to do the job or duty of"

obviously, replacement is a complete act - from removal to installation.

it was already said best - to pull it without consulting with an A&P first would just be stupid.

will you hanged for it ? probably not

could you be hanged for it ? beats me not a lawyer, odds are probably be as good as Vegas

 

[PilotAlan]

I don't have a link, but I believe it's in the FAR verbiage. You technically suspend the airworthiness of the aircraft when you pull the prop, you need some one with an A&P to resotore the airworthiness through the log book entry.

Bingo.

Someone earlier talked about an inspector catching the pilot removing a prop. What are they going to do? Ground the plane. It's unairworthy.
How does it get airworthy? An A&P installs the prop and signs it off as airworthy.

Except that the inspector didn't have to do anything, it was unairworthy as soon as you removed the prop. The only thing the inspector is doing is following up to make sure that it is properly reinstalled and returned to service by an A&P, vs being reinstalled by the "maintenance fairies" and never logged.

Suppose my prop got stolen in the middle of the night. Does anyone question that my A&P can install a new one and sign off the install? The removal wasn't done and logged by an A&P....

The rules only apply to an aircraft if the intent is to legally fly it. Anyone can do anything to a plane. If you want to fly it legally, an A&P or IA has to declare it airworthy and return it to service.
As has been stated, anyone can make a plane unairworthy.

 

[jaybee]

Well technically I can sell crack and heroin and until I get caught...

anyhow... the question wasn't how to make the aircraft legal, it was if an owner pulling a prop is illegal. Since replacement is a complete procedure...

like you said "what can they do?" beats me but I don't want to find out. EDIT -funny thing, as I was studying for my A&P written, they can revoke any and all certificates. :wink2: thats what they can do.

I just sat down with an ASI the other day to have my 8610-2 signed off and the biggest thing he wanted me to take away from the meeting was "don't do anything you are not appropriately rated for and you won't get in trouble" and an owner isn't appropriately rated for prop replacement.

again, will they do something ? probably not

can they do something ? take your odds im sure they're as good as Vegas odds.

 

[bluerooster]

How it works,
True story: I(not A&P) pulled the prop off our C-150, sent it to prop shop for overhaul. When it came back, I (not a&P) installed said prop IAW maintenance manual.
"Under the supervision necessary....." A&P/IA inspected my work, and signed the logs.
No worries, all legal and above board.

 

[Hank S]

Too many hair-splitting weenies here confusing "replace" with "remove and replace." Taking things off is frequently required in maintenance, but the act of removing a screw, a propeller or an alternator is not "maintenance" by itself. Cracking open the alternator and checking/replacing brushes is, the alternator is being maintained, changing its condition for improved/proper operation; taking it off does nothing for its condition.

Putting the alternator and prop back on is not maintenance either, but is restoring the plane to an airworthy condition. Can't fly with the prop on the floor, and to keep flying it must be properly installed--> get an A&P/IA to do it or supervise it and approve it. I do owner assisted annuals, maintain my cars and tear apart large equipment at work, but I turned down the opportunity to reinstall my propeller because it's rather important to my longevity, has constant speed complexity and other than that spiky lever on the panel and a bunch of grease fittings under the spinner, I am completely unfamiliar with what's in there. Besides, my safety wiring is often unattractive though functional.

 

[jaybee]

Says the even bigger weenie who makes up his own words that the FAA doesn't use to validate his opinion.

Replacement is a complete function - Remove, overhaul or exchange, and reinstall.

Remove and replace is not terminology the FAA uses. It is that simple, really. Reading comprehension is your friend. You can internet lawyer it up all you want doesn't change the terminology the FAA uses.

And again, but this simple fact seems to be overlooked again and again - the question that was asked was answered. The reality of the situation has been recognized again and again, the chances of the FAA actually doing something about this to someone is about the same chances of hitting the Jackpot in Vegas.

 

[SoloEqs]

My understanding is that anybody can make an airplane not-airworthy.

. . .when he doesn't have enough placards . . .

 

[Witmo]

Says the even bigger weenie who makes up his own words that the FAA doesn't use to validate his opinion.

Replacement is a complete function - Remove, overhaul or exchange, and reinstall.

Remove and replace is not terminology the FAA uses. It is that simple, really. Reading comprehension is your friend. You can internet lawyer it up all you want doesn't change the terminology the FAA uses.

And again, but this simple fact seems to be overlooked again and again - the question that was asked was answered. The reality of the situation has been recognized again and again, the chances of the FAA actually doing something about this to someone is about the same chances of hitting the Jackpot in Vegas.

Can the FAA revoke someone's pilot certificate for taking an axe and making large, irregular holes in the wing of an airplane he owns? What if he just takes the wing or propeller off and hangs it in his hangar? I think not; it's his property to do with as he likes as long as it doesn't fly. If the pilot tried to take off with the airplane in that condition or restore it to flyable condition without the benefit of an A&P, yes, they would have a problem with doing so without the proper certification. Rendering an aircraft unairworthy is not illegal provided it's your own property and you have no intention of flying it in that condition. The only dog that the FAA has in this fight is how an aircraft can be returned to service after it is in an unairworthy condition. Makes no difference if the pilot removed something or ran into a post.