Recommended TBO

[Bob Noel]

Owners do not worry about what you do to their aircraft as long as the bills do not resemble the national debt.

I'm one owner that pays attention to what service is necessary from a legal perspective and what service is common sense. I most definitely do not simply turn the keys over to my A&Ps. Besides, owner-assisted maintenance is part of the fun of owning.

Except for one A&P/IA who was a complete richard, I've had excellent A&P and IA's working on my airplane and I trust them all (except for the richard).

 

[Tom-D]

I'm one owner that pays attention to what service is necessary from a legal perspective and what service is common sense. I most definitely do not simply turn the keys over to my A&Ps. Besides, owner-assisted maintenance is part of the fun of owning.

Except for one A&P/IA who was a complete richard, I've had excellent A&P and IA's working on my airplane and I trust them all (except for the richard).

Would you have a problem with doing the service bulletins if the costs were reasonable?

 

[Bob Noel]

Would you have a problem with doing the service bulletins if the costs were reasonable?

If the SB doesn't provide any benefit I probably wouldn't have it done even if it was almost free.

I'm more interested in knowing what the SB fixes/addresses. If there was some airworthiness/safety thing being addressed by the SB and (by some miracle) the FAA hadn't made compliance an AD yet, I'd still probably comply with it even if it was expensive. That's kind of a long-winded way of saying safety is more important to me than paperwork.

 

[poadeleted20]

I was told last night by a friend that the latest edition of Light Plane Maintenance contains, on page 2, a report of a court case in Maryland and the awarding of damages from the crash of a Cherokee against the maintenance shop which last did the annual because it did not perform the SB388C valve guide wear test and the engine subsequently failed for reasons related to valve guide wear. I'm trying to obtain a citation so I can read the actual case and get the details, but this sounds be a warning to maintainers that if they don't obtain informed consent to skip doing relevant SB's, they may be held civilly liable for the consequences. Caveat mechanicus.

 

[BillTIZ]

There is an article in this months EAA magazine pushing exactly the opposite. Well actually discussing the selective application of recommended TBO limitations and service limits.

No discussion of the liability issues in court.

 

[Tom-D]

I was told last night by a friend that the latest edition of Light Plane Maintenance contains, on page 2, a report of a court case in Maryland and the awarding of damages from the crash of a Cherokee against the maintenance shop which last did the annual because it did not perform the SB388C valve guide wear test and the engine subsequently failed for reasons related to valve guide wear. I'm trying to obtain a citation so I can read the actual case and get the details, but this sounds be a warning to maintainers that if they don't obtain informed consent to skip doing relevant SB's, they may be held civilly liable for the consequences. Caveat mechanicus.

Like Lucky Ned Pepper said, " I need a good judge not a good lawyer" or some thing like that.

If what you suggest is a fact, I see some very expensive annuals in the future. because we must remember the Canadians already think of S/B as mandatory.

If the manufacturers see an opportunity to sell parts thru the S/B system, GA days are numbered.

 

[Bob Noel]

If the manufacturers see an opportunity to sell parts thru the S/B system, GA days are numbered.

Or that might be enough to push small GA into the experimental side.

At least until the lawyers turn their attacks towards experimentals.

 

[poadeleted20]

Like Lucky Ned Pepper said, " I need a good judge not a good lawyer" or some thing like that.

If what you suggest is a fact, I see some very expensive annuals in the future. because we must remember the Canadians already think of S/B as mandatory.

If the manufacturers see an opportunity to sell parts thru the S/B system, GA days are numbered.

I've not read the case, but it is my understanding that the issue was not failure to perform the SB, but failure to inform the owner of its existence and to obtain informed consent to not do it, possibly because the shop didn't even know of its existence. If so, then a shop is off the hook once they identify the SB if they inform the owner, explain the ramifications, and obtain informed consent to skip it. OTOH, a shop which signs off an annual but misses the existence of an applicable SB, or chooses on its own to skip it, would be at risk. When I find out more, I'll post more.

 

[Tom-D]

I've not read the case, but it is my understanding that the issue was not failure to perform the SB, but failure to inform the owner of its existence and to obtain informed consent to not do it, possibly because the shop didn't even know of its existence. If so, then a shop is off the hook once they identify the SB if they inform the owner, explain the ramifications, and obtain informed consent to skip it. OTOH, a shop which signs off an annual but misses the existence of an applicable SB, or chooses on its own to skip it, would be at risk. When I find out more, I'll post more.

I wonder how this effects the question ?

91.403 General.

(a) The owner or operator of an aircraft is primarily responsible for maintaining that aircraft in an airworthy condition, including compliance with part 39 of this chapter.

 

[poadeleted20]

I wonder how this effects the question ?

91.403 General.

(a) The owner or operator of an aircraft is primarily responsible for maintaining that aircraft in an airworthy condition, including compliance with part 39 of this chapter.

There are plenty of cases on record where the pilot/owner of an aircraft was excused from airworthiness violations that his/her certiricate and required training did not allow him/her to determine. For example, if a crankshaft is improperly reworked by a repair station and installed in the engine by an A&P, with all the right signoffs on the paperwork, the FAA will not hold the pilot/owner responsible flying that aircraft with that unairworthy crankshaft. OTOH, if an AD is not performed, the FAA will indeed hold the pilot responsible for flying the aircraft in that unairworthy condition, because review of the maintenance records to determine AD compliance is well established as a pilot reponsibility.

However, the case in question involves civil liability, not FAA enforcement. From that perspective, it's possible that the pilot/owner might be determined by a jury to be negligent in this matter if an uncomplied-with SB results in an accident, but that would not necessarily absove the shop which failed to advise the pilot/owner of the SB from its liability to third parties injured by the accident, or even to the pilot for any damage to the aircraft.

 

[Tom-D]

There are plenty of cases on record where the pilot/owner of an aircraft was excused from airworthiness violations that his/her certiricate and required training did not allow him/her to determine. For example, if a crankshaft is improperly reworked by a repair station and installed in the engine by an A&P, with all the right signoffs on the paperwork, the FAA will not hold the pilot/owner responsible flying that aircraft with that unairworthy crankshaft. OTOH, if an AD is not performed, the FAA will indeed hold the pilot responsible for flying the aircraft in that unairworthy condition, because review of the maintenance records to determine AD compliance is well established as a pilot reponsibility.

However, the case in question involves civil liability, not FAA enforcement. From that perspective, it's possible that the pilot/owner might be determined by a jury to be negligent in this matter if an uncomplied-with SB results in an accident, but that would not necessarily absove the shop which failed to advise the pilot/owner of the SB from its liability to third parties injured by the accident, or even to the pilot for any damage to the aircraft.

Seeing as the FAA and manufacturers send the owners the ADs and SBs to the owner first, why should the A&P be required to tell them too?

My Cessna customers are continually calling me and asking if they must comply with the letters they receive.

I'll simply tell them yes from now on.

 

[poadeleted20]

Seeing as the FAA and manufacturers send the owners the ADs and SBs to the owner first,

Only on initial issue.

why should the A&P be required to tell them too?

Becaues new owners don't get back copies when they register their new ownership, and I think it would be easy enough to demonstrate in court that maintainers know or should know that many if not most owners don't know all the AD's and SB's applicable to their aircraft (including its components and accessories).

My Cessna customers are continually calling me and asking if they must comply with the letters they receive. I'll simply tell them yes from now on.

You can do that if you like. Or maybe you can just give them the facts including costs and risks and let them decide ("informed consent"). Once we see the case which triggered this discussion, we'll know better what the standard of conduct is now (at least in Maryland) for mechanics and shops to limit their liability on SB issues.

 

[Tom-D]

Becaues new owners don't get back copies when they register their new ownership, and I think it would be easy enough to demonstrate in court that maintainers know or should know that many if not most owners don't know all the AD's and SB's applicable to their aircraft (including its components and accessories).

The owners have the same internet tools as I do in finding the ADs and SBs.

Remember we are not limited by getting the paper any more as we were years ago.

Google is your friend, search "Lycoming Service bulletins" see what pops.

 

[MarcBourget]

Since it hasn't been mentioned in the slightest, I would like to add that John Thorp was of the opinion that a properly filtered Lycoming or Continental simply wouldn't wear out (for all practical purposes). This approach included filtered carb heat air as well as an oil filter and responsible maintenance.

Onward and upward

Marc Bourget