Red tags

[philiplane]

A red tag is the opinion of the person inspecting that part, if they are using standards not called out by the maintenance manual for that part. Opinions may vary, unlike facts.

 

[tyndall]

And when they find flaws beyond what the Ovhl/Manual requires , What then?

Can the A&P make a decision to use the part? Is that legal?

There are many 0-300 crank shafts that have been running for decades with flaws that a magna flux will not see, but an ultra sound will. is that criteria to condemn?

Sounds like when a manual says to inspect with 5x magnification and someone sees a defect using 20x. The manufacturer chose 5x because anything seen at a higher magnification is inconsequential to the strength or longevity of the part. Look hard enough at anything and you'll find a flaw.

I'd ask the company to inspect and certify per the manual. If they can't due to their own policy, I'd turf the red tag as not done iaw the manual and send it to another shop.

 

[Tom-D]

Yes...

why??

 

[Let'sgoflying!]

Colored Tags never used to appear in the FARs or any other regulatory docs; as such we always said they were used solely for convenience by the industry; has that changed?

 

[Let'sgoflying!]

There is at least one inspection or standard beyond the O'haul & Mx manuals a crank might be required to survive; an AD.

 

[Let'sgoflying!]

Beyond what is determined in a quest for 'would this part survive an airworthiness examination' by FAR scholars, more importantly for an installer might be the liability test.
I would always fear the question in court, "so this part was determined to be condemned, red-tagged, & unairworthy by Shop A but you proceeded to install it anyway, a week before the crash..."

 

[Tom-D]

I don't know and I have never bothered finding out. Even it it was legal I still wouldn't install it and if a customer had an issue with my decision they could find services somewhere else.

What if? that part was very rare hard to find antique? You thought it was good, had it checked by CRS and they failed it. because they used an inspection method never heard of when the part was made?

 

[Tom-D]

Colored Tags never used to appear in the FARs or any other regulatory docs; as such we always said they were used solely for convenience by the industry; has that changed?

Yes we now use a 8130 form, stating what was done to the item.

 

[Tom-D]

Beyond what is determined in a quest for 'would this part survive an airworthiness examination' by FAR scholars, more importantly for an installer might be the liability test.
I would always fear the question in court, "so this part was determined to be condemned, red-tagged, & unairworthy by Shop A but you proceeded to install it anyway, a week before the crash..."

How would the court know it was condemned ?

You certainly wouldn't keep the 8130 that said it was bad. and many items are not serialized.

If it was condemned because a higher quality inspection was used, and it did pass the criteria set forth in the Ovhl/manual would it really be bad?

 

[Tom-D]

Apparently there is no guidance on this or some one would have shown it by now.

 

[N801BH]

How would the court know it was condemned ?

You certainly wouldn't keep the 8130 that said it was bad. and many items are not serialized.

If it was condemned because a higher quality inspection was used, and it did pass the criteria set forth in the Ovhl/manual would it really be bad?

So......

You knowingly withheld /discarded / shreaded a document that stated that a part you sent it to be inspected and it failed a quality test by a FAA approved Certified Repair Station and you don't have any problem with that ??...............

 

[bnt83]

An 8130-3 "Airworthiness Approval Tag" will never be used in lieu of a red tag.

http://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Order/8130-21G.pdf

Red, green, yellow, black tags come from the CRS's FAA approved RSGOM. The RSGOM contains the Quality Plan which states how parts will be segregated from each other and tracked within the company, amoung other things.

Assuming the CRS Quality Plan contains colored tags, the CRS can be violated for not properly tagging parts should the FAA walk through the building and find said parts.

 

[Tom-D]

So......

You knowingly withheld /discarded / shreaded a document that stated that a part you sent it to be inspected and it failed a quality test by a FAA approved Certified Repair Station and you don't have any problem with that ??...............

Personally I do, but what's legal?

When the part passes the OEM requirements, but not the CRS, is the part legal to use?

In almost every case I can think of the FAA favors the manufacturer in what the part should be. But not this time ??? why?

 

[Tom-D]

An 8130-3 "Airworthiness Approval Tag" will never be used in lieu of a red tag.

http://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Order/8130-21G.pdf

Red, green, yellow, black tags come from the CRS's FAA approved RSGOM. The RSGOM contains the Quality Plan which states how parts will be segregated from each other and tracked within the company, amoung other things.

Assuming the CRS Quality Plan contains colored tags, the CRS can be violated for not properly tagging parts should the FAA walk through the building and find said parts.

What happens with in the CRS is not normally seen by the user, all we ever see is the 8130 accompanying the part.

 

[Tarheelpilot]

What if? that part was very rare hard to find antique? You thought it was good, had it checked by CRS and they failed it. because they used an inspection method never heard of when the part was made?

That is exactly what I mean. I don't care how rare the part is. Just because the inspection process didn't exist back in the day does not mean it is not valid or the results are inconsequential.

 

[Tom-D]

That is exactly what I mean. I don't care how rare the part is. Just because the inspection process didn't exist back in the day does not mean it is not valid or the results are inconsequential.

OK, we know how you feel, now tell me what the FAA believes.

I know how TCM covers their Azz in their Overhaul manual for the 0-200/0-300. They simply add a statement "or equivalent method" to the method of inspection.

 

[N801BH]

OK, we know how you feel, now tell me what the FAA believes.

I know how TCM covers their Azz in their Overhaul manual for the 0-200/0-300. They simply add a statement "or equivalent method" to the method of inspection.

And THAT leaves the determination on the CRS's back...

If ya don't like it.... Buy all the required testing equipment, get it all certified and do your own inspection........

 

[Skip Miller]

That is exactly what I mean. I don't care how rare the part is. Just because the inspection process didn't exist back in the day does not mean it is not valid or the results are inconsequential.

I agree. I'm thinking of the infamous DC-10 crash at Sioux City where the turbine wheel fell apart because of a defect. This part had passed umpteen inspections by approved inspection methods in the Part 121 service, until it let go, killing many (some survived - a true miracle).

How would you feel standing up before the jury and saying "we approved the formerly red tagged part because the part passed all inspections that were routine and required at the time of its manufacture, and it passed". That CRS would be out of business faster than ... well, you know. Whatever inspection method they used on the recovered pieces saw the flaw. Claiming that you weren't required to use that method would be a losing argument, IMO.

Every now and then an antique aircraft flies west. It is a shame. However, I also believe there is no part on those simple machines that cannot be safely reproduced.... IF you have enough money. Maybe the plane you speak of needs to be in a museum somewhere.... -Skip

 

[Tom-D]

I agree. I'm thinking of the infamous DC-10 crash at Sioux City where the turbine wheel fell apart because of a defect. This part had passed umpteen inspections by approved inspection methods in the Part 121 service, until it let go, killing many (some survived - a true miracle).

How would you feel standing up before the jury and saying "we approved the formerly red tagged part because the part passed all inspections that were routine and required at the time of its manufacture, and it passed". That CRS would be out of business faster than ... well, you know. Whatever inspection method they used on the recovered pieces saw the flaw. Claiming that you weren't required to use that method would be a losing argument, IMO.

Every now and then an antique aircraft flies west. It is a shame. However, I also believe there is no part on those simple machines that cannot be safely reproduced.... IF you have enough money. Maybe the plane you speak of needs to be in a museum somewhere.... -Skip

Skip,I didn't speak of any particular aircraft or part. why do you keep thinking that?

 

[Tom-D]

I agree. I'm thinking of the infamous DC-10 crash at Sioux City where the turbine wheel fell apart because of a defect. This part had passed umpteen inspections by approved inspection methods in the Part 121 service, until it let go, killing many (some survived - a true miracle).

How would you feel standing up before the jury and saying "we approved the formerly red tagged part because the part passed all inspections that were routine and required at the time of its manufacture, and it passed". That CRS would be out of business faster than ... well, you know. Whatever inspection method they used on the recovered pieces saw the flaw. Claiming that you weren't required to use that method would be a losing argument, IMO.

Every now and then an antique aircraft flies west. It is a shame. However, I also believe there is no part on those simple machines that cannot be safely reproduced.... IF you have enough money. Maybe the plane you speak of needs to be in a museum somewhere.... -Skip

We are going to have material failures with even the best of testing methods, it is only some that will be life threatening.

 

[Tom-D]

It's been an interesting thread, But I'm done, got a work shop to build.

OBTW the little C-90 went back on the 120 today. Yes, I do get some work done

 

[Skip Miller]

We are going to have material failures with even the best of testing methods, it is only some that will be life threatening.

I agree fully. But when someone (in this case a CRS) says red tag it, well, we are on notice. -Skip