Sticky Situation - Need Advice

S

Sonny225

Filing Flight Plan
Joined
Jul 4, 2026
Messages
6
Display Name
Sonny225
Hello all,

First time I've posted on here and I'm looking for some advice; kind of a long story so bear with me.

I'm a flight instructor working toward a job in the airlines and I have more than 1400 hours so I'm almost there. I have, however, got this situation and I'm looking for advice on how to handle it. Just yesterday I was supposed to pick up one of my students in another city and fly with him back to our home airport; during the run up I noted that setting the ignition switch on the right mag didn't produce an RPM drop or a rise in EGTs. The POH called for performing an additional mag check at higher RPM to verify a suspected broken p-lead on the left magneto, which gave me exactly the same results. So, having determined the aircraft to not be airworthy, I taxied back to the hanger, texted the owner of the flight school (and the instructor who was supposed to fly the airplane later that day) about the issue and jumped in the schools other plane to complete my flight. However, as I prepared to enter the pattern on the way back home I was surprised to hear the airplane with the mag issue doing laps in the pattern with the instructor and his student onboard. When they landed I asked the instructor if he had seen the same issue with the no drop on the left mag and he said he had. I then asked him how he was able to safely and legally fly an airplane with a clearly faulty ignition system and he said he was told by management that since it was "just a p-lead" and the magneto itself was working fine it was ok to fly and we just needed to be careful around the prop on the ramp. This did not sit well with me so after I got home I called the owner of the flight school thinking that maybe he was unaware of what was happening. To my chagrin, he confirmed that he was aware and had approved. He stated that they had been able to run the airplane and "do some more testing and troubleshooting and send more data to maintenance" and that "maintenance" (note that we use three different maintenance facilities depending on the situation and he didn't say which maintenance facility he had consulted) had determined that it was "just a p-lead" and was safe to fly. This flies in the face of everything I have ever read, heard or been taught about how to handle a broken p-lead. So my question is what do I do about this? I firmly believe that the owner (who also happens to be hard up for cash) just doesn't want to ground half his fleet of airplanes over a busy weekend and I suspect that he never even consulted "maintenance" because, based on what I have read, no A&P would sign off on it and take on that kind of liability. Is this par for the course for flight schools? Is not flying with a broken p-lead just a thing you say you would never do to a DPE but done regularly in real life? Am I making a mountain out of a molehill? Is this what I should expect in my aviation career? Should I push this issue or let it drop and hope nothing bad happens?

I welcome any advice!
 
What to do? Don’t fly for that flight school anymore and let others you run into know about their unsafe maintenance practices. If they are dispatching airplanes to students with a known hot mag then what other maintenance isn’t being addressed? There isn’t much else you can do besides not fly their airplanes and spread the word about why you won’t.
 
It could also be a bad switch. Either way. Poor maintenance is a non starter for me. And yes, poor maintenance is unfortunately common.
 
Sonny225 said:
Hello all,

First time I've posted on here and I'm looking for some advice; kind of a long story so bear with me.

I'm a flight instructor working toward a job in the airlines and I have more than 1400 hours so I'm almost there. I have, however, got this situation and I'm looking for advice on how to handle it. Just yesterday I was supposed to pick up one of my students in another city and fly with him back to our home airport; during the run up I noted that setting the ignition switch on the right mag didn't produce an RPM drop or a rise in EGTs. The POH called for performing an additional mag check at higher RPM to verify a suspected broken p-lead on the left magneto, which gave me exactly the same results. So, having determined the aircraft to not be airworthy, I taxied back to the hanger, texted the owner of the flight school (and the instructor who was supposed to fly the airplane later that day) about the issue and jumped in the schools other plane to complete my flight. However, as I prepared to enter the pattern on the way back home I was surprised to hear the airplane with the mag issue doing laps in the pattern with the instructor and his student onboard. When they landed I asked the instructor if he had seen the same issue with the no drop on the left mag and he said he had. I then asked him how he was able to safely and legally fly an airplane with a clearly faulty ignition system and he said he was told by management that since it was "just a p-lead" and the magneto itself was working fine it was ok to fly and we just needed to be careful around the prop on the ramp. This did not sit well with me so after I got home I called the owner of the flight school thinking that maybe he was unaware of what was happening. To my chagrin, he confirmed that he was aware and had approved. He stated that they had been able to run the airplane and "do some more testing and troubleshooting and send more data to maintenance" and that "maintenance" (note that we use three different maintenance facilities depending on the situation and he didn't say which maintenance facility he had consulted) had determined that it was "just a p-lead" and was safe to fly. This flies in the face of everything I have ever read, heard or been taught about how to handle a broken p-lead. So my question is what do I do about this? I firmly believe that the owner (who also happens to be hard up for cash) just doesn't want to ground half his fleet of airplanes over a busy weekend and I suspect that he never even consulted "maintenance" because, based on what I have read, no A&P would sign off on it and take on that kind of liability. Is this par for the course for flight schools? Is not flying with a broken p-lead just a thing you say you would never do to a DPE but done regularly in real life? Am I making a mountain out of a molehill? Is this what I should expect in my aviation career? Should I push this issue or let it drop and hope nothing bad happens?

I welcome any advice!
Click to expand...
First, good work identifying the defect and making a sound no-go decision.

Second, if the airplane wouldn't pass an annual or 100-hr inspection, it shouldn’t be flying—especially in revenue service. Note that, on many light piston-engine airplanes, there is a step in certain emergency checklists that calls for the mags to be switched off—kinda hard to do with a defective p-lead.

Third, you are responsible for each flight that you operate, but you cannot control the maintenance policies and decisions of the companies that you work for. Your options are to work elsewhere, or do the best you can with the circumstances you’re given. The latter may mean making a decision that puts your job at risk, or accepting an airplane that puts your safety at risk.
 
If it was own plane, I wouldn't hesitate to fly it,* but there's no way as a school owner I'd let others fly it.

* Actually I'd fly other planes I've owned in that situation, but not my current plane... lacking a mixture control the engine is shut down with the mag switch.
 
Racerx said:
It could also be a bad switch. Either way. Poor maintenance is a non starter for me. And yes, poor maintenance is unfortunately common.
Click to expand...

That's common enough that there's an AD for Bendix switches: https://drs.faa.gov/browse/excelExt...53A53E.0001?modalOpened=true?modalOpened=true . A flight in that condition can be made with a ferry permit to get to a repair facility, but it's not okay to just go fly that way.

@Sonny225 , you've expressed your concern to the owner. The response seems unsatisfactory, so were I you (and I'm not) I wouldn't fly that school's planes anymore and the matter would end right there.
 
Dana said:
If it was own plane, I wouldn't hesitate to fly it,* but there's no way as a school owner I'd let others fly it.
Click to expand...
I'd be a little hesitant. What if the hot mag is covering up for a bad plug or some other component?
 
Sonny225 said:
Hello all,

First time I've posted on here and I'm looking for some advice; kind of a long story so bear with me.

I'm a flight instructor working toward a job in the airlines and I have more than 1400 hours so I'm almost there. I have, however, got this situation and I'm looking for advice on how to handle it. Just yesterday I was supposed to pick up one of my students in another city and fly with him back to our home airport; during the run up I noted that setting the ignition switch on the right mag didn't produce an RPM drop or a rise in EGTs. The POH called for performing an additional mag check at higher RPM to verify a suspected broken p-lead on the left magneto, which gave me exactly the same results. So, having determined the aircraft to not be airworthy, I taxied back to the hanger, texted the owner of the flight school (and the instructor who was supposed to fly the airplane later that day) about the issue and jumped in the schools other plane to complete my flight. However, as I prepared to enter the pattern on the way back home I was surprised to hear the airplane with the mag issue doing laps in the pattern with the instructor and his student onboard. When they landed I asked the instructor if he had seen the same issue with the no drop on the left mag and he said he had. I then asked him how he was able to safely and legally fly an airplane with a clearly faulty ignition system and he said he was told by management that since it was "just a p-lead" and the magneto itself was working fine it was ok to fly and we just needed to be careful around the prop on the ramp. This did not sit well with me so after I got home I called the owner of the flight school thinking that maybe he was unaware of what was happening. To my chagrin, he confirmed that he was aware and had approved. He stated that they had been able to run the airplane and "do some more testing and troubleshooting and send more data to maintenance" and that "maintenance" (note that we use three different maintenance facilities depending on the situation and he didn't say which maintenance facility he had consulted) had determined that it was "just a p-lead" and was safe to fly. This flies in the face of everything I have ever read, heard or been taught about how to handle a broken p-lead. So my question is what do I do about this? I firmly believe that the owner (who also happens to be hard up for cash) just doesn't want to ground half his fleet of airplanes over a busy weekend and I suspect that he never even consulted "maintenance" because, based on what I have read, no A&P would sign off on it and take on that kind of liability. Is this par for the course for flight schools? Is not flying with a broken p-lead just a thing you say you would never do to a DPE but done regularly in real life? Am I making a mountain out of a molehill? Is this what I should expect in my aviation career? Should I push this issue or let it drop and hope nothing bad happens?

I welcome any advice!
Click to expand...
If you think that's bad ownership and maintenance philosophy (and it is), just wait until you see some of the defects on aircraft that are personally owned and operated (and tolerated).. It is not uncommon at all.

The basic mindset is: this problem will have to wait until it's more financially or operationally convenient to deal with. And if I managed to get N flights out of this without issue so far, surely I can get N+1 flights trouble free, right?

On P-Lead specifically: hope none of the students manually turn the prop (IIRC that was part of the procedure for my remos GX trainer when adding oil). With a hot lead that could become newsworthy... in the wrong way.
 
I’d confront the guy professionally. Comprehensively.

If I determined he was lying to me, I’d be done on the spot, and yes, I’ve done that. And been done on the spot.

EVERYONE is a selective complyer, I’m not holier than thou… I just wouldn’t trust him. Not if he continues to lie when confronted.

I’ve been known to not ask questions I don’t want the answers to. I pick my battles. But if I care enough to confront, and discover continued dishonestly, it’s an issue with which I cannot live and vote with my feet.
 
Have a professional conversation with him about it. Don't accuse; ask and listen. If you aren't satisfied and don't trust him after the conversation, move on. I wouldn't fly an airplane maintained by someone I didn't trust.
 
ArrowFlyer86 said:
just wait until you see some of the defects on aircraft that are personally owned and operated (and tolerated).. It is not uncommon at all.
Click to expand...
Whatever happened with that bomb of a Dakota with the leaky fuel tanks?
 
If you have been employed with this flight school for more than 1 year, I am surprised this has been your first exposure to an unairworthy aircraft flying because owners who are willing to do this do it quite often. But, this situation really isn’t on the owner and on the other CFI who opted as PIC in that aircraft.

I would continue your close preflight and pretakeoff checks, get your hours and move on,
 
I sure hope we don't see another post from you in a day or two a student didn't shut the engine down correctly and the next student or CFI got injured when they rotate the prop and a cylinder fired.

And you can go talk to the owner again, but if you reported the plane should be grounded and they sent it back up with students, I'd go find another Flight School. How's it going to look for your future flight career if you go down with a student and they ask the student if everything was okay in the runup and they say no, but my CFI said we were going anyway.
 
Racerx said:
Whatever happened with that bomb of a Dakota with the leaky fuel tanks?
Click to expand...
I should ask my old CFI since I didn't stay in touch with the guy. I haven't heard of a Dakota blowing up, so guessing that's good. Absolute, 100% ****box aircraft. I hope he and his partner didn't unload that heap of **** on someone else.

That's still my gold standard for terrible decision making. Got money for a beautiful panel and paint job, but don't have a dollar to spare for the engine, new tubes for the ****ed up tire -- or to find out why the airplane reeks of gas during ground operations. Makes a broken P-Lead feel innocent, which is not a good thing.
 
It’ll be ok, until it ain't. Decide right now what you’ll do when faced with a similar situation working for a carrier.

I knew a girl working for a cargo operation flying as the onboard A&P. Someone didn’t secure a pallet jack and when they took off next… the pallet jack rolled many many feet (yards) before impacting the rear pressure wall. When she evaluated the damage on the phone with her maintenance control, they had instructed her with the verbiage to sign off the squawk in the maintenance log so they could repair the damage at the next maintenance base. She refused and after some phone threats, she bought her own ticket home.

Same carrier, Two pilots refused to fly a plane that had too many maintenance deferrals in the same category. The owner of the outfit was on the phone telling the pilots to fly it home or they were fired and he’d fly 2 more pilots out to do it.

Right is right. Do you have the balls to quit on the spot and buy your own ticket home?
 
Last edited:
Thinking about this a little more, I might have tried to confirm a broken p lead and done a "post flight mag check".

Perhaps it was mag drift and one mag was running advanced.
 
Sonny225 said:
First time I've posted on here and I'm looking for some advice; kind of a long story so bear with me.

I'm a flight instructor working toward a job in the airlines and I have more than 1400 hours so I'm almost there.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't get in the mindset of thinking you're almost there. In 2023 you'd be almost there. In 2026, we've got about a 3-year backlog in the pipeline and things are far more competitive. You may be instructing to 3,000 hours. I know that wasn't the question, but thinking that you're just around the corner from a 121 job may affect how you handle this situation.

Sonny225 said:
I have, however, got this situation and I'm looking for advice on how to handle it. Just yesterday I was supposed to pick up one of my students in another city and fly with him back to our home airport; during the run up I noted that setting the ignition switch on the right mag didn't produce an RPM drop or a rise in EGTs. The POH called for performing an additional mag check at higher RPM to verify a suspected broken p-lead on the left magneto, which gave me exactly the same results. So, having determined the aircraft to not be airworthy, I taxied back to the hanger, texted the owner of the flight school (and the instructor who was supposed to fly the airplane later that day) about the issue and jumped in the schools other plane to complete my flight. However, as I prepared to enter the pattern on the way back home I was surprised to hear the airplane with the mag issue doing laps in the pattern with the instructor and his student onboard. When they landed I asked the instructor if he had seen the same issue with the no drop on the left mag and he said he had. I then asked him how he was able to safely and legally fly an airplane with a clearly faulty ignition system and he said he was told by management that since it was "just a p-lead" and the magneto itself was working fine it was ok to fly and we just needed to be careful around the prop on the ramp. This did not sit well with me so after I got home I called the owner of the flight school thinking that maybe he was unaware of what was happening. To my chagrin, he confirmed that he was aware and had approved. He stated that they had been able to run the airplane and "do some more testing and troubleshooting and send more data to maintenance" and that "maintenance" (note that we use three different maintenance facilities depending on the situation and he didn't say which maintenance facility he had consulted) had determined that it was "just a p-lead" and was safe to fly. This flies in the face of everything I have ever read, heard or been taught about how to handle a broken p-lead. So my question is what do I do about this?
Click to expand...
Don't fly the plane until it's fixed.
Preflight all the planes as thoroughly as you can.
Continue to write up squawks that you see.
Look for your next job now, and leave as soon as you have it. If you believe that there are potentially life-threatening maintenance issues, then leave now.

I won't tell you whether to pursue anything up the chain with the FAA. I do wish more people would so that we have fewer shady operators in the industry, but this is also a VERY small industry and you never know when getting a reputation as a pain in the butt is going to come back to haunt you later. Being the guy who keeps flying unairworthy airplanes will also come back to haunt you, though, so keep strict about that and get out as soon as you can.

Sonny225 said:
I firmly believe that the owner (who also happens to be hard up for cash) just doesn't want to ground half his fleet of airplanes over a busy weekend and I suspect that he never even consulted "maintenance" because, based on what I have read, no A&P would sign off on it and take on that kind of liability.
Click to expand...
An owner that's hard up for cash is a BAD thing.

Sonny225 said:
Is this par for the course for flight schools? Is not flying with a broken p-lead just a thing you say you would never do to a DPE but done regularly in real life? Am I making a mountain out of a molehill? Is this what I should expect in my aviation career? Should I push this issue or let it drop and hope nothing bad happens?
Click to expand...
Unfortunately, there are some bad operators out there. Back in the 90s and 00s, there were TONS of them. Thankfully, the pilot shortage ran a lot of them out of business. The pendulum has swung pretty hard the other direction now in terms of "shortage" and there are lots of aspiring pilots looking for work, so bad operators are going to be springing up again.

It's hard to do much other than to take care of your own personal financial situation such that you can leave if you feel like they're asking you to do illegal and unsafe things.

Roger Wilco said:
Third, you are responsible for each flight that you operate, but you cannot control the maintenance policies and decisions of the companies that you work for. Your options are to work elsewhere, or do the best you can with the circumstances you’re given. The latter may mean making a decision that puts your job at risk, or accepting an airplane that puts your safety at risk.
Click to expand...
And, of course, if you knowingly accept an unairworthy airplane and something happens, it's not just your job and safety, it's your entire career at risk.

rockyfatcat said:
It’ll be ok, until it ain't. Decide right now what you’ll do when faced with a similar situation working for a carrier.
Click to expand...
This.

rockyfatcat said:
I knew a girl working for a cargo operation flying as the onboard A&P. Someone didn’t secure a pallet jack and when they took off next… the pallet jack rolled many many feet (yards) before impacting the rear pressure wall. When she evaluated the damage on the phone with her maintenance control, they had instructed her with the verbiage to sign off the squawk in the maintenance log so they could repair the damage at the next maintenance base. She refused and after some phone threats, she bought her own ticket home.

Same carrier, Two pilots refused to fly a plane that had too many maintenance deferrals in the same category. The owner of the outfit was on the phone telling the pilots to fly it home or they were fired and he’d fly 2 more pilots out to do it.

Right is right. Do you have the balls to quit on the spot and buy your own ticket home?
Click to expand...
And all of this too. Don't ever put yourself in a position where you'll feel forced to keep working somewhere that asks you do to unsafe and illegal things.
 
I would talk to the other flight instructor again. Ask him, peer to peer, if he really thinks it's okay a) to fly unairworthy aircraft, b) to let paying customers fly unairworthy aircraft, and c) teach his student that it's okay to fly unairworthy aircraft. If he doesn't see it as unairworthy, perhaps a more in depth discussion will elucidate the problem for him.

When I had trouble with a flight school maintenance issue I recruited two other instructors to agree with me and gang up on management. They finally fixed the issue we were dealing with.
 
Dana said:
If it was own plane, I wouldn't hesitate to fly it,* but there's no way as a school owner I'd let others fly it.

* Actually I'd fly other planes I've owned in that situation, but not my current plane... lacking a mixture control the engine is shut down with the mag switch.
Click to expand...
What would you do if you couldn’t turn the engine off.?
 
luvflyin said:
What would you do if you couldn’t turn the engine off.?
Click to expand...

Mixture.

The better question to me is whether he annotated this properly. Big placard… p lead broke, mag continuously hot.

Flying an airplane like this ain’t the end of the world, it can be mitigated. Deliberately not informing customers flying it about that known issue, is.
 
Tools said:
Mixture.

The better question to me is whether he annotated this properly. Big placard… p lead broke, mag continuously hot.

Flying an airplane like this ain’t the end of the world, it can be mitigated. Deliberately not informing customers flying it about that known issue, is.
Click to expand...
My reply wasn’t to the OP. It was to post #6. He said “…* Actually I'd fly other planes I've owned in that situation, but not my current plane... lacking a mixture control the engine is shut down with the mag switch...”
 
I flew for years without doing the P-lead check during shut down. It wasn’t in the check lists of the planes I flew. Wasn’t until about 25 years later that a CFI told me about it during a Flight Review. I just read something that it’s not good for the engine.
J

Thread 'Ly-Con 160HP O-320-E2D And Similar - CHT issues'

I've flown a few different 172's with the 160hp Lycoming O-320-E2D mods that replace the 7:1 pistons with 8.5:1 pistons. In every single one, all it seems to do is increase the climb CHTs. Now you're stuck either having to dial the power back (giving you the same climb rate) OR doing a step climb.

The whole point of horsepower upgrades (or so I thought) was better climb performance. But if you're having to step climb or climb at a lower power setting, what did you really gain for that 10hp?
See post #2
 
luvflyin said:
I flew for years without doing the P-lead check during shut down. It wasn’t in the check lists of the planes I flew. Wasn’t until about 25 years later that a CFI told me about it during a Flight Review. I just read something that it’s not good for the engine.
J

Thread 'Ly-Con 160HP O-320-E2D And Similar - CHT issues'

I've flown a few different 172's with the 160hp Lycoming O-320-E2D mods that replace the 7:1 pistons with 8.5:1 pistons. In every single one, all it seems to do is increase the climb CHTs. Now you're stuck either having to dial the power back (giving you the same climb rate) OR doing a step climb.

The whole point of horsepower upgrades (or so I thought) was better climb performance. But if you're having to step climb or climb at a lower power setting, what did you really gain for that 10hp?
See post #2
Click to expand...
That's referring to switching both mags off and back on at the same time.
 
Plano Pilot said:
Turn off the fuel selector.
Click to expand...
Right. Actually the fuel valve is how I normally shut down at the end of the day, to empty the float bowl as the old Stromberg carbs used on the small Continentals tend to leak a bit while sitting. But it takes a while for the to empty; for a normal stop at the fuel pump or whatever I use the mag switch.
luvflyin said:
I flew for years without doing the P-lead check during shut down. It wasn’t in the check lists of the planes I flew. Wasn’t until about 25 years later that a CFI told me about it during a Flight Review
Click to expand...
I was taught to always do a mag ground check as part of the shutdown procedure. Once during a rental checkout the CFI freaked when I did it until he realized I wasn't actually shutting the engine down that way.
 
Sonny225, some of the replies that you have received suggested confronting the owner and your OP gives me an inkling that you'd kinda like to do just that. Unless you have the luxury of other opportunities and the means to pursue them, I would counsel against doing so. You gotta know your place in the larger landscape of the industry that you work in, and as a 1400-hr CFI, you are far too low on the proverbial totem pole to presume to tell your boss how to run his/her business. It's likely that the boss has (figuratively speaking) a stack of resumes on her/his desk from new CFIs who want your job, and maybe a few of those have attracted attention.

You do, however, seem to know how to run your business, and you should keep calm and carry-on. When given an airplane that has an issue affecting airworthiness (or other conditions/circumstances that would impact the safety of the operation), you should continue to put safety first and do your best to maintain regulatory compliance--two things that you are directly responsible for. You will, of couse, make personal notes detailing those situations should you be called-upon to defend your decisions. If a confrontation should arise, let it be initiated by the owner.
 
Last edited:
dmspilot said:
I would talk to the other flight instructor again. Ask him, peer to peer, if he really thinks it's okay a) to fly unairworthy aircraft, b) to let paying customers fly unairworthy aircraft, and c) teach his student that it's okay to fly unairworthy aircraft. If he doesn't see it as unairworthy, perhaps a more in depth discussion will elucidate the problem for him.

When I had trouble with a flight school maintenance issue I recruited two other instructors to agree with me and gang up on management. They finally fixed the issue we were dealing with.
Click to expand...
You are spot on with this comment. If the CFI is willing to fly an unairworthy aircraft, they are teaching their students is an acceptable practice. Maybe the other CFI was trained in this environment and the peer to peer will go nowhere.

I once instructed in a flight school where a pilot’s seat was damaged and the owner refused to fix it claiming it wasn’t unairworthy. I told him the seat was going to come back to haunt him. A week latter an obese student had the seat collapsed on take off and the aircraft was totaled. The owner told me he would fix everything I told him needed repaired in the future.
 
Skymac said:
I’d see no issues on flying with a single plead issue.
Click to expand...
But we don't actually know for certain it is in fact a p lead issue. All we know is it had no mag drop and the owner claims it was p lead. The owner's lackadaisical response makes me a bit skeptical.

It could be that mag was running advanced and running increased risk of detonation or failure.

@GeorgeC experienced this very thing a few months ago outlined here

Going off poh and flipping the switch to off at low rpm would have been the troubleshooting I'd have done. Knowing the aircraft systems is always a good thing when something abnormal happens.

On the other hand. Maybe it was just a broken ring terminal on the p lead and it was fixed in 10 minutes which would explain the owners attitude. I've actually had that happen. But without troubleshooting we don't know. Honestly, a broken p lead might be the best scenario.
 
Last edited:
Skymac said:
This right here…. All day…. I’d see no issues on flying with a single plead
Click to expand...

If the mag with the broken P lead malfunctions and is firing out of time, how do you propose turning it off in flight?


If any accident occurs and a student/passenger is injured, how do you plan on defending yourself in a lawsuit when there is clear evidence (a witness who warned you of the condition) the plane had at least 1 condition that made the aircraft unairworthy and you knowingly violated 3 FARs even if the cause of the accident isn’t related to the mag issue?



§ 91.213 Inoperative instruments and equipment.​

(a) Except as provided in paragraph (d) of this section, no person may take off an aircraft with inoperative instruments or equipment installed. (P lead is equipment)

§ 91.7 Civil aircraft airworthiness.​

(a) No person may operate a civil aircraft unless it is in an airworthy condition.

§ 91.13 Careless or reckless operation.​

(a) Aircraft operations for the purpose of air navigation. No person may operate an aircraft in a careless or reckless manner so as to endanger the life or property of another.
 
Last edited:
Roger Wilco said:
Sonny225, some of the replies that you have received suggested confronting the owner and your OP gives me an inkling that you'd kinda like to do just that. Unless you have the luxury of other opportunities and the means to pursue them, I would counsel against doing so. You gotta know your place in the larger landscape of the industry that you work in, and as a 1400-hr CFI, you are far too low on the proverbial totem pole to presume to tell your boss how to run his/her business. It's likely that the boss has (figuratively speaking) a stack of resumes on her/his desk from new CFIs who want your job, and maybe a few of those have attracted attention.

You do, however, seem to know how to run your business, and you should keep calm and carry-on. When given an airplane that has an issue affecting airworthiness (or other conditions/circumstances that would impact the safety of the operation), you should continue to put safety first and do your best to maintain regulatory compliance--two things that you are directly responsible for. You will, of couse, make personal notes detailing those situations should you be called to defend your decisions. If a confrontation should arise, let it be initiated by the owner.
Click to expand...
I hear what you are saying about my place in the landscape of the industry. I realize I'm still a baby pilot in the grand scheme of aviation which is why I'm here asking if pushing this further is worth the trouble it might cause for me over something that might be more widespread and commonplace (and insignificant) than I realize. Is grounding your aircraft over a bad p-lead the correct "by-the-book" rule the FAA requires CFIs to teach but one that no one in the real world of aviation really follows?

To me its not just an issue of telling him how to run his business; that would be like me telling him he should distribute students among instructors more fairly, pay lease back owners on time, be more responsive to lease back owners questions and concerns regarding maintenance costs and aircraft downtime, regularly meeting and flying with his CFIs to help them maintain instructional proficiency, etc. To me this is different, I'm not telling him anything other than that the airplane failed its mag check and, from what I've always been taught, grounding the airplane isn't a business decision, it's a black and white legal requirement that not following may result in serious injury or death for someone else. I can avoid flying the airplane and I don't mind telling him that I wont fly it until its fixed but he's having his other CFIs, either willingly or unwillingly, teaching student pilots that its safe and legal to fly an airplane with a compromised ignition system. How far do my legal and moral obligations require I push to fix that?

Thanks for your input.
 
Plano Pilot said:
Turn off the fuel selector.
Click to expand...
How would you feel if you were parked someplace and some Line Kid went to move your prop so he could move the plane and the prop kicked them HARD? Possible death, serious and/or perminate injury.

Just confirming, you remember that if there is a P-Lead issue, that is the same as leaving the Mags ON.
 
OP, to clarify, was there absolutely zero change in RPM, or just less than the other?
 
If you shut off with mixture, it really can’t burp. AND ANYONE should assume prop is hot when they touch it anyway.

That being said, ANYONE who touches it should know the mag is hot. If he’s HIDING that fact, THAT is the attitude I worry about.

I can mitigate all sorts of issues if I’m informed and not worrying about what is DELIBERATELY HIDDEN.
 
Ed Haywood said:
OP, to clarify, was there absolutely zero change in RPM, or just less than the other?
Click to expand...
Zero change at normal run-up RPM, the POH specifies running at high RPM and repeating the mag check which I did again with zero drop in RPM or rise in EGT. Also, I didn't mention it in the orginal post but it is standard procedure at the flight school to do the low RPM hot mag check before shut down and when I did the engine continued running.
 
Racerx said:
But we don't actually know for certain it is in fact a p lead issue. All we know is it had no mag drop and the owner claims it was p lead. The owner's lackadaisical response makes me a bit skeptical.

It could be that mag was running advanced and running increased risk of detonation or failure.

@GeorgeC experienced this very thing a few months ago outlined here

Going off poh and flipping the switch to off at low rpm would have been the troubleshooting I'd have done. Knowing the aircraft systems is always a good thing when something abnormal happens.

On the other hand. Maybe it was just a broken ring terminal on the p lead and it was fixed in 10 minutes which would explain the owners attitude. I've actually had that happen. But without troubleshooting we don't know. Honestly, a broken p lead might be the best scenario.
Click to expand...
I left out of my post that it is standard procedure to do the hot mag check at low RPM before shutdown after every flight (or attempted flight) at this school and when I performed that check (by switching the ignition to OFF) I got an RPM drop (as you would expect with one mag grounding) but the engine continued running again indicating a broken p-lead.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top