|
-
POSTING RULES

-
Donate yearly (please).
-
Advertise in here!
-
Today's Posts
|
Insert Pics
|

01-28-2020, 06:15 AM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Western US
Posts: 98
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by bkervaski
I may be wrong, have never owned a certified aircraft, but I don't think an A&P can sign it off as "unairworthy" they simply don't sign it off at all until they find it airworthy (all the issues resolved).
|

Last edited by Aryana : 01-28-2020 at 07:21 AM.
Reason: Added missing quote
|

01-28-2020, 06:45 AM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Dallas area
Posts: 10,769
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aryana
|
In the Experimental world, this sticker is only relevant to an aircraft that requires a "100Hr. inspection". i.e. One that is being operated under a LODA and used commercially. The "Annual" part of it is not relevant to Experimentals.
Operating Limitations for amateur-built aircraft contain specific wording for a condition inspection sign-off. I know that it says "or a similar worded statement", but the wise inspector uses the specific wording provided. If the aircraft is not found "in a condition for safe operation", the inspection has not been completed and should not be signed off.
__________________
Mel Asberry, DAR since the last century.
EAA Flight Advisor/Tech Counselor, Friend of the RV-1
Recipient of Tony Bingelis Award and Wright Brothers Master Pilot Award
USAF Vet, High School E-LSA Project Mentor.
RV-6 Flying since 1993 (sold)
<rvmel(at)icloud.com>
Last edited by Mel : 01-28-2020 at 06:59 AM.
|

01-28-2020, 07:37 AM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Western US
Posts: 98
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mel
In the Experimental world, this sticker is only relevant to an aircraft that requires a "100Hr. inspection". i.e. One that is being operated under a LODA and used commercially. The "Annual" part of it is not relevant to Experimentals.
Operating Limitations for amateur-built aircraft contain specific wording for a condition inspection sign-off. I know that it says "or a similar worded statement", but the wise inspector uses the specific wording provided. If the aircraft is not found "in a condition for safe operation", the inspection has not been completed and should not be signed off.
|
Edited to include the quote that was missed when I posted. Thanks for the catch!
Quote:
Originally Posted by bkervaski
I may be wrong, have never owned a certified aircraft, but I don't think an A&P can sign it off as "unairworthy" they simply don't sign it off at all until they find it airworthy (all the issues resolved).
|
In response to the quote above, for certified aircraft, it is quite useful at times to make that entry I posted during an annual or 100 hour inspection and provide a discrepancy list of unairworthy items to an owner.
For an annual, this allows the IA to sign the books and move on while any A&P can address the items in the discrepancy list and everything is then good to go.
I've seen it come in handy in another rare instance where it really helps to keep cheap owners honest. I've run into certified aircraft owners that expect to pay a flat fee for an annual/100 hour inspection and don't want to pay extra for any required repairs. This entry and discrepancy list clearly separates the inspection from repairs. The discrepancy list becomes another bill if they want those items addressed. Paying for the annual/100 hour inspection means just that...the inspection. It's not an all you can eat buffet for your A&P or IA to do everything your plane needs to get back in the air.
Stay EXPERIMENTAL my friends! The certified world sucks. This Christen Eagle II (ADSB exempt  ) is my antidote to the constant BS of illogical certified aircraft maintenance restrictions.

Last edited by Aryana : 01-28-2020 at 09:10 AM.
|

01-28-2020, 08:16 AM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2019
Location: Vaca Moo Airport - TA37 in East TEXAS
Posts: 1,331
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aryana
For an annual, this allows the IA to sign the books and move on while any A&P can address the items in the discrepancy list and everything is then good to go.
|
Thank you, this is exactly what I've been talking about and I'm very surprised it's not common knowledge as it was when I had my standard aircraft. Of course this being a experimental forum and the vast majority of experience in that category I suppose it's not really an uncommon thing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aryana
I've seen it come in handy in another rare instance where it really helps to keep cheap owners honest.
|
I have to push back hard on this because it was the normal way of business when I owned a Citabria, Cherokee6 and a Seneca all at the same time, and for every other pilot on our airport. Back in the day IAs weren't as common as now. The airport had a couple of A&Ps but no IA. The A&Ps would have the planes open and the IA would come and just do the inspections and would charge for that. The local A&Ps would then correct the discrepancies and charge for their work. Has nothing to do with cheap because it never was.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aryana
I've run into certified aircraft owners that expect to pay a flat fee for an annual/100 hour inspection and don't want to pay extra for any required repairs.This entry and discrepancy list clearly separates the inspection from repairs. The discrepancy list becomes another bill if they want those items addressed. Paying for the annual/100 hour inspection means just that...the inspection. It's not an all you can eat buffet for your A&P or IA to do everything your plane needs to get back in the air.
|
Agreed and since the Annual Inspection states what the IA must do then that's all that was expected for that price, nothing more nothing less and everyone was happy about it.
I'm happy with the conversation up to now and I suppose the only thing missing from my original post is to see where in the Regulations I can find everything on Condition Inspections on Experimental aircraft and everything related to that. Like an FAA Order 8000.xxx or something like that.
__________________
RV-8 N52VM: OnSpeed Gen2 AOA-3D, Dynon D-180, Autopilot, Titan 0-360A1A, Hartzell C/S, INS-429 IFR & GPS496, WingX & Stratux for backup & ADS-B IN. Enjoying life while building an airpark with FREE campsite for pilots www.facebook.com/VacaMooAirport/
Exempt by 3 out of the 10 ways but I still donated.
|

01-28-2020, 08:31 AM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: 8I3
Posts: 3,564
|
|
Personally I would not want to risk my IA by depending on another A&P addressing airworthiness issues. Typically I tell people I will come back and inspect the followup work because I think that's the most prudent and safest thing to do. Most of the time its the non-A&P owner doing the work so I have to anyway. I'm not just protecting you having a second set of eyes on the work but I am protecting myself.
That said I often run into unacceptable standards of work even from other IA's.
__________________
Please don't PM me! Email only!
Bob Japundza CFI A&PIA
N9187P PA-24-260B Comanche, flying
N678X F1 Rocket, under const.
N244BJ RV-6 "victim of SNF tornado" 1200+ hrs, rebuilding
N8155F C150 flying
N7925P PA-24-250 Comanche, restoring
Not a thing I own is stock.
|

01-28-2020, 09:06 AM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Hubbard Oregon
Posts: 9,035
|
|
A point that seems to be being missed by some in this thread is that there are no FAR's or other documents that detail what the rules are for inspections in an E-AB aircraft (and that is one of the reasons a lot of people prefer them over certificated aircraft).
The only guidance is that all of FAR 43 does not apply which means none of the standard practices that people are used to with certificated aircraft are relevant (because FAR 43 is where all of those rules/allowances are detailed).
The only regulatory rule that is relevant for inspections on E-AB aircraft is the following operating limitation that is part of each individual aircraft's airworthiness certificate.
No person may operate this aircraft unless within the preceding 12
calendar months it has had a condition inspection performed per
the scope and detail of part 43, appendix D, manufacturer or other
FAA-approved programs, and was found to be in a condition for safe
operation. The inspections must be recorded in the aircraft maintenance
records showing the following, or a similarly worded, statement: ?I certify
that this aircraft has been inspected on [insert date] per the [insert either:
scope and detail of part 43, appendix D; or manufacturer?s inspection
procedures] and was found to be in a condition for safe operation.? The
entry will include the aircraft?s total time-in-service (cycles if appropriate),
and the name, signature, certificate number, and type of certificate held
by the person performing the inspection.
There is no path to allow someone other than the person that did the actual inspection, to sign off the inspection as completed. That doesn't mean that they have to be the one who corrects any discrepancies found that prevent the inspector from making the log book entry, but they have to be the one that determines they were corrected properly.
__________________
Opinions, information and comments are my own unless stated otherwise. They do not necessarily represent the direction/opinions of my employer.
Scott McDaniels
Van's Aircraft Engineering Prototype Shop Manager
Hubbard, Oregon
RV-6A (aka "Junkyard Special ")
|

01-28-2020, 09:12 AM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2019
Location: Vaca Moo Airport - TA37 in East TEXAS
Posts: 1,331
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by rvbuilder2002
A point that seems to be being missed by some in this thread is that there are no FAR's or other documents that detail what the rules are for inspections in an E-AB aircraft (and that is one of the reasons a lot of people prefer them over certificated aircraft).
The only guidance is that all of FAR 43 does not apply which means none of the standard practices that people are used to with certificated aircraft are relevant (because FAR 43 is where all of those rules/allowances are detailed).
The only regulatory rule that is relevant for inspections on E-AB aircraft is the following operating limitation that is part of each individual aircraft's airworthiness certificate.
No person may operate this aircraft unless within the preceding 12
calendar months it has had a condition inspection performed per
the scope and detail of part 43, appendix D, manufacturer or other
FAA-approved programs, and was found to be in a condition for safe
operation. The inspections must be recorded in the aircraft maintenance
records showing the following, or a similarly worded, statement: “I certify
that this aircraft has been inspected on [insert date] per the [insert either:
scope and detail of part 43, appendix D; or manufacturer’s inspection
procedures] and was found to be in a condition for safe operation.” The
entry will include the aircraft’s total time-in-service (cycles if appropriate),
and the name, signature, certificate number, and type of certificate held
by the person performing the inspection.
There is no path to allow someone other than the person that did the actual inspection, to sign off the inspection as completed. That doesn't mean that they have to be the one who corrects any discrepancies found that prevent the inspector from making the log book entry, but they have to be the one that determines they were corrected properly.
|
I think there must be something else because if that's the case and there's nothing else then where in that statement does it say it must be an A&P?
Part 43 Appendix D just starts everything with "...Each person performing an annual or 100-hour inspection shall..." but doesn't say who that person is.
The end of your paragraph says
"...The entry will include the aircraft’s total time-in-service (cycles if appropriate), and the name, signature, certificate number, and type of certificate held by the person performing the inspection. "
So can I do it with my ATP or CFI certificate? That's why I think there must be another Regulation or FAA Order 8000.xxx
__________________
RV-8 N52VM: OnSpeed Gen2 AOA-3D, Dynon D-180, Autopilot, Titan 0-360A1A, Hartzell C/S, INS-429 IFR & GPS496, WingX & Stratux for backup & ADS-B IN. Enjoying life while building an airpark with FREE campsite for pilots www.facebook.com/VacaMooAirport/
Exempt by 3 out of the 10 ways but I still donated.
Last edited by Pilot135pd : 01-28-2020 at 09:14 AM.
|

01-28-2020, 09:23 AM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Hubbard Oregon
Posts: 9,035
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pilot135pd
I think there must be something else because if that's the case and there's nothing else then where in that statement does it say it must be an A&P?
|
There is.
There is a whole bunch of different operating limitations (I only listed one of them).
Another one is - An experimental aircraft builder certificated as a repairman for this aircraft
under § 65.104, or an appropriately rated FAA-certificated mechanic, may
perform the condition inspection required by these operating limitations.
It would be a good idea for anyone that owns / flys an E-AB aircraft to read through and become familiar with the operating limitations for their aircraft (they are not all the same depending on the calendar date they were issued). Some of them may surprise you.
__________________
Opinions, information and comments are my own unless stated otherwise. They do not necessarily represent the direction/opinions of my employer.
Scott McDaniels
Van's Aircraft Engineering Prototype Shop Manager
Hubbard, Oregon
RV-6A (aka "Junkyard Special ")
Last edited by rvbuilder2002 : 01-28-2020 at 09:26 AM.
|

01-28-2020, 09:29 AM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Dallas area
Posts: 10,769
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pilot135pd
I think there must be something else because if that's the case and there's nothing else then where in that statement does it say it must be an A&P?
|
The operating limitations state that the person performing the inspection must be the "holder of the Repairman Certificate for that aircraft" or a certificated mechanic. Certificated mechanic being an A&P.
I really don't understand the confusion over this issue. This has been the process for many years and seems pretty clear to me.
__________________
Mel Asberry, DAR since the last century.
EAA Flight Advisor/Tech Counselor, Friend of the RV-1
Recipient of Tony Bingelis Award and Wright Brothers Master Pilot Award
USAF Vet, High School E-LSA Project Mentor.
RV-6 Flying since 1993 (sold)
<rvmel(at)icloud.com>
|

01-28-2020, 09:42 AM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Western US
Posts: 98
|
|
The thread got contaminated with certified and EAB discussions of the same topic which makes it hard to follow.
I was part of that thread drift and added to the confusion, but my original intent was good. Sorry!
|
| Thread Tools |
Search this Thread |
|
|
|
| Display Modes |
Linear Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:23 AM.
|