Condition Inspection Sign off Question

When signing off a condition inspection does it go in both the aircraft log and the engine log or just the aircraft log.
This has probably been discussed here before but I did not find exactly what I was looking for.
Thanks in advance!

Legally it doesn't matter. You could write it on a post-it note and stick it on the refrigerator if you wanted to. That said since it's an inspection of the aircraft, most put it in the aircraft logbook. No need for it to be anywhere else.

I do separate entries for airframe/eng/prop.

Walt said:

I do separate entries for airframe/eng/prop.

Click to expand...

I do too, but I believe the technical answer to the OP question is that only an airframe logbook entry is required. The typical wording as per most ops limitations that I’ve seen have you certify that the “aircraft” is in a condition for safe operation, so I believe that to only require the entry in the airframe logbook. I have been putting a similarly worded statement in the engine and prop logs too, but I don’t think they are required. Would love to hear other people’s input to this also.

CFR Part 43 Appendix D includes airframe/eng/prop.
You can put it all in the airframe book or a shoe box if you prefer, but it needs to account for everything.

As I understand it, in the EXPERIMENTAL aircraft world, you are required to have an Airframe log. The log should keep track of ALL required inspections.

I like to have Airframe, Engine, and Prop logs. Engine and or Prop could get changed and or sold. Most people want the records that go with them. As such, I log Airframe, Engine, and Prop condition inspection in three (3) different logs.

If someone wanted to get get nitpicky… The requirement in the operating limitations states the entry will read “I certify that this aircraft…“. So in technical terms, making separate entries that say airframe, engine, or Propeller doesn’t meet the exact requirements stated in the operating limitation, but I have never heard anyone having any problems having broken out the separate entries. Bottom line, From a legality’s standpoint all you need is one entry saying “I certify this aircraft…”, And then that covers everything.

rvbuilder2002 said:

If someone wanted to get get nitpicky…
--- snip ---
Bottom line, From a legality’s standpoint all you need is one entry saying “I certify this aircraft…”, And then that covers everything.

Click to expand...

FAA Order 8130.2J lists the requirement you state.

Following is a COPY / PASTE (I added BOLD):
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 ...

RV6_flyer said:

FAA Order 8130.2J lists the requirement you state.

Following is a COPY / PASTE (I added BOLD):
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 ...

Click to expand...

Yea, I know what 8130.2J says...
Like I said, it is nit picky but that is what the FAA often does.

Most people are probably unaware, but the certification of all of Van's Aircraft's demonstrators expires every 365 days (with the exception of the SLSA's).
That means that I get to go though the entire certification application process on 9 aircraft, every year. All with the FAA having the opportunity to look through the log books during this process and provide feedback to what ever degree they feel appropriate.
So I do have a pretty good idea on what they (in our local FSDO at least) expects.

From my experience, changing a statement from Aircraft to Airframe is not similar wording. They are describing two different things.

As always, the interpretation in your local FSDO may be different.

RV6_flyer said:

As I understand it, in the EXPERIMENTAL aircraft world, you are required to have an Airframe log. The log should keep track of ALL required inspections.

Click to expand...

Since we're playing armchair lawyers, and picking nits ...

Do the regulations state that one must have a "log"? Or does it make reference to "records"? Similar, but not identical...and I honestly don't know (and don't feel like looking it up right now).

E.g., I don't "log" every oil change in the aircraft logbook, but I keep a binder with the oil analysis reports from each oil change. Those pages have hours on oil, total hours, type of oil, quantity, etc., plus all the analysis data. So, I have a "record" of every oil change in my "records", just in a different book.

I do all three, engine airframe and prop. I want a complete record of the airplane's care and feeding over the years when it comes to that sad, sad time to sell and pass it on to the next lucky (younger) guy. Dan from Reno

The main reason for separate aircraft, engine, and prop logs is in case those items are separated from the aircraft and sold independently. In that case each item has a log that can go with it - a selling point.
I bought a used MT prop, that had one of the blades repaired. It was nice to have the repair documented in its own log.

I keep separate airframe, engine, and prop logs for all our planes because....well....I’m an engineer, so of course I am going to keep those kind of records. I log inspections for each component in each logbook, but the only one that gets the “official” Condition Inspection statement each year is the Airframe log - it only needs to be in one place, and it makes the most sense there. Nothing wrong with make a similar statement in the other books if it makes you feel better, but it doesn’t mean anything legally.

And, BTW, as Scott pointed out, not all experimentals have the same logging requirements - the little jet, even though it is E-AB, has a completely different set of maintenance requirements (it has an “approved” maintenance plan) and the sign offs relate to that plan, not to an annual Condition Inspection.

Paul