Results 1 to 2 of 2

Thread: [inbox] Conditional Annuals

  1. #1

    [inbox] Conditional Annuals

    I have a "conditional" pass each year (so far) on my annual due to my
    engine, it's over TBO but had a full bottom and partial top overhaul after
    nose wheel failure / prop strike upon landing, (if I had the plane then, I
    would have done a complete overhaul) as long as certain conditions /
    performance criteria / tests are passed, I'm OK and listed as a "conditional
    pass"...maybe this the same thing Bob and Wes are discussing?

    Ed Fitchett
    C-GBTC
    Toronto


    ----- Original Message -----
    From: "Bob Steward" <n76lima@mindspring.com>
    To: <musketeermail@yahoogroups.com>
    Sent: Sunday, January 15, 2006 1:35 PM
    Subject: [inbox] Re: [musketeermail] Conditional Annuals


    >
    > >I must disagree with your post. There is no such animal as a
    > >"conditional annual".
    >
    > <snip>
    >
    > >You either complete an annual inspection or you don't. A mechanic must
    > >sign for what he has done. If the annual inspection is complied with by
    > >him then he must sign it off. If the aircraft had "Unairworthy"
    > >discrepencies found during that annual he can refer to them as the reason
    > >for the negative statement entered in
    > >the logs (This aircraft has been inspected IAW an annual inspection and
    > >was found NOT airworthy due to the following discrepencies: 1-''''''''',
    > >2-'''''''' ) or (This aircraft was inspected IAW an anual inspection
    > >and was found NOT airworthy. A list of discrepencies was given to the
    > >owner.)
    >
    > This issue is covered in FAR 43.11 "Content, form, and disposition of
    > records for inspections conducted under Parts 91..."
    >
    > 43.11 (4-5)
    >
    > (4) Except for progressive inspections, if the aircraft is found to be
    > airworthy and approved for return to service, the following or a similarly
    > worded statement - "I certify that this aircraft has been inspected in
    > accordance with (insert type) inspection and was determined to be in
    > airworthy condition."
    >
    > (5) Except for progressive inspections, if the aircraft is not approved
    for
    > return to service because of needed maintenance, noncompliance with
    > applicable specifications, airworthiness directives, or other approved
    > data, the following or a similarly worded statement - "I certify that this
    > aircraft has been inspected in accordance with (insert type) inspection
    and
    > a list of discrepancies and unairworthy items dated (date) has been
    > provided for the aircraft owner or operator."
    >
    > >Either signoff is perfectly legal. No where do the FARS say I cannot
    > >enter a discrepency in any aircraft log. The industry standard is to
    > >provide a list. Some hand the list seperately. Some who prefer to
    > >protect their arses for the next 18 years against agressive attorneys
    > >will put the list IN the Legal Record. Remember the owner can chuck your
    > >list if it's not in the logs and tell another A&P that he was told he
    > >only needed new brake pads to make her air worthy when in reality he was
    > >given a 10 item list of grounding items. Your file copy of that list is
    > >useless in court. If you made the owner sign your copy oif the list it
    > >gives you a 50/50 shot of saving you home and license in court. If you
    > >put the list in the logs the next A&P knows for sure what needs to be
    > >done and will then have to sign his ticket for that work. If the law is
    > >followed to the "T" the list of discrepencies when completed will have
    > >to be entered in the log anyway by whomever complete the work.
    >
    > While I agree with Wes that one must be vigilant in protecting one's butt
    > (and certificates) in the increasingly litigious environment today, one is
    > not empowered to declare in the logs that an airplane is "unairworthy" in
    > any way except that an inspection has been performed and a list of
    > unairworthy items was given to the owner.
    >
    > We as mechanics are just the hired hands that assist owners in meeting
    > their airworthiness responsibilities. Before each flight the owners must
    > assure themselves that the plane is airworthy, and we get hired to
    > periodically help the owners know that things outside the scope of a
    > pre-flight are in conformity with the Type Design, and in a condition for
    > safe operation.
    >
    > As an inspector, I can (and do) find that an aircraft has discrepancies
    > that prevent me from stating that it is airworthy if the AR(R)OW paperwork
    > is not in the plane. This doesn't mean that the owner can't pull it out
    of
    > his flight bag and display it as required when he cranks up to leave. We
    > have 2 levels of criteria to inspect for during an annual. #1) Does the
    > plane meet its Type Design or properly altered condition? -- Which means
    is
    > it as it left the factory, just like the Type Certificate was approved by
    > the FAA, subject to any legal and documented repairs or alterations; which
    > is a Yes or No question. It can not be ALMOST meeting its Type Design and
    > be signed off as airworthy. #2) Is it in a condition for safe operation?
    > -- Which means are the wear items in suitable condition for safe
    > operation? Will that tire hold air even though the tread is worn off, are
    > the spark plugs within the manufacturer's limitations for electrode wear?,
    etc.
    >
    > There is no gray area in the items covered by #1, there can be things that
    > are open to interpretation and subjective judgement in item #2.
    >
    > In every case, it is up the the owner/pilot to satisfy themselves BEFORE
    > EACH FLIGHT if the plane is currently airworthy, regardless of what the
    > logs say.
    >
    > Bob Steward, A&P IA
    > Birmingham, AL
    >
    >
    >
    > Join BAC today and be a part of the ONLY Type Club for the Musketeer
    series!
    >
    > www.beechaeroclub.org
    >
    >
    > Yahoo! Groups Links
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >




    Join BAC today and be a part of the ONLY Type Club for the Musketeer series!

    www.beechaeroclub.org


    Yahoo! Groups Links

    <*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/musketeermail/

    <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    musketeermail-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

    <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

  2. #2

    [inbox] Conditional Annuals

    Since Canada has slightly different rules than the US it may be that
    the inspectors "up north" look at TBO as having a "requirement".
    Since yours is "past TBO" the inspector may be saying that it should
    be redone to be fully "airworthy".


    --- In musketeermail@yahoogroups.com, "Ed Fitchett" <efitchett@s...>
    wrote:
    >
    > I have a "conditional" pass each year (so far) on my annual due to
    my
    > engine, it's over TBO but had a full bottom and partial top
    overhaul after
    > nose wheel failure / prop strike upon landing, (if I had the plane
    then, I
    > would have done a complete overhaul) as long as certain conditions /
    > performance criteria / tests are passed, I'm OK and listed as
    a "conditional
    > pass"...maybe this the same thing Bob and Wes are discussing?
    >
    > Ed Fitchett
    > C-GBTC
    > Toronto
    >
    >
    > ----- Original Message -----
    > From: "Bob Steward" <n76lima@m...>
    > To: <musketeermail@yahoogroups.com>
    > Sent: Sunday, January 15, 2006 1:35 PM
    > Subject: [inbox] Re: [musketeermail] Conditional Annuals
    >
    >
    > >
    > > >I must disagree with your post. There is no such animal as a
    > > >"conditional annual".
    > >
    > > <snip>
    > >
    > > >You either complete an annual inspection or you don't. A
    mechanic must
    > > >sign for what he has done. If the annual inspection is complied
    with by
    > > >him then he must sign it off. If the aircraft had "Unairworthy"
    > > >discrepencies found during that annual he can refer to them as
    the reason
    > > >for the negative statement entered in
    > > >the logs (This aircraft has been inspected IAW an annual
    inspection and
    > > >was found NOT airworthy due to the following discrepencies: 1-
    ''''''''',
    > > >2-'''''''' ) or (This aircraft was inspected IAW an anual
    inspection
    > > >and was found NOT airworthy. A list of discrepencies was given
    to the
    > > >owner.)
    > >
    > > This issue is covered in FAR 43.11 "Content, form, and
    disposition of
    > > records for inspections conducted under Parts 91..."
    > >
    > > 43.11 (4-5)
    > >
    > > (4) Except for progressive inspections, if the aircraft is found
    to be
    > > airworthy and approved for return to service, the following or a
    similarly
    > > worded statement - "I certify that this aircraft has been
    inspected in
    > > accordance with (insert type) inspection and was determined to be
    in
    > > airworthy condition."
    > >
    > > (5) Except for progressive inspections, if the aircraft is not
    approved
    > for
    > > return to service because of needed maintenance, noncompliance
    with
    > > applicable specifications, airworthiness directives, or other
    approved
    > > data, the following or a similarly worded statement - "I certify
    that this
    > > aircraft has been inspected in accordance with (insert type)
    inspection
    > and
    > > a list of discrepancies and unairworthy items dated (date) has
    been
    > > provided for the aircraft owner or operator."
    > >
    > > >Either signoff is perfectly legal. No where do the FARS say I
    cannot
    > > >enter a discrepency in any aircraft log. The industry standard
    is to
    > > >provide a list. Some hand the list seperately. Some who prefer to
    > > >protect their arses for the next 18 years against agressive
    attorneys
    > > >will put the list IN the Legal Record. Remember the owner can
    chuck your
    > > >list if it's not in the logs and tell another A&P that he was
    told he
    > > >only needed new brake pads to make her air worthy when in
    reality he was
    > > >given a 10 item list of grounding items. Your file copy of that
    list is
    > > >useless in court. If you made the owner sign your copy oif the
    list it
    > > >gives you a 50/50 shot of saving you home and license in court.
    If you
    > > >put the list in the logs the next A&P knows for sure what needs
    to be
    > > >done and will then have to sign his ticket for that work. If the
    law is
    > > >followed to the "T" the list of discrepencies when completed
    will have
    > > >to be entered in the log anyway by whomever complete the work.
    > >
    > > While I agree with Wes that one must be vigilant in protecting
    one's butt
    > > (and certificates) in the increasingly litigious environment
    today, one is
    > > not empowered to declare in the logs that an airplane
    is "unairworthy" in
    > > any way except that an inspection has been performed and a list of
    > > unairworthy items was given to the owner.
    > >
    > > We as mechanics are just the hired hands that assist owners in
    meeting
    > > their airworthiness responsibilities. Before each flight the
    owners must
    > > assure themselves that the plane is airworthy, and we get hired to
    > > periodically help the owners know that things outside the scope
    of a
    > > pre-flight are in conformity with the Type Design, and in a
    condition for
    > > safe operation.
    > >
    > > As an inspector, I can (and do) find that an aircraft has
    discrepancies
    > > that prevent me from stating that it is airworthy if the AR(R)OW
    paperwork
    > > is not in the plane. This doesn't mean that the owner can't pull
    it out
    > of
    > > his flight bag and display it as required when he cranks up to
    leave. We
    > > have 2 levels of criteria to inspect for during an annual. #1)
    Does the
    > > plane meet its Type Design or properly altered condition? --
    Which means
    > is
    > > it as it left the factory, just like the Type Certificate was
    approved by
    > > the FAA, subject to any legal and documented repairs or
    alterations; which
    > > is a Yes or No question. It can not be ALMOST meeting its Type
    Design and
    > > be signed off as airworthy. #2) Is it in a condition for safe
    operation?
    > > -- Which means are the wear items in suitable condition for safe
    > > operation? Will that tire hold air even though the tread is worn
    off, are
    > > the spark plugs within the manufacturer's limitations for
    electrode wear?,
    > etc.
    > >
    > > There is no gray area in the items covered by #1, there can be
    things that
    > > are open to interpretation and subjective judgement in item #2.
    > >
    > > In every case, it is up the the owner/pilot to satisfy themselves
    BEFORE
    > > EACH FLIGHT if the plane is currently airworthy, regardless of
    what the
    > > logs say.
    > >
    > > Bob Steward, A&P IA
    > > Birmingham, AL
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > > Join BAC today and be a part of the ONLY Type Club for the
    Musketeer
    > series!
    > >
    > > www.beechaeroclub.org
    > >
    > >
    > > Yahoo! Groups Links
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > >
    >






    Join BAC today and be a part of the ONLY Type Club for the Musketeer series!

    www.beechaeroclub.org


    Yahoo! Groups Links

    <*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/musketeermail/

    <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    musketeermail-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

    <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Similar Threads

  1. Conditional annual
    By Swaimpilots in forum Musketeer-Mail Archive
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01-17-2006, 08:03 AM
  2. Conditional Annuals
    By n76lima in forum Musketeer-Mail Archive
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 01-15-2006, 09:18 PM
  3. Rudder Pedal Torque Tube Bushings (& Conditional Annuals)
    By Swaimpilots in forum Musketeer-Mail Archive
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01-14-2006, 10:54 PM
  4. Annuals
    By vanhook in forum BAC Mail Archive - DO NOT POST HERE
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 07-21-2005, 03:15 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO