AMT question: Approved Data

[Mark]

Hello.

I am studying for my O&Ps and I have a question about "approved data" and
"acceptable data."

I understand that the manufacturer's maintenance manual is only considered
"acceptable data," and is therefore not approved for use in making major
repairs or major alterations.

So let's suppose I want to overhaul some big nasty Lycoming with an integral
supercharger and a planetary-type prop reduction gear. Per CFR Part 43
Appendix A, this is a powerplant major repair. What is my approved data? Is
the Lycoming overhaul manual a source of approved data? If so, what is the
difference between this overhaul manual and a "maintenance manual" as
defined in CFR Part 43 Appendix A?

Second question:

Suppose I crumpled some skin on the wing of my Cessna 172. Assuming that it
is economically feasible to undertake a major repair to correct this damage,
where would I find my approved data? A Cessna 172 Structural Repair Manual
seems like the obvious choice, if there is such a publication. Again, would
this not be considered a "maintenance manual?"

Thanks
-Mark

[Highflyer]

"Mark" > wrote in message
...
> Hello.
>
> I am studying for my O&Ps and I have a question about "approved data" and
> "acceptable data."
>
> I understand that the manufacturer's maintenance manual is only considered
> "acceptable data," and is therefore not approved for use in making major
> repairs or major alterations.
>
> So let's suppose I want to overhaul some big nasty Lycoming with an
> integral supercharger and a planetary-type prop reduction gear. Per CFR
> Part 43 Appendix A, this is a powerplant major repair. What is my approved
> data? Is the Lycoming overhaul manual a source of approved data? If so,
> what is the difference between this overhaul manual and a "maintenance
> manual" as defined in CFR Part 43 Appendix A?
>
> Second question:
>
> Suppose I crumpled some skin on the wing of my Cessna 172. Assuming that
> it is economically feasible to undertake a major repair to correct this
> damage, where would I find my approved data? A Cessna 172 Structural
> Repair Manual seems like the obvious choice, if there is such a
> publication. Again, would this not be considered a "maintenance manual?"
>
> Thanks
> -Mark
>
>

Mark,

It can be very confusing between acceptable data and approved data. Some of
the data in the manufacturers maintenance manual is likely "approved" data,
but most is "acceptable." AC43-13 is also considered "acceptable" data.

On a major repair "acceptable" data is acceptable! It becomes "approved"
when they accept the 337. Approved data is required for major alterations.
For this purpose the data provided with the STC or on the TCDS is approved
data. The difference becomes important on a "field modification." Then you
write up the 337 explaining what you are going to do and how you will do it
referring to what approved data you have and acceptable data where you do
not have approved data. Make sure you include all sixteen points of the
ICA even if you only put down N/A for most of them. Then you send it off to
the FSDO before you do any of the work. They will put their stamp and
signature in Block 3 of the 337 and when they do all of your writeup becomes
approved. Then you perform the work exactly like you said you were going
to, and have the IA do the "return to service."

A major overhaul is "minor" maintenance and does not require a 337 form.
Welding up a crack in a seat frame is a "major" repair and does require a
337. :-) In my FSDO replaceing any factory part is minor maintenance and
just requires a logbook entry unless the part is something like a skin panel
that requires rivits to attach. Then it becomes a "major" repair because of
the rivits and requires a 337.

Putting in any avionics that is not listed on the TCDS, which these days is
virtually all avionics, requires a 337.

If ever you are not sure about something, call you PMI at the local FSDO and
talk it over. They will be glad to tell you what they will require from
you. If you give them what they need, all should go smoothly. I has worked
well for me over the years.

Highflyer
Highflight Aviation Services
Pinckneyville Airport ( PJY )

[Stealth Pilot]

On Fri, 24 Mar 2006 14:59:51 -0800, "Mark" >
wrote:


>Second question:
>
>Suppose I crumpled some skin on the wing of my Cessna 172. Assuming that it
>is economically feasible to undertake a major repair to correct this damage,
>where would I find my approved data? A Cessna 172 Structural Repair Manual
>seems like the obvious choice, if there is such a publication. Again, would
>this not be considered a "maintenance manual?"
>
>Thanks
>-Mark
>

Cessna 100 series service manual.
this is for the 150, 172, 175, 180, 182 and 185 if yours is the same
vintage as mine ( 1962 and prior)

this has details of the repairs you mention.
they are available from Univair

Stealth Pilot

[Mark]

"Stealth Pilot" > wrote:
>
> Cessna 100 series service manual.
> this is for the 150, 172, 175, 180, 182 and 185 if yours is the same
> vintage as mine ( 1962 and prior)
>
> this has details of the repairs you mention.
> they are available from Univair

Thanks for the information. However, my question is hypothetical.
I'm studying for the A&P exams.

-Mark

[Capt.Doug]

>"Mark" wrote in message
> So let's suppose I want to overhaul some big nasty Lycoming with an
integral
> supercharger and a planetary-type prop reduction gear. Per CFR Part 43
> Appendix A, this is a powerplant major repair.

Wouldn't you need an IA to go along with the A&P to perform this operation?

D.

[RST Engineering]

"Capt.Doug" > wrote in message
...
> >"Mark" wrote in message
>> So let's suppose I want to overhaul some big nasty Lycoming with an
> integral
>> supercharger and a planetary-type prop reduction gear. Per CFR Part 43
>> Appendix A, this is a powerplant major repair.
>
> Wouldn't you need an IA to go along with the A&P to perform this
> operation?


No, you would need the IA for return to service. The A&P can DO the
overhaul; the IA is needed for return to service.

Jim

[Dale Scroggins]

RST Engineering wrote:
> "Capt.Doug" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>>"Mark" wrote in message
>>>So let's suppose I want to overhaul some big nasty Lycoming with an
>>
>>integral
>>
>>>supercharger and a planetary-type prop reduction gear. Per CFR Part 43
>>>Appendix A, this is a powerplant major repair.
>>
>>Wouldn't you need an IA to go along with the A&P to perform this
>>operation?
>
>
>
> No, you would need the IA for return to service. The A&P can DO the
> overhaul; the IA is needed for return to service.
>
> Jim
>
>
Ackshully, you would need an appropriately rated pilot for return to
service. You'd need an IA to approve the engine for return to service.
And yes, the pilot is supposed to make an engine log entry.

[Mark]

"Dale Scroggins" > wrote:
>>
> Ackshully, you would need an appropriately rated pilot for return to
> service. You'd need an IA to approve the engine for return to service.
> And yes, the pilot is supposed to make an engine log entry.

If I did the overhaul, then he also gets a beer. Or two. :-)

[Barry]

> Ackshully, you would need an appropriately rated pilot for return to
> service. You'd need an IA to approve the engine for return to service. And
> yes, the pilot is supposed to make an engine log entry.

I agree with you that the IA approves the engine for return to service, and
the pilot actually returns it to service. But what's your reference for
stating that the pilot is supposed to make a logbook entry? I'm not aware of
any such requirement in Part 43.

[Barry]

> Putting in any avionics that is not listed on the TCDS, which these days is
> virtually all avionics, requires a 337.

This is certainly true in practice, but adding avionics doesn't seem to me to
fit any of the definitions of major alterations given in Part 43 Appendix A.
I once asked an FAA avionics inspector about this, and he just said something
about it being critical to safety and thus it makes sense to require a 337.
Does anyone know of a case in which someone has tried to challenge the FAA's
interpretation of this?

[Jim Macklin]

Look in Part 91

Title 14: Aeronautics and Space
PART 91-GENERAL OPERATING AND FLIGHT RULES
Subpart E-Maintenance, Preventive Maintenance, and
Alterations


Browse Previous | Browse Next


§ 91.407 Operation after maintenance, preventive
maintenance, rebuilding, or alteration.
(a) No person may operate any aircraft that has undergone
maintenance, preventive maintenance, rebuilding, or
alteration unless-

(1) It has been approved for return to service by a person
authorized under §43.7 of this chapter; and

(2) The maintenance record entry required by §43.9 or
§43.11, as applicable, of this chapter has been made.

(b) No person may carry any person (other than crewmembers)
in an aircraft that has been maintained, rebuilt, or altered
in a manner that may have appreciably changed its flight
characteristics or substantially affected its operation in
flight until an appropriately rated pilot with at least a
private pilot certificate flies the aircraft, makes an
operational check of the maintenance performed or alteration
made, and logs the flight in the aircraft records.

(c) The aircraft does not have to be flown as required by
paragraph (b) of this section if, prior to flight, ground
tests, inspection, or both show conclusively that the
maintenance, preventive maintenance, rebuilding, or
alteration has not appreciably changed the flight
characteristics or substantially affected the flight
operation of the aircraft.

(Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under
control number 2120-0005)

Browse Previous | Browse Next

"Barry" > wrote in message
...
|> Ackshully, you would need an appropriately rated pilot
for return to
| > service. You'd need an IA to approve the engine for
return to service. And
| > yes, the pilot is supposed to make an engine log entry.
|
| I agree with you that the IA approves the engine for
return to service, and
| the pilot actually returns it to service. But what's your
reference for
| stating that the pilot is supposed to make a logbook
entry? I'm not aware of
| any such requirement in Part 43.
|
|

[jc]

Jim Macklin wrote:

<snip>
> (b) No person may carry any person (other than crewmembers)
> in an aircraft that has been maintained, rebuilt, or altered
> in a manner that may have appreciably changed its flight
> characteristics or substantially affected its operation in
> flight until an appropriately rated pilot with at least a
> private pilot certificate flies the aircraft, makes an
> operational check of the maintenance performed or alteration
> made, and logs the flight in the aircraft records.

So what happened to the idea that the person who signed the maintenance out
comes for the ride?

--

regards

jc

LEGAL - I don't believe what I wrote and neither should you. Sobriety and/or
sanity of the author is not guaranteed

EMAIL - and are not valid email
addresses. news2x at perentie is valid for a while.

[pbc76049]

If you are studying for your A&P exams, this isn't the place to find
answers.
ALL the answers to the exam are in the 4 bibles....
The Airframe, Powerplant and General Handbook as well as AC43

Have a great day

Scott
"Dale Scroggins" > wrote in message
. com...
> Mark wrote:
>> "Stealth Pilot" > wrote:
>>
>>>Cessna 100 series service manual.
>>>this is for the 150, 172, 175, 180, 182 and 185 if yours is the same
>>>vintage as mine ( 1962 and prior)
>>>
>>>this has details of the repairs you mention.
>>>they are available from Univair
>>
>>
>> Thanks for the information. However, my question is hypothetical.
>> I'm studying for the A&P exams.
>>
>> -Mark
>>
>>
> "Approved" is defined in Part 1; approved by the Administrator, or his
> delegate. As others have mentioned, a stamp and signature in the proper
> box of a Form 337 by an FAA inspector constitutes approval of data.
> Inspectors aren't very enthusiastic about approving data nowadays, so more
> often such approval is given by a Designated Engineering Representative
> (who has authority to do so from the Administrator).
>
> Some manufacturers' manuals have parts or chapters approved by the
> Administrator. This fact will be stated in the preface of the manual; it
> could be a repair manual or flight manual. If the manual does not contain
> an approval statement, it is not approved data.
>
> "Acceptable" data isn't defined in Part 1. In practice, acceptable data
> is useful for performing maintenance, minor repairs, and minor alterations
> of aircraft. Maintenance manuals will be acceptable if not approved;
> AC43.13 is acceptable data unless the manufacturer offers data that
> conflicts. Some parts of AC43.13 can be used as approved data if the
> repair or alteration instructions are directly applicable and not in
> conflict with manufacturer's recommendations. Read the preface to
> AC43.13.
>
> In practical terms, an authorized inspector can approve a major repair or
> alteration based upon approved data. If he only has acceptable data, he
> cannot, unless he first has the acceptable data approved by the
> Administrator (by field approval by an FAA inspector, or by a DER).
>
> While structural repair manuals for smaller aircraft are most often not
> approved, SRMs for larger aircraft most often are. Read the preface.
> Flight manuals are nearly always approved. If you don't think there will
> be any maintenance-related data in a flight manual, think again.
>
> Dale Scroggins

[Mark]

"pbc76049" > wrote:
> If you are studying for your A&P exams, this isn't the place to find
> answers.
> ALL the answers to the exam are in the 4 bibles....
> The Airframe, Powerplant and General Handbook as well as AC43

Even a bible is open to interpretation.

[pbc76049]

"Mark" > wrote in message
...
>> Even a bible is open to interpretation.



Not acording to fundamentalists........

[Mark]

"pbc76049" > wrote:
>
> "Mark" > wrote in message
> ...
>>> Even a bible is open to interpretation.
>
> Not acording to fundamentalists........

Which is why it's so much fun to confront them with the
internal inconsistencies.

[Capt.Doug]

>"Jim Macklin" wrote in message
> (c) The aircraft does not have to be flown as required by
> paragraph (b) of this section if, prior to flight, ground
> tests, inspection, or both show conclusively that the
> maintenance, preventive maintenance, rebuilding, or
> alteration has not appreciably changed the flight
> characteristics or substantially affected the flight
> operation of the aircraft.

The last chapter of the Lycoming opposed engine overhaul manual specifies
that the rebuilt engine must be run in a calibrated test cell. That shows
conclusively that the flight characteristics won't be substantially
affected. Therefore, who needs the pilot?

Incidentally, and don't ask me how I know, does everyone here with an
overhauled cetificated engine have a record of a test cell run in the
engine's overhaul records?

Now then, I seem to remember something about integral superchargered engines
needing to be overhauled by an approved facility. When I ran R-985s, we had
to send them out as we weren't allowed to overhaul them ourselves.

D.