If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
"certified' parts
Yesterday, I attended a FAA safety seminar where the topic was
maintenance issues. I walked away with a few surprising nuggets of information. These issues have been discussed here in the past and some of the information posited here disagreed with what the FAA said. So, I thought it would be useful to list them here. Now, before everyone flames me and tells me I'm an idiot, these are not my opinions, they are the opinions of the Safety Inspectors at Washington - Dulles FSDO. Manuals: You must have current service manuals to do any (including preventative) maintenance on your bird. That includes all service letters. A few pilots grumbled that certain companies will not send the service letters to the owners. The Safety Inspector said that didn't matter. Missing a service letter makes the manual out of date and unusable. Parts: You must buy the parts from an aviation source. Someone brought up that landing lights can be bought cheaper at automotive supply stores than from aviation outlets at a fraction of the cost. The FAA wouldn't hear of it. It does not matter if the part is made by the same company with an identical part number, if you didn't get it from an aviation source, then it is not an airworthy part. The Safety Inspector gave three examples, the light bulb above, an alternator belt, and an air filter. I guess that the alternator belt part number you would get in a automotive store has fewer layers of material in it than the one approved for aviation. The belts were the same dimensions, but there was an extra layer in the aviation belt, but they both had the same part numbers. The air filter from some airplanes also fit some automobiles. Same Fram part number. The Inspector used this as a uncertainty example. Are the parts exactly the same, who knows? I was going to ask him how do we know that we're getting approved parts from aviation houses if the manufacturers use identical part numbers for aviation approved and non approved parts. But by the end of this discussion, he was getting kind of ticked by all the questions, so I took a pass. Logs: All preventative maintenance must be logged, including updating the database on your GPS unit. So, if you have updated your GPS database and did not log it, you're not airworthy. This one caught a lot of pilots. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Jimmy B. wrote:
: I guess that the alternator belt part number you would get in a : automotive store has fewer layers of material in it than the one : approved for aviation. The belts were the same dimensions, but there : was an extra layer in the aviation belt, but they both had the same part : numbers. I call bull**** on this one. A part number from one manufacturer is a part number. If its a different part, it's got a different number. Now, if someone says a Wicks P/N-XYZPQ is the same as an Autolite P/N-XYZPQ, then I might believe it. : I was going to ask him how do we know that we're getting approved parts : from aviation houses if the manufacturers use identical part numbers for : aviation approved and non approved parts. But by the end of this : discussion, he was getting kind of ticked by all the questions, so I : took a pass. Sound about right. The FAA rules/regs sound ominous, and are written in "airtight" legaleaze. If you try to corner someone on the details, however, the final interpretation is done by the specific person you ask. The "ultimate authority" is the *specific FAA person* at *YOUR* FSDO you asked at the time. They may be right/wrong, but they're the one that interprets something as "legal." An immediate corollary of this is that as soon as there's a problem, *SOMEONE* will find something wrong, and since it's their interprettation, you are wrong. : All preventative maintenance must be logged, including updating the : database on your GPS unit. So, if you have updated your GPS database : and did not log it, you're not airworthy. This one caught a lot of pilots. Just remember that there isn't a single solitary aircraft currently flying that's actually airworthy. I don't care if it just rolled off the manufacturer's lot. The guy who pumped fuel into it last didn't clip the grounding lug on the 100LL truck to the "approved ground," thus performing an illegal servicing of the craft and rendering it unairworthy. Running around crying "the sky is falling," tends to be a debilitating proposition WRT flying. It's *IMPOSSIBLE* to keep an aircraft airworthy, because the actual laws are subject to individual FAA interpretation. The GPS update may seem a bit crazy, but in the highly unlikely case that an improper update causes a crash and ensuing investigation, it will becoming immediately very important. A few bits I try to remember when talking about issues like this: - "Hi! We're the FAA and we're not happy until you're not happy" - "Hi! We're the FAA. If you don't have a problem, we won't have any problems, but if you have a problem, we'll find a problem." I take that to mean that be smart WRT certified parts. Don't go to Ace Hardware for your propeller bolts, but at the same time you don't need to buy nitrogen to fill your struts directly from Piper, either. -Cory (this $h*t really irritates me as it's still slowly killing GA) ************************************************** *********************** * Cory Papenfuss * * Electrical Engineering candidate Ph.D. graduate student * * Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University * ************************************************** *********************** |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Jimmy B. wrote:
All preventative maintenance must be logged, including updating the database on your GPS unit. So, if you have updated your GPS database and did not log it, you're not airworthy. This one caught a lot of pilots. You must be thinking panel mounted... There are lots of time line rules in regards to IFR panels... |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Darrel Toepfer wrote:
Jimmy B. wrote: All preventative maintenance must be logged, including updating the database on your GPS unit. So, if you have updated your GPS database and did not log it, you're not airworthy. This one caught a lot of pilots. You must be thinking panel mounted... There are lots of time line rules in regards to IFR panels... Yeah, sorry. This referred to panel mounted units only. It was kind of interesting because the same question came up in the seminar. Someone asked about a hand held GPS running on its own batteries. Then about a hand held running off of the cigarette lighter. Then about being Velcro mounted, Then bracket mounted. It was kind of funny. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Jimmy B. wrote:
: It was kind of interesting because the same question came up in the : seminar. Someone asked about a hand held GPS running on its own : batteries. Then about a hand held running off of the cigarette lighter. : Then about being Velcro mounted, Then bracket mounted. It was kind of : funny. See my previous rant about the rules sounding airtight.... until you try to nail one down. Then you see that it's often open to interpretation. -Cory ************************************************** *********************** * Cory Papenfuss * * Electrical Engineering candidate Ph.D. graduate student * * Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University * ************************************************** *********************** |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
You must buy the parts from an aviation source. Someone brought up that landing lights can be bought cheaper at automotive supply stores than from aviation outlets at a fraction of the cost. The FAA wouldn't hear of it. Indeed. That's why the FAA doesn't hear of it, even though everyone does it. All preventative maintenance must be logged, including updating the database on your GPS unit. So, if you have updated your GPS database and did not log it, you're not airworthy. This one caught a lot of pilots. An FAA guy has to say this. He can't go around saying that you don't have to follow the rules. However, I'd be very surprised if you can find anyone who has been busted for not logging database updates on their GPS. (Someone will now pop-up and repeat the nonsence about how not logging it will void your insurance...) |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
All preventative maintenance must be logged, including updating the database on your GPS unit. So, if you have updated your GPS database and did not log it, you're not airworthy. This one caught a lot of pilots. However, you don't have to update your database to be legal. This is per a briefing we received from the FAA last month. What is true is that you must be able to verify the latitude and longitude of any waypoint you use for navigation. So, if you checked the latitude and longitude of your GPS nav fixes by hand before flight, even if your database is out of date, you can still use the GPS for navigation. Paul Missman |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Paul Missman wrote:
All preventative maintenance must be logged, including updating the database on your GPS unit. So, if you have updated your GPS database and did not log it, you're not airworthy. This one caught a lot of pilots. However, you don't have to update your database to be legal. This is per a briefing we received from the FAA last month. What is true is that you must be able to verify the latitude and longitude of any waypoint you use for navigation. So, if you checked the latitude and longitude of your GPS nav fixes by hand before flight, even if your database is out of date, you can still use the GPS for navigation. Some supplemental POHs require a current database for conducting a GPS instrument approach. I'd be very surprised if that weren't considered a violation of the airworthiness certificate if your supplemental POH has that wording. Maybe you intentionally made a distinction between approaches and "navigation"? DGB |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
As Dave says, this depends on the GPS and the associated AFM supplement. ISTR that Garmin allows you to check the waypoints, whereas King does not. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
"Jimmy B." wrote in message k.net... Yesterday, I attended a FAA safety seminar where the topic was maintenance issues. I walked away with a few surprising nuggets of information. These issues have been discussed here in the past and some of the information posited here disagreed with what the FAA said. So, I thought it would be useful to list them here. Now, before everyone flames me and tells me I'm an idiot, these are not my opinions, they are the opinions of the Safety Inspectors at Washington - Dulles FSDO. Another in the list of excuses for mandating parts procurement from an aviation supplier is the paper trail, a Fram filter from Autozone has no paper trail to the source. When confronting the FAA with the simple fact that anyone with a quality printer can "create" a paper trail you'll be greeted with a shrug. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Homebuilt Aircraft Frequently Asked Questions List (FAQ) | Ron Wanttaja | Home Built | 40 | October 3rd 08 03:13 PM |
Homebuilt Aircraft Frequently Asked Questions List (FAQ) | Ron Wanttaja | Home Built | 0 | December 2nd 04 07:00 AM |
Homebuilt Aircraft Frequently Asked Questions List (FAQ) | Ron Wanttaja | Home Built | 0 | September 2nd 04 05:15 AM |
Homebuilt Aircraft Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) | Ron Wanttaja | Home Built | 0 | June 2nd 04 07:17 AM |
Homebuilt Aircraft Frequently-Asked Questions (FAQ) | Ron Wanttaja | Home Built | 0 | July 4th 03 04:50 PM |