![]() |
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 |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]() wrote in message news:r5dNe.22116$Rp5.7682@trnddc03... On 18-Aug-2005, "Doug" wrote: I am quite sure that one can offer an aircraft for hire with an instructor under part 91 with an engine that has gone beyond TBO. My understanding of the "official" FAA interpretation is as follows: Renting an airplane, as opposed to chartering one, does not constitute a commercial, "for hire" use. Hiring of a flight instructor is a separate transaction not tied to the rental of the airplane. Therefore, regulations specifically governing commercial operations do not apply to airplanes that are rented out for instruction or for general use by pilots, regardless of whether dual instruction is given. Of course, if the pilot renting the airplane is going to use it for commercial purposes then the plane must meet commercial use maintenance and operational regulations. Because this interpretation is contrary to widely held belief it is not surprising that a local FSDO would provide a different reading. ------------------------------------- http://www.avweb.com/news/columns/187037-1.html The Savvy Aviator #4: Debunking TBO Engine TBO (time between overhauls) seems to be one of the most misunderstood concepts in aviation maintenance. There are lots of TBO-related old wives tales that are widely believed by owners and mechanic alike, and they can cost owners a great deal of money. Mike Busch endeavors to clear up these misconceptions, and explain what TBO really means. By Mike Busch (MYTH) "While it's true that manufacturer's TBO isn't compulsory for non-commercial (Part 91) operators, commercial (Part 121/135) operators are required to overhaul an engine when it reaches TBO." Not so. Both Lycoming and TCM publish engine TBOs in the form of non-mandatory service bulletins. Some Part 121/135 operators have Operations Specifications that require them to comply with all manufacturer's service bulletins (even non-mandatory ones), while others have Op Specs that require compliance only with mandatory service bulletins. Those in the latter group are no more obligated to comply with published TBO than are Part 91 operators. Those in the former group might theoretically be required to overhaul at published TBO, but most such operators request TBO extensions from their FSDO and these are routinely granted, often for as much as 50% over the engine manufacturer's published TBO. So, in actual practice, published TBO is hardly ever compulsory for any operators -- commercial or non-commercial. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|