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 |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
On 5/17/2005 17:28, Mike Ferrer wrote:
"A Lieberman" wrote in message ... Unpleasant surprise on my .411 .413 check. Person doing the check would not certify the inspection. He said that the VSI is not connected to the pitot static system. Interesting point. Although the VSI should be connected to the static system, it is not required by 91.411 or FAR Appendix E. In other words, he could have certified the system and you could have had an A&P investigate why the VSI wasn't hooked to the static system afterwards. But if the VSI is not connected to the static system, what has happed to the point where it was connected? Is the static line simply venting to the area behind the panel? Won't this affect all the other static-based instruments? .... unless someone took the time to plug the hole in the static line... The VSI will operate even though it is not connected the the official static system. However, it should be fixed. Mike -- Mark Hansen, PP-ASEL, Instrument Student Sacramento, CA |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
"A Lieberman" wrote in message ... Unpleasant surprise on my .411 .413 check. Person doing the check would not certify the inspection. He said that the VSI is not connected to the pitot static system. I am the first to say I am clueless about "systems". He said I would have to take it to a certified repair place to get it fixed. The VSI works, so I don't get this at all. It passed 2 years ago, with no problems. Do things "disconnect" on it's own or what's up with my VSI. Everything else appears to work just fine (ASI, altimeter and VSI). My plane does not have an alternate static in the plane. What should I expect when I take it to a repair center? Allen Check the Flight Manual/Maitenance Manual/Parts Manual to determine if the VSI is supposed to be hooked up to the static system. Some are not. Mike MU-2 |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
"Mark Hansen" wrote in message ... On 5/17/2005 17:28, Mike Ferrer wrote: "A Lieberman" wrote in message ... Unpleasant surprise on my .411 .413 check. Person doing the check would not certify the inspection. He said that the VSI is not connected to the pitot static system. Interesting point. Although the VSI should be connected to the static system, it is not required by 91.411 or FAR Appendix E. In other words, he could have certified the system and you could have had an A&P investigate why the VSI wasn't hooked to the static system afterwards. But if the VSI is not connected to the static system, what has happed to the point where it was connected? Is the static line simply venting to the area behind the panel? Won't this affect all the other static-based instruments? ... unless someone took the time to plug the hole in the static line... The VSI will operate even though it is not connected the the official static system. However, it should be fixed. Mike -- Mark Hansen, PP-ASEL, Instrument Student Sacramento, CA Or if it was never connected to the static port. Miie MU-2 Or |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
"Ron Natalie" wrote in message ... Yes, but it takes a repair facility who can do the appropriate tests to recertify the plane for IFR after most static system work. No, a mechanic with an Airframe rating can certify the static system after it has been worked on. For a non-pressurized aircraft, the test involves sucking the static system up 1,000 ft and making sure it doesn't leak more that 100 fpm. If no work was performed on the transponder or blind encoder, it doesn not require IFR recertification. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Here is the mad solution: Take it out! The VSI is not
required for any kind of flight, including instrument flight. Put a cover there. Go get your signoff. Put it back. It will indicate a bit flakily when not connected to the static system. For example, it will take a jump when you open your pilot window in flight. I like Mike's solution: See if it was ever connected. I can't imagine that having it connected is required for the static check. Bill Hale |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
wrote in message oups.com... Here is the mad solution: Take it out! The VSI is not required for any kind of flight, including instrument flight. Put a cover there. Go get your signoff. Put it back. It will indicate a bit flakily when not connected to the static system. For example, it will take a jump when you open your pilot window in flight. I like Mike's solution: See if it was ever connected. I can't imagine that having it connected is required for the static check. Bill Hale A lot of homebuilders don't use a static port at all. They just use the cabin air for static, this works fine for slower airplanes. Mike MU-2 |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
No, a mechanic with an Airframe rating can certify the static system after it has been worked on. For a non-pressurized aircraft, the test involves sucking the static system up 1,000 ft and making sure it doesn't leak more that 100 fpm. If no work was performed on the transponder or blind encoder, it doesn not require IFR recertification. This would apply to a VFR aircraft only. If you open the system on an IFR aircraft, the 91.411 required part 43 altimeter tests will have to be done by a rated entity; an "A" rated mechanic is not one of them. IFR or VFR aircraft, if the transponder integrated system is disturbed so as to cause an error, the 91.413 Part 43 tests must be re-done by a rated entity. Will opening a static line that includes the transponder quailfy as that kind of disturbance? Most FAA PMI's I have delt with think so. Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services ---------------------------------------------------------- ** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY ** ---------------------------------------------------------- http://www.usenet.com |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
"Don Hammer" wrote in message
... This would apply to a VFR aircraft only. There is no requirement for VFR aircraft static systems to be inspected or tested. If you open the system on an IFR aircraft, the 91.411 required part 43 altimeter tests will have to be done by a rated entity; an "A" rated mechanic is not one of them. Altimeter doesn't need retesting, just the static system. 91.411(b) The tests required by paragraph (a) of this section must be conducted by- (1) The manufacturer of the airplane, or helicopter.... (2) A certificated repair station..... (3) A certificated mechanic with an airframe rating (static pressure system tests and inspections only). IFR or VFR aircraft, if the transponder integrated system is disturbed so as to cause an error, the 91.413 Part 43 tests must be re-done by a rated entity. Opening or closing the static system is unlikely to introduce a data correspondance error. AC43-6B, Appendix 1, shows what needs to be done when system components are replaced. They indicate that replacement of an altimeter, other than the pilot's primary reference, requires a static leak test and field elevation test only. This is a similar case to removing and replacing a VSI or airspeed indicator, which requires opening up the static system. Will opening a static line that includes the transponder quailfy as that kind of disturbance? Most FAA PMI's I have delt with think so. Everyone interprets the FARs differently, Just to be sure, I just called my PMI at the AFW FSDO he agreed with my position. |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
There is no requirement for VFR aircraft static systems to be inspected or tested. 91.413 requires the transponder checks every 24 mo if you have one and use it. It makes no distinctions between IFR or VFR Altimeter doesn't need retesting, just the static system. 91.411(b) The tests required by paragraph (a) of this section must be conducted by- (1) The manufacturer of the airplane, or helicopter.... (2) A certificated repair station..... (3) A certificated mechanic with an airframe rating (static pressure system tests and inspections only). Agreed, as long as it is the static pressure system and it is just opened and closed. Does this include the pitot pressure system? Maybe - maybe not. Will opening a static line that includes the transponder quailfy as that kind of disturbance? Most FAA PMI's I have delt with think so. Everyone interprets the FARs differently, Just to be sure, I just called my PMI at the AFW FSDO he agreed with my position. I'm glad that the guys at AFW agreed with you. Did you ask them if they would put it in writing to cover you? For 20 + years I was a DOM at DAL on corporate jets and other than flying them have very little small aircraft experience so I may be looking trough a different pair of glasses. While I was there I got a 145 Limited Instrument Repair Station certificate so we could legally do our own checks to our own company aircraft. My PMI at DAL was hard on this; open the transponder system and you will test it and sign it off. It is interesting to me how two FSDO's 20 miles apart can be so different. AFW seems to be much more lenient on a lot of issues. The real question is, what can you defend on the witness stand? A verbal from a PMI doesn't count. It's the old $.10 and a cup of coffee thing. I do some aircraft maintenance-related expert witness stuff and you'd be amazed how easy it is for a good attorney to turn you into the bad guy. Just because some FAA inspector told you something won't get you off the hook if you did or didn't do the work. On the larger stuff, we always hang our hat on the Manufacturer's Approved Maintenance Manual. It is interesting to note however that the Maintenance Manual in not approved by the FAA, it is only an acceptable document to them. The only FAA Approved aircraft document is the AFM. In all cases, the FAR's are the law and are controlling. My advise to the group is this is a news group and a good way to pass around ideas. However, when it comes to making decisions that effect your livelihood or a life, this is not the place to rely on. The FSDO's are a good source of information, but if you really need to cover your posterior on an issue, get a written ruling from the FAA attorneys in OKC. Those will work in court. Thanks for the good feedback, Don Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services ---------------------------------------------------------- ** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY ** ---------------------------------------------------------- http://www.usenet.com |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Always boils down to interpretation.... Perhaps I should adopt your view,
it would mean more business for me! I own/operate a repair station that performs transponder, altimeter and static system certifications... Cheers, Mike |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Good morning or good evening depending upon your location. I want to ask you the most important question of your life. Your joy or sorrow for all eternity depends upon your answer. The question is: Are you saved? It is not a question of how good | Excelsior | Home Built | 0 | April 22nd 05 01:11 AM |
A question on Airworthiness Inspection | Dave S | Home Built | 1 | August 10th 04 05:07 AM |
Home Inspection Listings | Patrick Glenn | Home Built | 4 | April 26th 04 11:52 AM |
100 Hour Inspection Question | FryGuy | General Aviation | 59 | November 19th 03 04:01 AM |
100 Hour Inspection Question | FryGuy | Piloting | 58 | November 19th 03 04:01 AM |