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 |
#51
|
|||
|
|||
Yep,
The annual inspection is complete when the log book is filled out. It does not have to pass, just the inspection has to be complete. If there are items that need to be attended to, those items can be completed prior the end of the inspection, then the inspection is complete and the aircraft is deemed airworthy. Or the logbook can be signed off with the unairworthy items noted and the inspection is complete, but unairworthy. A&P can bring the aircraft up to snuff. Dave No Spam wrote: On 9/20/05 19:28, "Bob Noel" wrote: In article , "RST Engineering" wrote: [a bunch of stuff snipped] (S)he cannot sign off the annual inspection. 43.11 (a)(5) is quite specific as to what has to happen when the aircraft is inspected and not found airworthy. If you have another section of the regs that countermands this section, please post it. Otherwise I maintain that the inspection is neither complete nor current. Maybe I haven't followed this thread well enough. Are you saying that an Annual Inspection is not complete and valid if there is a list of unairworthy items given to the owner? I don't mean to imply that the aircraft is airworthy or "in annual", rather that the inspection was finished and that any appropriate A&P could sign off the repair of those unairworthy items (as appropriate), right? (In this case I'm asking about a hypothetical case, not the specific stuff earlier in the thread). thanks That's what I thought, Bob. Hopefully someone in the know will confirm this. - Don When once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been, and there you will always long to return. - Leonardo da Vinci |
#52
|
|||
|
|||
|
#53
|
|||
|
|||
I believe that it's FAR 91.7 that makes the annual inspection _process_ "complete". It says that: (a) No person may operate a civil aircraft unless it is in an airworthy condition. (b) The pilot in command of a civil aircraft is responsible for determining whether that aircraft is in condition for safe flight. The pilot in command shall discontinue the flight when unairworthy mechanical, electrical, or structural conditions occur. The PIC has the the onus of ensuring that only airworthy airplanes get flown, not the inspector. -R Yes but if a "competent person" informs the PIC that the plane is unairworthy (s)he better have a darn good explanation for flying it. |
#54
|
|||
|
|||
Drew Dalgleish wrote: Yes but if a "competent person" informs the PIC that the plane is unairworthy (s)he better have a darn good explanation for flying it. That's my point. An inspector doesn't have to "ground the airplane" in any formal manner. He/she just has to state that it's not airworthy. There's no leeway in the regs for a pilot to decide they don't agree and fly it anyway. -R |
#55
|
|||
|
|||
What is the Gull Wing prop?
The prop I saw had the tip bent back maybe 1/4"-3/8". The Gullwing prop is a nickname given to the prop used on the 152. The inboard section of its blades were angled forward a few degrees, then straightened out past that. If it was laid flat on a table it would look from the side like a gull in flight. That angle caused structural failures in the blades. Centrifugal forces tried to straighten that bend and it would crack. The prop type was a McCauley 1A103, and ADs 95-21-01PL, 97-06-16, and 2003-12-05 applied to it, with the newest ADs supseding the earlier ones. Dan |
#56
|
|||
|
|||
Then you clearly have not the vaguest concept of what 91.3 means.
Jim That's my point. An inspector doesn't have to "ground the airplane" in any formal manner. He/she just has to state that it's not airworthy. There's no leeway in the regs for a pilot to decide they don't agree and fly it anyway. -R |
#57
|
|||
|
|||
RST Engineering wrote: Then you clearly have not the vaguest concept of what 91.3 means. Oh. O.K. Sorry. Perhaps you could clarify the concept for me then, Jim. Rob |
#58
|
|||
|
|||
Rob wrote: RST Engineering wrote: Then you clearly have not the vaguest concept of what 91.3 means. Oh. O.K. Sorry. Perhaps you could clarify the concept for me then, Jim. Rob Posted this before and it looks like Google ate it: Disregard my previous post Jim. You said "91.3", I read "91.7". 91.3 says the PIC may deviate from the FARs if necessary to deal with an emergency. That's a lot of "leeway". Point taken. -R |
#59
|
|||
|
|||
Rob wrote: RST Engineering wrote: Then you clearly have not the vaguest concept of what 91.3 means. Oh. O.K. Sorry. Perhaps you could clarify the concept for me then, Jim. Rob Disregard. Part of 91.3 means that a pilot may deviate from FARs if necessary to deal with an emergency. Technically, that's a lot of leeway. Point taken. -R |
#60
|
|||
|
|||
91.3 says in no uncertain terms (a) The pilot in command of an aircraft is
directly responsible for, and is the FINAL AUTHORITY as to the operation of that aircraft." (emphasis author) It doesn't say that the inspector can over-ride the PIC's assessment of the situation, does it? Jim "Rob" wrote in message oups.com... RST Engineering wrote: Then you clearly have not the vaguest concept of what 91.3 means. Oh. O.K. Sorry. Perhaps you could clarify the concept for me then, Jim. Rob |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Engine Balancing and Resonance Vibration Problem | AllanFuller | Owning | 13 | September 12th 05 12:51 AM |
Proposals for air breathing hypersonic craft. I | Robert Clark | Military Aviation | 2 | May 26th 04 06:42 PM |
Car engine FAA certified for airplane use | Cy Galley | Home Built | 10 | February 6th 04 03:03 PM |
What if the germans... | Charles Gray | Military Aviation | 119 | January 26th 04 11:20 PM |
Real stats on engine failures? | Captain Wubba | Piloting | 127 | December 8th 03 04:09 PM |