Ed Haywood
Final Approach
I'm quite envious. Did you log the time? You're part of the way towards your A&P.
Another logbook question....
- Thread starter Half Fast
- Start date
I'm quite envious. Did you log the time? You're part of the way towards your A&P.
Half Fast
Touchdown! Greaser!
- Joined
- May 7, 2016
- Messages
- 21,187
- Location
- Central Florida
- Display Name
- Half Fast
- Home Airfield
- KGIF
Nah, I have no desire to become an A&P. I’m enjoying being unemployed.
Ed Haywood
Final Approach
Me neither, but it would be cool to be able to do all the work on your own plane.
Putting a rebuilt engine on an aircraft doesn't require and IA? Okay, that surprises me. I would have thought it fell under "major repairs." But then not being one, I don't know what they are required to sign off on or not.
My hangar neighbor is an IA, so now you've got me curious as to what requires an IA's signature vs an A&P.
Hang 4
En-Route
- Joined
- Aug 18, 2017
- Messages
- 3,422
- Display Name
- Hang 4
It's not a major alteration, that's different from a major repair. The latter has no meaning in FAA speak. An A&P can sign off, no need for IA
Ed Haywood
Final Approach
FAR part 1 says:
Major repair means a repair:
(1) That, if improperly done, might appreciably affect weight, balance, structural strength, performance, powerplant operation, flight characteristics, or other qualities affecting airworthiness; or
(2) That is not done according to accepted practices or cannot be done by elementary operations.
Hang 4
En-Route
- Joined
- Aug 18, 2017
- Messages
- 3,422
- Display Name
- Hang 4
@Ed Haywood - You're right, I stand corrected. Having said that, the overhaul does not require an AI sign off.
Doc Holliday
En-Route
One exception to that. If the engine uses a gearbox other than a spur type gear or an integral supercharger, now it requires an IA.
I get that it is not an alteration, but if you're saying there is no such thing as a "major repair" that it not accurate.
Take a look at the INSPECTION AUTHORIZATION INFORMATION GUIDE (FAA-G-8082-19). You'll find references to "major repairs" throughout the guide. I'm sure you'll also find it in multiple other FAA documentation. That's why I would have thought it was a "major repair" to swap out the engine. But again, not something I'm up on, so going to ask an IA I know.
FYI: Replacement of engines is a form of maintenance as is overhaul and repair. Overhaul is defined in Part 43.2 and a major repair is defined in Part 1 and 43 Appendix A(b). Only a major repair would require the services of an IA. And given 91.407 applies to maintenance, preventive maintenance, rebuilding, and alteration, it would also apply to the OPs engine overhaul.
Last edited:
Half Fast
Touchdown! Greaser!
- Joined
- May 7, 2016
- Messages
- 21,187
- Location
- Central Florida
- Display Name
- Half Fast
- Home Airfield
- KGIF
From FAA https://www.faa.gov/regulationspoli...aa-h-8083-32b-aviation-maintenance-technician , chapter 10:
Major Overhaul & Major Repairs
Major overhaul consists of the complete reconditioning of
the powerplant. A reciprocating engine would require that the
crankcase be disassembled per the FAA; a major overhaul
is not generally a major repair.
Not typically a major repair, thus no IA typically necessary.
Ed Haywood
Final Approach
Which is kinda bizarre when you look at the plain wording of the definition of a major repair. But like many things regulatory, you have to combine multiple regs to get to the answer. In this case, Appendix A to part 43 elaborates on major repairs to engines.
Bonkers that an A&P can overhaul an engine but not fix a leaky compass.
billsgs126
Line Up and Wait
It isn't quite as intuitive as it might seem. Fer instance, if'n when replacing the fluid in yer Whisky Compass, you use Bourbon instead of a Canadian, it'll point to Tennessee.
FWIW: Not so much bizarre or bonkers as to how each work type is “categorized.” Part 1.1 defines maintenance as: "...inspection, overhaul, repair, preservation, and the replacement of parts, but excludes preventive maintenance." And each “category” has its own base guidance to follow.
For example, your comparison of an engine OH to a leaky compass falls under different mx types: overhaul and repair. And a mechanic cannot repair an instrument per 61.81. However, I’m part of the group who believe servicing is not a repair, so I will service a mag compass with fluid.
Even “replacement of parts” has its own guidance. So when you add in alterations, rebuilding, and separately preventive maintenance to mix, you have 8 separate maintenance “categories” in which to know and understand. If that makes sense.
So in the case of the OP engine overhaul, in general, a mechanic would need to address 43.2, 43.5, 43.9, 43.13, and 43 Appx A/Part 1.1, if needed, on the regulatory level. Below that you have the various FAA, OEM, etc. guidance documents. While it does appear everything is grouped together under the general term “maintenance” there are specific and subtle differences between those individual types of maintenance.
Lindberg
Final Approach
My training in reading the law included the very important instruction to never paraphrase the statute. Here you've left out at least one very important word.
Lindberg
Final Approach
"My experience is the general rule."
My understanding. Engine replacement or overhaul no IA needed. Repair to a pressurized part of airplane is considered a major repair, 337 and IA in the part 91 world.
Yes, I understand now the engine change is not a major repair. Just pointing out that there still is a thing called a "major repair" in the FAAs view. The post made it sound like there was no such thing.
Hang 4
En-Route
- Joined
- Aug 18, 2017
- Messages
- 3,422
- Display Name
- Hang 4
See the post #47. I corrected what I said. I would have deleted the post, but it was already quoted.
AlphaPilotFlyer
Line Up and Wait
- Joined
- Dec 15, 2020
- Messages
- 509
- Display Name
- AlphaPilotFlyer
For what it’s worth…… the FBO I CFI’d in many years ago performed many engine swaps (they mostly swapped cores with over hauled) and offered the customers service to have us fly the plane for the first 5 to 10 hours….. which time most failures would manifest. Many signed up for this and I flew many post engine swap break-ins. The process we had was to include a pilot entry in log book under the A&P’s entry stating,”post maintenance functional flight test completed, no discrepancies noted”. I’m not sure this was really required as engine swap is minor mx, it seemed even back then as a gray area.
The ops check flight entry is governed by 91.407 and required for any maintenance that meets the requirements of that rule. An engine replacement would usually require such a flight and entry.ĺ
Clip4
Touchdown! Greaser!
ok, the Lycoming warranty says,
“Lycoming warrants each new and rebuilt Lycoming engine against defects in material or workmanship for the Warranty Period when used in accordance with applicable regulations and Lycoming’s technical publications”
If failing to document the breaking in procedures per 1427C voids the warranty, is the warranty void for not calibrating the engine instruments annually and not logging compliance with a technical publication 1094D?
No. There is no special Lycoming requirement to document the mx performed outside of the FAR requirements. However, to hedge your warranty position its always best to reference the OEMs documents to remove any doubt in what was done provided you actually follow those recommendations. But keep in mind 1427 applies to field OHs vs a factory OH where the initial runs are performed in a test stand and the warranty is in full effect.
Clip4
Touchdown! Greaser!
No, if your premise is correct, you have to document compliance with every technical bulletin for a Lycoming engine warranty. 1094D applies to all engines. The engine failed because you didn’t do the instrument calibration.
“Lycoming warrants each new and rebuilt Lycoming engine against defects in material or workmanship for the Warranty Period when used in accordance with applicable regulations and Lycoming’s technical publications”
Don't quite follow the point you're trying make given the context of the discussion, but I'll stick to what I stated. Plus you missed the word "applicable" in your previous highlight. However, I will add that while the Lycoming warranty only applies to work/parts performed/offered by Lycoming, if one has engine work performed by a different 3rd party shop, their post-maintenance requirements should be followed as they will be directly managing any warranty issues.
Clip4
Touchdown! Greaser!
What I am saying is you don’t have to document the break procedure for a Lycoming factory overhauled engine in the engine logbook and if you do you must also document anything else applicable in Lycoming’s library.
Except you as the recipient of that factory OH'd engine are completing the recommended break-in process that Lycoming started and how you finished that process usually becomes a focal point of any warranty claim. Hence my comment to document what reference you used. For you to require the inclusion of any other factory bulletin not related to the OH, well, that is your choice as the owner but not one I would recommend.