Hand Prop Prohibition

dmccormack said:
The guy I know will stop closer to solid objects next time. :yesnod:
Click to expand...
In the seven years I flew the prototype Fly Baby, there was only two times that I had to prop the plane without being able to tie the tail down. The first time was when the engine overcooled on approach on a 15-degree day and died as I turned off the runway. The second was when I stopped at a private grass strip and the trees, etc. were on the other side of the perimeter road.

Otherwise, I just kept my eyes open and parked it near an open tiedown, lightpoles, etc. I carried a hank of rope in the plane just in case, but preferred to use an existing tiedown. Biggest problem was old, deteriorated tiedown ropes...I'd test each rope before using it, and several times the rope just snapped.

Ron Wanttaja
 
Tom-D said:
So as the IA doing the annual I should look for a return to service entry before every start.

or did you forget 43.9

43.9 Content, form, and disposition of maintenance, preventive maintenance, rebuilding, and alteration records (except inspections performed in accordance with part 91, part 125, §135.411(a)(1), and §135.419 of this chapter).
top

(a) Maintenance record entries. Except as provided in paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section, each person who maintains, performs preventive maintenance, rebuilds, or alters an aircraft, airframe, aircraft engine, propeller, appliance, or component part shall make an entry in the maintenance record of that equipment containing the following information:
Click to expand...

Wow, If I need a maintenance log for that, Do I need to log plugging in the battery Tender or airing up the tires or adding oil? Or how about if I just go out once every 2 weeks and start it to charge the battery. Don't all of these qualify as Preventive Maintenance?

It seems more likely I only need to log the Preventative Maintenance items listed as Owner Maintenance in FAR 43.

How about installing the wings on my glider, which I do every time I fly it. However I forget, there may be some exception for this. I do know at one time the FAA was pushing for logging this, but has since backed off of this.

Brian
 
Last edited:
brcase said:
Wow, If I need a maintenance log for that, Do I need to log plugging in the battery Tender or airing up the tires or adding oil? Or how about if I just go out once every 2 weeks and start it to charge the battery. Don't all of these qualify as Preventive Maintenance?

It seems more likely I only need to log the Preventative Maintenance items listed as Owner Maintenance in FAR 43.

How about installing the wings on my glider, which I do every time I fly it. However I forget, there may be some exception for this. I do know at one time the FAA was pushing for logging this, but has since backed off of this.

Brian
Click to expand...

Plugging in and adding oil are not considered maintenance. adding oil is servicing, as is adding fuel. Turning things on and off (plugging it in) is usage. and in some cases adds to the time counted as time in service for useful life of time lifed items.

removing and replacing wings on a glider, great question I simply don't know if that is usage or maintenance.
 
Tom-D said:
removing and replacing wings on a glider, great question I simply don't know if that is usage or maintenance.
Click to expand...

it's usage. it used to be maintenance. but back in the 80's (i think) glider assembly and disassembly was added to the glider PTS, requiring all glider pilots to be trained on the task. previous to that it was listed under preventative maintenance and technically a logbook entry had to be made every time the glider was put together and/or taken apart. major PIA and very few people really complied.

I believe it is similar with putting together and rigging Balloons.
 
brcase said:
It seems more likely I only need to log the Preventative Maintenance items listed as Owner Maintenance in FAR 43.
Brian
Click to expand...

FAR 43-Appendix D (c) 1-31, are maintenance, in the true sense of the rule, things listed are in fact things being disassembled and or inspected by the pilot/owner/operator. and are required to be entered into the log.
 
Tom-D said:
FAR 43-Appendix D (c) 1-31, are maintenance, in the true sense of the rule, things listed are in fact things being disassembled and or inspected by the pilot/owner/operator. and are required to be entered into the log.
Click to expand...

Really? So every time I unbutton the cowl I need to note it in a log?

I do already, i suppose, in that each flight logbook entry has the airplane type and N number, and each flight includes a full POH pre-flight.

But recording in a maintenance log? Are you sure?

:dunno:
 
dmccormack said:
Really? So every time I unbutton the cowl I need to note it in a log?

I do already, i suppose, in that each flight logbook entry has the airplane type and N number, and each flight includes a full POH pre-flight.

But recording in a maintenance log? Are you sure?

:dunno:
Click to expand...

When you open doors and panels that were made to be opened with out tools it is usage, if you require a tool to remove screws to remove panels that are not made to be opened by hand, that is maintenance.

for example, the later model 172 has a little door that you open to check the oil, but it requires tools to remove the whole cowl. You open and close the little door, = no maintenance, you remove the entire cowl, that is maintenance.
 
43.9 is probably the most abused rule in aviation.
 
Tom, I am still confused. Your response to Brian in post 117 made it sound like either plugging in a battery tender or hand propping an airplane, maybe both, required a log entry. Really?
 
Greg Bockelman said:
HOWEVER, I don' know if road service could help you out if you have a 24 volt system.
Click to expand...

Tom-D said:
A couple 12 v in series will getter going.
Click to expand...

Henning said:
Never seen a 24v tow truck, though since a lot of them have 2 batteries, I could set up for it. I'm fine with flicking the prop though.
Click to expand...

Someone, who shall remain nameless, once did that for a guy in a King Air who left his battery on all day at a far northern airport where the airplane probably would've had to stay until spring if he hadn't gotten it started.

2 car batteries, 3 cables, and the knowledge of which pins you had to connect with one cable.

Woulda' been kind' tiring flicking the prop on a PT-6 :)
 
Tom-D said:
When you open doors and panels that were made to be opened with out tools it is usage, if you require a tool to remove screws to remove panels that are not made to be opened by hand, that is maintenance.

for example, the later model 172 has a little door that you open to check the oil, but it requires tools to remove the whole cowl. You open and close the little door, = no maintenance, you remove the entire cowl, that is maintenance.
Click to expand...

The hinged cowling panels of my Baron require a screwdriver to open but I'd never consider that to be loggable maintenance so I don't see that requiring tools would be the distinction. BWTHDIK?
 
tonycondon said:
it's usage. it used to be maintenance. but back in the 80's (i think) glider assembly and disassembly was added to the glider PTS, requiring all glider pilots to be trained on the task. previous to that it was listed under preventative maintenance and technically a logbook entry had to be made every time the glider was put together and/or taken apart. major PIA and very few people really complied.

I believe it is similar with putting together and rigging Balloons.
Click to expand...

Well that explains a bunch of entries in my glider log book. One of the prior owners logged every assembly and disassembly in the log.
 
gismo said:
The hinged cowling panels of my Baron require a screwdriver to open but I'd never consider that to be loggable maintenance so I don't see that requiring tools would be the distinction. BWTHDIK?
Click to expand...

Exactly -- Bonanzas old and new have Dzus fasteners -- only way to open is with a wide blade screwdriver.
 
Greg Bockelman said:
That is stretching it quite a bit. Just because a battery can't provide enough juice to properly spin the starter does not mean that either "don't work properly". Get the engine started, by whatever means possible, and the "problem" solves itself.
Click to expand...
...provided the battery charges normally after start, in which case the battery is not "inoperative." If not, then back to what I said -- I'm pretty sure that if you check with Cessna or the ACO that handles the C-172 Type Certificate, you'll find the battery and starter are both listed as required for all flight in the TC.

BTW, they don't have to list either the starter or the battery in 91.213 for it to apply, since it says, "Except as provided in paragraph (d) of this section, no person may take off an aircraft with inoperative instruments or equipment installed unless the following conditions are met..." Thus, any instrument or piece of equipment installed but inoperative brings this reg into play. As for subparagraph (d), it says:
(2) The inoperative instruments and equipment are not--
(i) Part of the VFR-day type certification instruments and equipment
prescribed in the applicable airworthiness regulations under which the
aircraft was type certificated;
(ii) Indicated as required on the aircraft's equipment list, or on
the Kinds of Operations Equipment List for the kind of flight operation
being conducted;
Click to expand...
I know for sure that the starter and battery are both listed as "R" items on the equipment lists for the 172's which have that list in their POH/AFM, and I strongly suspect they were so listed on earlier ones, too, but as I said above, you'd have to ask Cessna or the ACO to find out for sure. It's possible you may be legal to fly no-electric with the older manual flap 172's, but on the electric flap models, the flaps are listed as R-items, and with no battery, you can't excite the alternator, and that means no flaps. Again, older 172's with generators may be able to get the flaps going without any battery at all once the engine is started. Beyond that, we're talking special flight ("ferry") permit.
 
Jack Spectre said:
I'm not going to challenge your knowledge of FARs, but from a common sense point of view, if you have a bad starter (not a dead battery), what possible safety hazard does that introduce to your upcoming flight?
Click to expand...
The issue I was discussing was legality, not safety.
I'm not being argumentative, I'm just trying to determine if there is a logical basis for the requirement.
Click to expand...
Understood. As I've said many times before, that which is legal isn't always safe, and that which is safe isn't always legal.

That said, even if it was legal to fly with an inop starter, I'd want to know why the starter wasn't working. There are plenty of failure modes for the entire starter system (including wiring, ignition/starter switches, starter, gears, etc) which could present the possibility of mechanical or electrical problems in flight if the system isn't working properly. I've had one electrical fire in flight in a light plane (fortunately, only five miles from a suitable airport, although Potomac TRACON was a bit startled when I announced I was comm/squawk-out inside then then-ADIZ), and that was more than enough. While that one was not related to the starter system, it reinforced my already-healthy respect for anything which might result in smoke in the cockpit and the smell of burning insulation.
 
dmccormack said:
But the airplane isn't "in-flight"...?
Click to expand...
I don't see anything there which suggests that an unairworthy condition is only reason to discontinue once airborne, but not before the flight starts. "Shall discontinue" is directive, with no latitude or discretion to the pilot, and the FAA and NTSB have made that pretty clear in any number of enforcement cases.
 
Rotor&Wing said:
I don't think hand propping an airplane because the battery is low would require a maintenance entry. You could if you felt it warranted it, but really?
Click to expand...
"Battery too low to crank starter. Handpropped engine to start, recharged battery off alternator. Operational check OK." /s/ I.M. Pilot, 1234567 PP

From 14 CFR Part 43, Appendix A, Section (c):
(24) Replacing and servicing batteries.
Click to expand...

And I want to see the face of the next inspector who looks at that logbook.:D
 
Ron Levy said:
"Battery too low to crank starter. Handpropped engine to start, recharged battery off alternator. Operational check OK." /s/ I.M. Pilot, 1234567 PP

From 14 CFR Part 43, Appendix A, Section (c):


And I want to see the face of the next inspector who looks at that logbook.:D
Click to expand...

Oh come on. Are you advocating making THAT entry based on THAT reference? Does that fall under the category of replacing. No. Servicing? Since the battery wasn't touched, I would say no to that too.

And I agree about the inspector.
 
Ron Levy said:
I don't see anything there which suggests that an unairworthy condition is only reason to discontinue once airborne, but not before the flight starts. "Shall discontinue" is directive, with no latitude or discretion to the pilot, and the FAA and NTSB have made that pretty clear in any number of enforcement cases.
Click to expand...


The question hangs on whether a hand propped airplane is "airworthy."

I was referring to airplanes that must be hand propped to start. Given this is an accepted method for those airplanes, it seems over-reaching to prohibit such on airport property.

Then the discussion wandered off into dead battery land....

And then to legal ridiculousness:

"Removed engine oil and battery kept in house where ambient temperatures exceed 40 F. Before starting, warmed engine block by pushing into hangar. Reintroduced engine oil and re-connected battery, started airplane. Operational check OK." /s/ I.M. Pilot, 1234567 PP
 
Last edited:
dmccormack said:
"Removed engine oil and battery kept in house where ambient temperatures exceed 40 F. Before starting, warmed engine block by pushing into hangar. Reintroduced engine oil and re-connected battery, started airplane. Operational check OK." /s/ I.M. Pilot, 1234567 PP
Click to expand...

:rofl::rofl::rofl: Exactly.
 
Greg Bockelman said:
Oh come on. Are you advocating making THAT entry based on THAT reference? Does that fall under the category of replacing. No. Servicing? Since the battery wasn't touched, I would say no to that too.

And I agree about the inspector.
Click to expand...
That's a joke, son.:rolleyes:
 
dmccormack said:
The question hangs on whether a hand propped airplane is "airworthy."
Click to expand...
Depends why it was hand-propped. If it was because it doesn't have a starter/electrical system, then hand-propping isn't an issue. If it's because the battery is dead and the starter is trashed and they're both R-items in the equipment list, it's unairworthy no matter how you start it.
 
Ron Levy said:
Depends why it was hand-propped. If it was because it doesn't have a starter/electrical system, then hand-propping isn't an issue. If it's because the battery is dead and the starter is trashed and they're both R-items in the equipment list, it's unairworthy no matter how you start it.
Click to expand...

...and thereby hangs to uncertainty. If everything's fine and all you did was leave the master on a little too long, is hand propping forbidden by the FARs??
 
Who believes that removal and replacement or servicing a battery doesn't need a log entry?

Who believes that just because it is called preventative maintenance is doesn't require a log entry. ?
 
dmccormack said:
...and thereby hangs to uncertainty. If everything's fine and all you did was leave the master on a little too long, is hand propping forbidden by the FARs??
Click to expand...

Some where along the line, did you discover a discrepancy? did you fail to correct the discrepancy?

we have sited the FARs, read them.

Know the FARs and protect your PPL
 
Let us say that I go to the hangar get the 24 out to fly, it has a battery, the voltage is up, and the starter worked great the last time I used it.

I pull the 24 out and hand prop it to start it.

Legal?
 
Tom-D said:
Who believes that removal and replacement or servicing a battery doesn't need a log entry?
Click to expand...

No one said any different. Unless you call charging a battery "servicing". I call servicing adding acid or distilled water servicing. NOT charging. As long as it remains in the plane.

Who believes that just because it is called preventative maintenance is doesn't require a log entry. ?
Click to expand...

Who said that?
 
Tom-D said:
Let us say that I go to the hangar get the 24 out to fly, it has a battery, the voltage is up, and the starter worked great the last time I used it.

I pull the 24 out and hand prop it to start it.

Legal?
Click to expand...

Why wouldn't it be?
 
Not that anyone cares but...

I hand prop my A75 Fly Baby every time I fly it. Occasionally I have help but usually not.

The plane has a release hook mounted on the tailwheel. I tie that securely AND chock the wheels.

I check that the switch is OFF and throttle is fully closed.

I have my parachute on and everything loaded in the cockpit needed for flight.

I pull on the prop to confirm that the aircraft can't roll forward then pull the prop through a few times to prime it.

Turn mag switch to both, crack the throttle, and close the canopy leaving side window open to provide quick access to throttle.

Again pull on the prop to confirm security of tail tie and chocks.

Pull prop through to start engine

Retard throttle, check oil press

With hand on wing, eye on prop, approach to remove chock 1, walk WAY around and do same on other side to remove chock 2

Climb aboard, hook up headset, seatbelts (careful not to bump throttle or tail release getting in), check controls, set breaks, pull tail release (break check)

Taxi away happy to have arms legs and head intact.
 
Tom-D said:
Let us say that I go to the hangar get the 24 out to fly, it has a battery, the voltage is up, and the starter worked great the last time I used it.

I pull the 24 out and hand prop it to start it.

Legal?
Click to expand...

Yep, you have a good battery and starter, nothing says you are required to use them.
 
gkainz said:
I continue to be amazed at things that used to be commonplace are now considered hazardous, dangerous and way out of bounds for all of us modern, "too stupid to know better" common man ... chalk up another one to litigation (if true)
Click to expand...

+1.

Henry has been safely propping for 35 years.

When I learned to fly his Luscombe, I learned to prop it correctly as well.

I haven't lost any limbs so far, and I'm a short, round granny. :D

That said, there are stupid folks out there.

Deb
 
Henning said:
Yep, you have a good battery and starter, nothing says you are required to use them.
Click to expand...

If you have an approved flight manual that tells you how to start the engine? What then, are you required to use that procedure?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top