Inoperative equipment

[falconkidding]

So I understand if its not required under far91, the TC, required equipment, or its on a MEL you can label it inop, deactivate it, and make a log of it and be good to go. (More or less)

Had a flight with a CFI and the heading bug wouldn't work when doing the run up. Obviously not required and CFI said we good to go. But wouldn't it have to be placarded and a note in the logs be made to be 100% legal?



I guess i've been in a few planes where stuff has been broken(clock, Vor, heading bug) but no placards( and probably no logbook entry) and CFI's have just gone yeah its been broken for a while we're good to go. So am I misunderstanding the rules? Personally doesn't bother me flying with broken equipment like that just curious incase mr FAA comes around that I have the 'Right" answer.

 

[Ravioli]

I'm not sure what a heading bug not working means.

Did the DG correctly match the Mag Compass (+/- deviation per the card)?

The "pointer" that is the bug need not work, unless you are driving an A/P from it.

 

[falconkidding]

I'm not sure what a heading bug not working means.

Did the DG correctly match the Mag Compass (+/- deviation per the card)?

The "pointer" that is the bug need not work, unless you are driving an A/P from it.

The DG worked but the heading bug was stuck. It is attached to the AP.
So

 

[Mistake Not...]

By that argument, paint chipped off the instrument case counts as inop.

 

[bradg33]

There's technical compliance and real-world compliance. I think you'll find that with respect to inoperative equipment, technical compliance is, um, rare?

 

[Sundancer]

I've been fantastically lucky in that nothing was ever broken when I took off - all failures occured after I was airborne. There were some times I didn't take off, of course, based on broken stuff. . .

 

[Ken Ibold]

There's technical compliance and real-world compliance. I think you'll find that with respect to inoperative equipment, technical compliance is, um, rare?

I have a friend who is a FSDO safety inspector. He said he can ground check any airplane and find something wrong with it if he looks hard enough, no matter how persnickety the owner is. This includes factory new airplanes after a delivery flight. I've actually watched him find flaws in factory fresh airplanes several times - a Cessna 206, a Piper Mirage, and my Citabria. All were ferry time only.

 

[Mistake Not...]

From other stories I've heard, most of those violations will be reversed by a mechanic. I'm not talking about your friend specifically, but as I understand it, they aren't qualified to make the final decision, only to raise the issue. So, they ground you until a mechanic looks at it and then it's over.

There are lots of things on a plane that look like a "violation" to the untrained eye, but end up being a nothing burger when looked at by an expert. In a just world, someone grounding my airplane would BE a mechanic not a "civil servant".

 

[Caramon13]

The litmus test I used for "placarded, etc" was if the instrument was designed to do something and it wasn't doing it. That constitutes a problem. The DG is working in your case, it's the bug that isn't.

A heading bug that controls the autopilot might be minor, but imagine someone trying to use the autopilot with that broken. The problem just compounds. If the DG was working but the bug wasn't, I might disable the autopilot as a precaution or at least NOTE that heading mode is not functional, but to disable the DG seems a bit silly. Especially if it is working.

The problem isn't the DG, the problem is the link between the DG heading bug and the autopilot. Now if the DG was precessing excessively or behaving strangely, then yeah, that'd be a problem.

 

[Zeldman]

I've been fantastically lucky in that nothing was ever broken when I took off - all failures occured after I was airborne. There were some times I didn't take off, of course, based on broken stuff. . .

Amazingly, every time something minor breaks on the plane I am flying, it happens on the leg home......

 

[Ken Ibold]

From other stories I've heard, most of those violations will be reversed by a mechanic. I'm not talking about your friend specifically, but as I understand it, they aren't qualified to make the final decision, only to raise the issue. So, they ground you until a mechanic looks at it and then it's over.

There are lots of things on a plane that look like a "violation" to the untrained eye, but end up being a nothing burger when looked at by an expert. In a just world, someone grounding my airplane would BE a mechanic not a "civil servant".

Nah, this guy is a super experienced mechanic. Rebuilds vintage seaplanes as a hobby. Because he is so experienced, he sees things other people pass over.