Mini Safety Program

S

Stache

Pre-takeoff checklist
Joined
Apr 2, 2005
Messages
381
Location
Yamagata, Japan
Display Name
Display name:
Stache
I am having a mini safety program in Santa Rosa, CA in REACH Air medical main hangar on March 29, 2007 starting at 9:00 AM. I would love to have a gaggle of pilots fly in and join us. REACH wanted to sponsor the event to help me provide training for them. I will be signing off IA renewals at the event.

I will be the main speaker (only speaker) for this event and it will count towards the WINGS program for pilots and mechanics. I am bringing three avionics inspectors to help sort out all those electron problems pilots have. I will also be reviewing logbooks to help pilots be legal (everyone will get immunity for one day). This is a training and learning day for pilots and mechanics.

Stache
 
Since this is an offical government function its FREE to attend all you have to do is show up.
 
Lemme find Santa Rosa on a map, and I might go to this. Thanks for the info, Stache.
 
Stache said:
I will also be reviewing logbooks to help pilots be legal (everyone will get immunity for one day).
Click to expand...

Yeah, but what are you gonna do to me tomorrow?

That's just a wee bit far for me, so I'll ask here... What is the most common problem you find with logbooks when you examine them like this? If we screwed up somewhere along the way (say we took pax and weren't night current or something like that)... What good would checking do? It's not like we can just lie and log some night landings beforehand after the fact... ?
 
flyingcheesehead said:
Yeah, but what are you gonna do to me tomorrow?

That's just a wee bit far for me, so I'll ask here... What is the most common problem you find with logbooks when you examine them like this? If we screwed up somewhere along the way (say we took pax and weren't night current or something like that)... What good would checking do? It's not like we can just lie and log some night landings beforehand after the fact... ?
Click to expand...

You could just not write in your logbook in a way that would show you took passengers in the first place. Use code :) I like to write enough to where I'll remember the day but not enough to where it could be used against me. Call me paranoid.

I suspect that he is looking for things like not endorsed, or improper wording on endorsements, things like that.
 
The most common mistakes I have found is the pitot and transponder tests out of date, IFR flight tests flight not recorded after a major alterations (were talking maintenance logs). Over flown annuals inspections. However the biggest problem is AD’s. Most mechanics seem to forget the accessories AD’s or don’t do a proper inspection to account for all them. Also the simple things like, changing the Bracket air filter in accordance with the STC requirements some are 50-hours to every 12-months depending on the part number. If you have alterations on your aircraft it is a good idea to have the mechanic check the instructions-for-continued-airworthiness (ICA’s). Many mechanics miss this part of the inspection and the owners are responsible for them.

If the equipment list is not current it means your weight and balance report may not be current. It is also a sign the A&P did not do a very good inspection checking all the accessories, as they should. It seems its the simple things are missed.

I wouldn’t want to look at any pilot logs at an event like, as I tend to find many mistakes like improper Bi-annual flight reviews or wrong dates and night landing not logged properly. However if a pilot requested a person like myself or someone else to review it for possible mistakes at a different type event (over a beer) I would have no problems sitting down and going over them one on one. Sitting down with a good CFI or DPRE and reviewing your flight logs is a good idea every couple of years.

Just one man’s opinion.

Stache
 
Stache, I much appreciate the work you are doing. I plan on taking advantage of your invitation but I do have a question.

What are the repercussions of letting the FAA review the mx logs once the day of immunity passes?
 
Lets just say its not a witch hunt, but an education. The FAA has a program where you can even bring your aircraft and have an inspector look it over as a training/education. I have done this in the past with very good results, yes we do finds things, but its not "you are busted" kind of thing. Otherwise whats the use of trying to help or educate. Here is one time where I can make a difference in my little way with no repercussions. Its will be good for you, good for the agency, and good for safety we call it a win win situation with no strings attached.

See in Santa Rosa it should be fun.

Stache
 
Stache said:
However the biggest problem is AD’s. Most mechanics seem to forget the accessories AD’s or don’t do a proper inspection to account for all them.
Click to expand...


When is a cylinder not an engine part?
Answer: When it's an aftermarket cylinder.

Why: Because then it's an appliance. :yes:
 
In regard to AD 2007-04-19 R1 effective May 07, 2007
"To prevent cylinder separation that can lead to engine failure, a possible engine compartment fire, and damage to the airplane."

The existing AD has been revised as a result of comments from the public.

The FAA changed the applicability to
(1) provide a date range (the eight month period between April and November 2005) and
(2) also clarified the serial number range (see the revised paragraphs (g) and (i) of the AD) and
(3) made some minor editorial changes.

The affected cylinder assemblies have to be removed no later than 150 hours time-in-service to preclude cylinder head fatique failure and separation at the head-to-barrel threaded interface.

http://www.airweb.faa.gov/Regulatory...4?OpenDocument

http://www.superiorairparts.com/sb0601/letter.asp
SB B06-01 E dated (01-24-2007) indicates 1354 cylinder assemblies.
 
This AD is against certain part number and serial numbered cylinder assemblies wherever they may be. End of story.

There is too much confusing information in the AD. The AD is for SAP affected cylinder assemblies whatever and wherever they are installed and stored. Then the focus should be the part numbers and serial numbers of the cylinder assemblies.
Table 1, 2, 3 and 4 are excess confusing verbiage. The lists describing engine models and series and aircraft the cylinders may be installed on are conflicting and incomplete.
What are the engine models that the cylinders are able to be installed on?
That’s the list to publish.
There was a table in the original AD that appeared to give that information; however it was removed in the revised AD.

In the Summary of the AD it indicates that certain SAP cylinder assemblies are installed in TCM 470, 520, and 550 series engines, Lycoming 320, 360, and 540 series engines and Avco Lycoming 540 series engines, and SAP 360 series engines. Note that Superior Air Parts advertise engines on their website they call XP-360.
The summary appears to affect all series of 320, 360, 470, 520 540, and 550 engines.

Table 1 lists affected TCM models.
Table 2 lists TCM engine models more specifically with aircraft they may be installed on.
Table 3 lists affected Lycoming and Avco Lycoming engine models.
Table 4 lists more specific Lycoming and Avco Lycoming engine models and aircraft they may be installed on.

The summary and four tables give conflicting information as to the models of engines that are affected.

In Tables 1 and 2:

0-470-G,-P,-R are listed in table 1; but are not listed in table 2.
I0-520-J is listed in table 1; but is not listed in table 2.
TSIO-520–BE,-CB,-CF is listed in table 2; but not in table 1.

And in Tables 3 and 4:

AIO-320-A,-B,-C are listed in table 3; but only AIO-320–B is listed in table 4.
0-360-A,-B,-C,-D,-F,-G,-J are listed in table 3; however 0-360-D,-G are not listed in table 4.
HI0-360-B,-C is listed in table 4; however only HI0-360-B is listed in table 3.
I0-360-E1A is missing from table 3; although it’s listed on table 4.
For I0-540-V is listed in table 3; however it is not listed in table 4;
and I0-540-E,-G are listed in table 4; however they are not listed in table 3.

There are engine models that are not listed in either table 3 or 4 (for example);
0-360-E1A6D,-E1AD,-E1BD,-E2AD,-E2BD and more.


Why all these tables of engine models and aircraft?
Just keep it simple.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top