Poh or afm required

U

Unregistered

Guest
I have a situation.
I have access to a 1971 c185E , and was going through the plane but could not find an AFM .
Does there have to be and AFM or POH in the aircraft or only pal carded limitations. I know ther is a reg that says after a certain date but i can't find it.

Can anyone help?
 
Unregistered said:
I have a situation.
I have access to a 1971 c185E , and was going through the plane but could not find an AFM .
Does there have to be and AFM or POH in the aircraft or only pal carded limitations. I know ther is a reg that says after a certain date but i can't find it.

Can anyone help?
Click to expand...

Yes, 91.9
 
No read 919.9 then 21.5 it states that: (a) With each airplane or rotorcraft that was not type certificated with an Airplane or Rotorcraft Flight Manual and that has had no flight time prior to March 1, 1979, the holder of a Type Certificate (including a Supplemental Type Certificate) or the licensee of a Type Certificate shall make available to the owner at the time of delivery of the aircraft a current approved Airplane or Rotorcraft Flight Manual.

Many planes certified prior to 1979 did not have an afm, instead they relied on placards
 
Yes you need one, yes the plane was certified with a manual, and no most planes built prior to 79' had POHs.

Remember your CFI teaching you AROW?

A 185 isn't a cheap plane, I'm surprised the guy has that caliber of aircraft and doesn't have a POH for it.


Do you have any experience in largish tailwheel aircraft (presuming its not on floats)?

I'd be sure you're OK on the insurance, you don't want to pay for 185 repairs, and certainly you don't want to pay for a new 185 should something happen.
 
The answer is usually in the aircraft TCDS. An AFM or POH is normally required in the "data pertinent to all models" portion of the TCDS so the POH/AFM is an airworthiness item. My mechanic won't sign of an annual if my required POH and applicable Fligh Manual Supplements aren't on board.

C185 TCDS-

http://www.airweb.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgMakeModel.nsf/0/37377ef4b5f2ca218625756e006e0b64/$FILE/3A24%20Rev%2039.pdf
 
Last edited:
Unregistered said:
I have a situation.
I have access to a 1971 c185E , and was going through the plane but could not find an AFM .
Does there have to be and AFM or POH in the aircraft or only pal carded limitations. I know ther is a reg that says after a certain date but i can't find it.

Can anyone help?
Click to expand...

I think that would depend on the serial number.
According to the link posted above by Stewartb, only later models require the AFM:
"This equipment must include a current Airplane Flight Manual effective S/N 18502300, 18503684 and on".

If your aircraft was in fact manufactured in 1971, it might well be exempt, depending on the serial number:
Serial Nos. Eligible 652, 18502091 through 18502310
except 18502300 (1973) (Normal)
18502311 through 18502565 (1974) (Normal and/or Restricted)
18502566 through 18502838 (1975) (Normal and/or Restricted)
18502839 through 18503153 (1976) (Normal and/or Restricted)
18503154 through 18503458 (1977) (Normal and/or Restricted)
18503459 through 18503683 (1978) (Normal and/or Restricted)
18502300, 18503684 through
18503938) (1979) (Normal and/or Restricted)
18503939 through 18504138 (1980) (Normal and/or Restricted)
18504139 through 18504328 (1981) (Normal and/or Restricted)
18504329 through 18504394 (1982) (Normal and/or Restricted)
18504395 through 18504415 (1983) (Normal and/or Restricted)
18504416 through 18504424 (1984) (Normal and/or Restricted)
18504425 through 18504448 (1985) (Normal and/or Restricted)
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
I guess it may be subject to interpretation....
A. On Models 185, 185A, 185B, 185C, 185D, 185E, and A185E:
(1) The following placards must be displayed in full view of the pilot:
(a) "This airplane must be operated as a normal category airplane in compliance with the operating limitations as stated in the form of placards, markings, and manuals
Click to expand...
 
What interpretation? All that says is you have to have a placard. RotorDude has the requirement for the manuals shown (it depends on when the plane was built as embodied by the serial number).

My plane has no AFM. The only thing that is required is the limitations book (mostly the stock w&b information) and the equipment list. I do have half a dozen "supplements" to the non-existent flight manual: tail modification, tip tank installation, IFR GPS, Autopilot, etc...
 
flyingron said:
What interpretation? All that says is you have to have a placard. RotorDude has the requirement for the manuals shown (it depends on when the plane was built as embodied by the serial number).

My plane has no AFM. The only thing that is required is the limitations book (mostly the stock w&b information) and the equipment list. I do have half a dozen "supplements" to the non-existent flight manual: tail modification, tip tank installation, IFR GPS, Autopilot, etc...
Click to expand...

That's another good point, the supplements and I have yet to see a 185 without a few STOL toys or other mods which have a supplement.

The Robertson STOL droop ailerons and fences comes to mind.
 
I went through this with my 56 Cessna. The correct answer is to look in the TCDS. It will tell you what is required. Older airplanes didnt come with an AFM or POH, they simply had the owners manual.

Mine had no placards in it. Went through the TCDS and figured out exactly which placards were required. There are several people who sell them on ebay and elsewhere. I ordered them for about $20, placed them were they made sense and I havent had an issue since.
 
James331 said:
Yes you need one, yes the plane was certified with a manual, and no most planes built prior to 79' had POHs.

Remember your CFI teaching you AROW?

A 185 isn't a cheap plane, I'm surprised the guy has that caliber of aircraft and doesn't have a POH for it.


Do you have any experience in largish tailwheel aircraft (presuming its not on floats)?

I'd be sure you're OK on the insurance, you don't want to pay for 185 repairs, and certainly you don't want to pay for a new 185 should something happen.
Click to expand...

I have my own none owners insurance .
 
A. On Models 185, 185A, 185B, 185C, 185D, 185E, and A185E:
(1) The following placards must be displayed in full view of the pilot:
(a) "This airplane must be operated as a normal category airplane in compliance with the operating limitations as stated in the form of placards, markings, and manuals
Click to expand...

I don't remember people so focused on finding deniability in 1971 as they are today. That said, does anyone wonder what "manuals" the TCDS-required placard in many 185s (including the 185E) referred to?
 
Stewartb said:
I don't remember people so focused on finding deniability in 1971 as they are today. That said, does anyone wonder what "manuals" the TCDS-required placard in many 185s (including the 185E) referred to?
Click to expand...

The way I read that TCDS and the placard you quote is that those items (placards, markings, manuals) are to be referred to for operating limitations that the pilot must comply with. In the case of the pre-1973 serial numbers, those aircraft (apparently) did not have an operating manual (or at least a mandatory one), so their operating limitations are specified only in markings and placards. In other words, there is an implied "as applicable" at the end of that list.
The point made in that placard is to not exceed the approved limitations, not what documents or markings are needed on board, since that requirement is stated elsewhere for the various models and serial numbers.
 
Last edited:
RotorDude said:
The way I read that TCDS and the placard you quote is that those items (placards, markings, manuals) are to be referred to for operating limitations that the pilot must comply with. In the case of the pre-1973 serial numbers, those aircraft (apparently) did not have an operating manual (or at least a mandatory one), so their operating limitations are specified only in markings and placards. In other words, there is an implied "as applicable" at the end of that list.
The point made in that placard is to not exceed the approved limitations, not what documents or markings are needed on board, since that requirement is stated elsewhere for the various models and serial numbers.
Click to expand...

You are correct.

Order 8620.2A

7.
TCDS.


Consistent with 14 CFR, a TCDS is part of a product’s type
certificate (TC). A TCDS is a summary of the product’s type design. It is used primarily by authorized persons
during initial or recurrent issuance of a Standard Airworthiness Certificate. It is neither a
regulation, a maintenance requirements document,
or a flight manual document. As such, for aircraft holding a valid and current airworthiness certificate, a TCDS
should not be used as a sole source to determine what maintenance is required or what the flight operations requirements are.
Any language on a TCDS, by itself, is not regulatory and is simply not enforceable. There must be a corresponding rule to make any language on the TCDS mandatory. For example, there is a mention of “operating limitations” on most
TCDS. The corresponding rule for “operating limitations” is 14 CFR § 91.9(a) which states, “Except as provided in paragraph (d) of this section, no person may operate a civil aircraft without complying with the operating limitations
specified in the approved Airplane or Rotorcraft Flight Manual, markings, and placards, or asotherwise prescribed by the certificating authority of the country of registry.” Without § 91.9, the TCDS requirement to comply with operating limitations would not be enforceable.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Unlike the rest of you, I have no interest in arguing, I'm just answering comments that are relevant to the OP's inquiry. If I had occasional access to a 185 that I wasn't familiar with I'd prefer to have the manual's information available, even if all you nay-sayers can find no regulations that require it. Sometimes a guy just needs to exercise a little common sense.
 
Stewartb said:
Unlike the rest of you, I have no interest in arguing, I'm just answering comments that are relevant to the OP's inquiry. If I had occasional access to a 185 that I wasn't familiar with I'd prefer to have the manual's information available, even if all you nay-sayers can find no regulations that require it. Sometimes a guy just needs to exercise a little common sense.
Click to expand...
The OP's inquiry was
Does there have to be and AFM or POH in the aircraft or only pal carded limitations.
Click to expand...

A discussion of the regulations that apply is directly relevant to the OP's inquiry, makes for a good educational discussion, increases understanding of the regulations we fly under, and does not preclude the common sense preference to have a manual with operating instructions and aircraft limitations. I didn't notice any of the "nay-sayers" arguing that they wouldn't want a manual if there was one existing or would toss theirs in the garbage because it's not technically required. Did you?
 
Last edited:
I think the regulatory answer about the make/model year stops short of answering. Is there a manufacturer's-approved manual for the 185E?

The reg for when a formal AFM is required tells us that if one is not "required", we still need to have "manual material, markings, and placards, or any combination thereof." If the manufacturer chose to provide "manual material" in the form of a book, as many did, it would need to be available (although perhaps not in the original book form).
13842.jpg

Who knows? Maybe the equipment list has it as a required item.
 
Stewartb said:
Unlike the rest of you, I have no interest in arguing, I'm just answering comments that are relevant to the OP's inquiry. If I had occasional access to a 185 that I wasn't familiar with I'd prefer to have the manual's information available, even if all you nay-sayers can find no regulations that require it. Sometimes a guy just needs to exercise a little common sense.
Click to expand...

interest in arguing? We're basically all agreeing with you and elaborating on the solution.
 
Is it just me, or is it curious that an anonymous poster asks a question, gets an immediate answer, and then in the very next post argues with that answer? Going so far as to quote regs?

I mean, if he knows the regs already, why ask?

I may be wrong, but this seems very troll-like.
 
FastEddieB said:
Is it just me, or is it curious that an anonymous poster asks a question, gets an immediate answer, and then in the very next post argues with that answer? Going so far as to quote regs?

I mean, if he knows the regs already, why ask?

I may be wrong, but this seems very troll-like.
Click to expand...

We have another regular poster on here that uses that same MO over and over trolling for arguments. :rolleyes:
 
FastEddieB said:
Is it just me, or is it curious that an anonymous poster asks a question, gets an immediate answer, and then in the very next post argues with that answer? Going so far as to quote regs?

I mean, if he knows the regs already, why ask?

I may be wrong, but this seems very troll-like.
Click to expand...

I have no idea who the OP is, or what his motivation is, but his reply to the original response he got is very much on point, since that response referred him to FAR 91.9, which in turn refers to 21.5, which basically tells you that operating manuals are not necessarily needed on board pre-1979 vintage aircraft. In other words, given that his plane is from 1971, the response he got was not informative, so it certainly makes sense for him make that clear and keep asking.
 
RotorDude said:
I have no idea who the OP is, or what his motivation is, but his reply to the original response he got is very much on point, since that response referred him to FAR 91.9, which in turn refers to 21.5, which basically tells you that operating manuals are not necessarily needed on board pre-1979 vintage aircraft. In other words, given that his plane is from 1971, the response he got was not informative, so it certainly makes sense for him make that clear and keep asking.
Click to expand...

The response he got was informative to the extent that he initially said he couldn't find the reg that applied. The response told him which reg it was, whereupon he apparently read it, together with 21.5 which is referenced in that reg, and then he commented on what he found in those regs. Both the response, and his response to the response, were appropriate, IMO. As always, "Your mileage may vary."
 
FastEddieB said:
Is it just me, or is it curious that an anonymous poster asks a question, gets an immediate answer, and then in the very next post argues with that answer? Going so far as to quote regs?

I mean, if he knows the regs already, why ask?

I may be wrong, but this seems very troll-like.
Click to expand...

The exact post was also made at the same time by username "Unitedcap". I suspect he had a log-in error, made a duplicate post, and the anonymous post got traction.
http://www.pilotsofamerica.com/forum/showthread.php?t=82243
 
Last edited:
No I'm not a troll I did have an issue with login and I wasn't the one who responded anonymously with the reg.

Here is my interpretations so far. Planes certified before 1979 usually didn't have a poh with a specific serial number, but they did come with a generic poh.
I decided to buy a generic poh for the plane to keep in it.

What,do you guys think?
 
Unitedcap said:
No I'm not a troll I did have an issue with login and I wasn't the one who responded anonymously with the reg.

Here is my interpretations so far. Planes certified before 1979 usually didn't have a poh with a specific serial number, but they did come with a generic poh.
I decided to buy a generic poh for the plane to keep in it.

What,do you guys think?
Click to expand...
If the airplane has no formal approved flight manual but has a nanufacturer's owner's handbook, makes sense to have one.

"POH" does not compute for me since a POH is a soecific form of flight manual that may not exist for an older airplane.
 
Unitedcap said:
No I'm not a troll I did have an issue with login and I wasn't the one who responded anonymously with the reg.

Here is my interpretations so far. Planes certified before 1979 usually didn't have a poh with a specific serial number, but they did come with a generic poh.
I decided to buy a generic poh for the plane to keep in it.

What,do you guys think?
Click to expand...

Prior to 79, it'll have an AFM instead of a POH -- they're similar but not standardized. They're not tied to a specific serial, as you indicated.
 
mkosmo said:
Prior to 79, it'll have an AFM instead of a POH -- they're similar but not standardized. They're not tied to a specific serial, as you indicated.
Click to expand...

Not quite. Strictly for informational purposes:

An "AFM", an Airplane Flight Manual or Approved Flight Manual, is regulatory creature is required by regulation for all aircraft certificated after March 1, 1979.

A "POH" is not a regulatory creature. It is a specification for a form of GA aircraft manuals originally created by the General Aviation Manufacturer's Association in 1975 in order to create industry consistency for pilots moving among different makes and models of aircraft while meeting applicable regulatory requirements.

So, prior to 1975, there simply was no "POH" although some have used the format for later revisions of earlier manuals. And a POH is nothing more that something that contains regulatory and non-regulatory information (including an AFM if there is one) in a format that organizes it in a certain way (the familiar POH sections) and uses consistent terminology across makes and models.

After 1979, it must have an AFM. If the manual was written or revised after 1975 it may be in the form of POH, whether it contains an AFM or not.
 
Last edited:
Yep, you're right. I wasn't quite functional yet when I wrote that lol. I was thinking of the older "owner's manual" format that was often seen.
 
mkosmo said:
Yep, you're right. I wasn't quite functional yet when I wrote that lol. I was thinking of the older "owner's manual" format that was often seen.
Click to expand...
And some of those are hysterical. I had a copy of a 1950s era 182 manual. I thought I scanned it but I can't locate it. It was great.
 
My owners manual from a 1956 almost makes it sound like anybody should be able to read it and fly the airplane, there's also annual and 100 hour inspection step by step instructions.

On the other hand the tables and figures are either WAY easier to read and understand or very confusing. I have a few spots that seem inconsistent.

"climb at 60 mph for best angle of climb"
"56 mph gives you best angle of climb"
 
RotorDude said:
I have no idea who the OP is, or what his motivation is, but his reply to the original response he got is very much on point, since that response referred him to FAR 91.9, which in turn refers to 21.5, which basically tells you that operating manuals are not necessarily needed on board pre-1979 vintage aircraft.
Click to expand...
That is true as long as there is no other requirement to have such a manual, and the TCDS for many such airplanes (Pipers in particular) make those AFM's a required item. As that FAA Order R&W quoted says, 14 CFR 91.9 makes any such TCDS requirement enforceable (the TCDS being a summary of requirements from the type certification documents). However, to my knowledge, no pre-1979 Cessna 182's or 185's had such a requirement in their type certification documents or stated on their TCDS.
 
Ron Levy said:
That is true as long as there is no other requirement to have such a manual, and the TCDS for many such airplanes (Pipers in particular) make those AFM's a required item. As that FAA Order R&W quoted says, 14 CFR 91.9 makes any such TCDS requirement enforceable (the TCDS being a summary of requirements from the type certification documents). However, to my knowledge, no pre-1979 Cessna 182's or 185's had such a requirement in their type certification documents or stated on their TCDS.
Click to expand...

Yes, I replied to the specific question about the OP's plane in post #6 and #13, based on its TCDS.
 
mkosmo said:
Prior to 79, it'll have an AFM instead of a POH -- they're similar but not standardized. They're not tied to a specific serial, as you indicated.
Click to expand...

They may or may not have such a manual.
 
Old Thread: Hello . There have been no replies in this thread for 365 days.
Content in this thread may no longer be relevant.
Perhaps it would be better to start a new thread instead.
Back
Top