Time limit on inoped gauges?

Discussion in 'Maintenance Bay' started by Tantalum, Nov 26, 2017.

  1. Tantalum

    Tantalum Pattern Altitude

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2017
    Messages:
    2,346
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    San_Diego_Pilot
    For basic rental fleet GA.. is there a time limit in how long something can be left inop? For example a secondary back up AI and autopilot? What about long range fuel tanks?

    I've read the regs and couldn't find anything specific but I thought for sure there was a time limit on it. Curious what the experts here say
     
  2. SkyDog58

    SkyDog58 Touchdown! Greaser!

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2015
    Messages:
    11,145
    Location:
    My own special place.
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Old dog w/o new tricks
    Depends.

    You need to read 91.213 & 91.405 to get to the answer.

    But basically...

    91.405 Each owner or operator of an aircraft—
    (c) Shall have any inoperative instrument or item of equipment, permitted to be inoperative by §91.213(d)(2) of this part, repaired, replaced, removed, or inspected at the next required inspection;

    So if it is just a straight rental aircraft and does not require 100 hour inspection, then repair, replacement, etc. will most likely be at the next annual. However, if the aircraft receives 100 hr inspections because it is used for hire, i.e. flight instruction, then it would be repaired at the next 100 hr inspection.

    However, if the type of flight operation (night, IFR) requires the equipment to be operative then it must be fixed prior to such flight.
     
    Tantalum likes this.
  3. Bell206

    Bell206 Line Up and Wait

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2017
    Messages:
    681
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Bell206
    Tant:
    What SkyDog said above unless the aircraft had an approved MEL then the time-period would be whatever stated in the MEL for that equipment.
     
    Paulie and Tantalum like this.
  4. SkyDog58

    SkyDog58 Touchdown! Greaser!

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2015
    Messages:
    11,145
    Location:
    My own special place.
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Old dog w/o new tricks
    I left out the MEL aspect as it gets a bit more complicated and he asked about a basic rental fleet which rarely use a MEL. However, it is covered in 91.213 which was suggested reading. :)
     
    Bell206 likes this.
  5. midlifeflyer

    midlifeflyer Final Approach

    Joined:
    May 25, 2006
    Messages:
    8,400
    Location:
    Chapel Hill NC
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Mark
    Someone who is into dancing on needle heads can have some fun parsing:

    Shall have any inoperative instrument or item of equipment, permitted to be inoperative by §91.213(d)(2) of this part, repaired, replaced, removed, or inspected at the next required inspection; ​

    The FAA Chief Counsel, just this past year, said exactly what @SkyDog58 said, but seems to have left out a discussion of whether, at the next inspection, it can once again be deferred.
     
  6. Bell206

    Bell206 Line Up and Wait

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2017
    Messages:
    681
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Bell206
    There is/was an AC that addressed re-inspecting the deferred item at the next inspection but I recall it being cancelled recently. I believe the item could be deferred again but required another discrepancy write up by the mechanic inspecting, the owner notified, and another 91.213 sign off.
     
  7. midlifeflyer

    midlifeflyer Final Approach

    Joined:
    May 25, 2006
    Messages:
    8,400
    Location:
    Chapel Hill NC
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Mark
    I would expect that would be required. To go back to the original question, does that mean no ultimate time limit, just repeated authorizations as though it was the first time it came up?
     
  8. Bell206

    Bell206 Line Up and Wait

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2017
    Messages:
    681
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Bell206
    Mid:
    I remember something on that issue but don't recall where. Even the LOI you referenced above stated the inoperative instrument couldn't fly indefinitely. I think the guidance mentioned if the item was not repaired at the next inspection the owner had to look at removing it per (d)(3) and the removal did not have to include any wire harnesses or permanent alterations associated with the item. But this could have been a 135 issue and not 91. I do recall several investigative reports that more or less defined the "who" and "what" side of deferring items per 213(d) and put more emphasis on the maintenance side of deactivating a system. I think few A&P's would continually defer an item per 213(d) after each inspection as it might run against 43.13(a) at some point.
     
  9. MauleSkinner

    MauleSkinner En-Route

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2005
    Messages:
    4,388
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    MauleSkinner
    Not for a Part 91 authorization.
     
    Bell206 likes this.
  10. midlifeflyer

    midlifeflyer Final Approach

    Joined:
    May 25, 2006
    Messages:
    8,400
    Location:
    Chapel Hill NC
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Mark
    I also recall something like that. Don't remember where either. Perhaps one of the mechanics on the board will chime in...
     
  11. Tantalum

    Tantalum Pattern Altitude

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2017
    Messages:
    2,346
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    San_Diego_Pilot
    Wow, thanks guys! @SkyDog58 I was reading that reg this morning but was curious for a straight rental what the "next required inspection" was, appreciate the input and safely guidance from the experts here

    Some more details:
    One of the planes in the club is a real beater, with several items that have been inoped for a while.. so was curious about how legit/legal that was

    Sucks that so many rental fleets are in such pitiful shape. There was an article in Flying about a club plane that lost power somewhere over CA and the plugs were found to be in horrid shape
     
  12. Tantalum

    Tantalum Pattern Altitude

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2017
    Messages:
    2,346
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    San_Diego_Pilot
    *sagely

    Not safely, typo
     
  13. GlennAB1

    GlennAB1 Ejection Handle Pulled

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2015
    Messages:
    4,889
    Location:
    Home will always be Vandalia, OH
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    GlennAB1
    Part 91 Subpart K
    91.1115
     
  14. MauleSkinner

    MauleSkinner En-Route

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2005
    Messages:
    4,388
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    MauleSkinner
    Yeah, Sub-K is always the exception
     
  15. Tom-D

    Tom-D Taxi to Parking

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2005
    Messages:
    29,123
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Tom-D
    I can find no regulation that prevents any equipment tagged out under 91.213, from being tagged out again.

    But.

    any owner that did not get it fixed, would not get me to tag it out again. (that's just me)
     
  16. GlennAB1

    GlennAB1 Ejection Handle Pulled

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2015
    Messages:
    4,889
    Location:
    Home will always be Vandalia, OH
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    GlennAB1
    Maybe you're just required to inspect and verify it's still deferred properly.
     
  17. Bell206

    Bell206 Line Up and Wait

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2017
    Messages:
    681
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Bell206
    Plus I could not imagine an owner wanting consecutive unairworthy annual sign offs with the same list of discrepancies deferred every year per 213(d).
     
  18. JAWS

    JAWS Line Up and Wait

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2016
    Messages:
    668
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    JAWS
    What was the comment in the other thread?
    "Trust in the system"?

    The system has a tendancy to get manipulated and twisted to suit. I see all sorts of justifications for it.
     
    Bell206 likes this.