What are some red-flags on maintenance logs?

ahkahn said:
Not sure about your experiences, but in mine any flight school (and I've worked with 4 different ones) have had access to the maintenance records and could provide them immediately upon request. How would you, as PIC when renting a plane, determine the plane is airworthy?
Click to expand...

You never rented from ME :)

Determine airworthiness on every aircraft I complete annuals on.

The pilot side is the easy side.
Is it in annual? Has it flown less than 100 hours since the last 100 hour or annual? Does it have to comply with this?
Is it safe to fly.
 
Tom-D said:
But it was documented, And who's saying the training school you are working owned the aircraft? many are on lease back and the owner is holding the maintenance records, and what you are allowed to look at only proves it is airworthy. and it is up to you to declare it is safe to fly.
To do that what do you need?
Click to expand...
You need to be the PIC. ;)
 
Tom-D said:
You never rented from ME :)

Determine airworthiness on every aircraft I complete annuals on.

The pilot side is the easy side.
Is it in annual? Has it flown less than 100 hours since the last 100 hour or annual? Does it have to comply with this?
Is it safe to fly.
Click to expand...

Easy side... his skin is in the game.

"pilot in command" - the person who has final authority and responsibility for the operation and safety of the flight.
 
GlennAB1 said:
Easy side... his skin is in the game.

"pilot in command" - the person who has final authority and responsibility for the operation and safety of the flight.
Click to expand...
and that is why they have the final decision of " is it safe to fly"
 
Tom-D said:
You never rented from ME :)

Determine airworthiness on every aircraft I complete annuals on.

The pilot side is the easy side.
Is it in annual? Has it flown less than 100 hours since the last 100 hour or annual? Does it have to comply with this?
Is it safe to fly.
Click to expand...

Tom-D said:
and that is why they have the final decision of " is it safe to fly"
Click to expand...

Per FAR, pilots are continually determining airworthiness.

Sec. 91.7

Civil aircraft airworthiness.

(a) No person may operate a civil aircraft unless it is in an airworthy condition.
(b) The pilot in command of a civil aircraft is responsible for determining whether that aircraft is in condition for safe flight. The pilot in command shall discontinue the flight when unairworthy mechanical, electrical, or structural conditions occur.
 
GlennAB1 said:
Per FAR, pilots are continually determining airworthiness.

Sec. 91.7

Civil aircraft airworthiness.

(a) No person may operate a civil aircraft unless it is in an airworthy condition.
(b) The pilot in command of a civil aircraft is responsible for determining whether that aircraft is in condition for safe flight. The pilot in command shall discontinue the flight when unairworthy mechanical, electrical, or structural conditions occur.
Click to expand...

Do you believe that is contrary to what I've said?
 
Tarheelpilot said:
Ha I was thinking the same thing. Another favorite is the reboot and problem went away entry.
Click to expand...

Often on the line (especially domestic flights) that's pretty much all you have time to do. If resetting the C/B doesn't clear it then you go to the MEL and see if it can be deferred if not then start unloading everything. There's even a sign-off code for "reset". Sure it'll probably get written up again but with a bit of history it will be taken care of when the airplane gets to its next overnight destination.
 
Recently went through 777 mx training and was told to forget everything you've learned about troubleshooting, swapping boxes, resetting breakers, etc., cause more faults. Haven't confirmed it, but that's what was taught.
 
I don't know who's telling you that but I've been working on 777's since we got the first one in '95. Yes it's different from the previous generations but no, you don't want to "forget everything you knew" about troubleshooting to work on it. With the Maintenance Computer you have a better tool to initially asses the fault which may or may not be a flight deck effect, may be active, inactive or latched or might need to be cleared from the maintenance page on the pilot's MFD. But in the end, resetting breakers, swapping boxes and ringing out wires is just as much a part of troubleshooting as it ever was.

I've found that most people's befuddlement with the triple seven is based on not having enough patience to allow the two AIMS cabinets to sort things out between themselves. Sometimes you just have to go to lunch and let it be for awhile it's not 21st century technology.
 
Thanks for your insight. That's what I get for paying attention in class. He was probably just emphasizing using the MAT rather than traditional techniques. Being in QC, I'll never use either.
 
Silvaire said:
Often on the line (especially domestic flights) that's pretty much all you have time to do. If resetting the C/B doesn't clear it then you go to the MEL and see if it can be deferred if not then start unloading everything. There's even a sign-off code for "reset". Sure it'll probably get written up again but with a bit of history it will be taken care of when the airplane gets to its next overnight destination.
Click to expand...

Um yeah. I didn't imply it wasn't an appropriate solution to some issues. It was more of a nod to a maintence action/sign off I encountered on a regular basis when I was flying 121 that some might not see as valid if they haven't had the pleasure of driving around in a glass cockpit/121 scenario.
 
A red flag showed up last week, as I was going over the logs on a Cherokee.
Last annual inspection was 2 years ago. short scribbled entry. A subsequent entry mentioned replacing brake pads, 14 months, and 60 hours after the last annual.
Then an oil change a few hours later. That, dry rotted tires, which should have been replaced 2 years ago, and the visible signs of intergranular corrosion in places underneath, caused me to just keep walking.

Seller all the while swears that the annual is not due until 12/2015.
 
ahkahn said:
Wow, tough bunch today. I'll elaborate further, since I must not be clear enough.

An airframe and/or engine logbook with NO OTHER ENTRIES other than annual inspections for the last 5 years that list ONLY THE ANNUAL INSPECTION and nothing else. That is a huge red flag, and I've seen it. Of course, if the plane is 5 years old and never flown, that may be a different story.

Now am I making sense?!?!
Click to expand...

I know what you mean. My own airplane had a several years of "pencil-whipped" annuals where nothing beyond replacing the air filter was done. The entry was pretty much "Inspected IAW..." and replaced air filter, etc.

In airplanes as old as the ones most of us fly, there is virtually always something to be done - at annual or otherwise. If nothing is noted in the logbook, it is a red flag that could (and that's a strong could) mean the owner wasn't attending to the mundane **** that wears out on old planes. Some owners let non-airworthiness items slide and that is something to make you go hmm.
 
petrolero said:
...In airplanes as old as the ones most of us fly, there is virtually always something to be done - at annual or otherwise...
Click to expand...

Like what? Are you saying it's not possible to go 2 or 3 hundred hours without something falling apart? :dunno:

I mean, give us an example. If I have to put oil on a creaky door hinge, replace a worn clamp or stop drill a crack in a plastic Cessna wingtip it doesn't need to go in the logbook.
 
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).
(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:

(1) A description (or reference to data acceptable to the Administrator) of work performed.

(2) The date of completion of the work performed.

(3) The name of the person performing the work if other than the person specified in paragraph (a)(4) of this section.

(4) If the work performed on the aircraft, airframe, aircraft engine, propeller, appliance, or component part has been performed satisfactorily, the signature, certificate number, and kind of certificate held by the person approving the work. The signature constitutes the approval for return to service only for the work performed.

(b) Each holder of an air carrier operating certificate or an operating certificate issued under Part 121 or 135, that is required by its approved operations specifications to provide for a continuous airworthiness maintenance program, shall make a record of the maintenance, preventive maintenance, rebuilding, and alteration, on aircraft, airframes, aircraft engines, propellers, appliances, or component parts which it operates in accordance with the applicable provisions of Part 121 or 135 of this chapter, as appropriate.

(c) This section does not apply to persons performing inspections in accordance with Part 91, 125, §135.411(a)(1), or §135.419 of this chapter.

(d) In addition to the entry required by paragraph (a) of this section, major repairs and major alterations shall be entered on a form, and the form disposed of, in the manner prescribed in appendix B, by the person performing the work.
 
I'm wondering how many (%) of CFIs can read logs and determine if the ADs are all complied with and properly logged.

or if the repairs they can see are really properly done.
 
Glenn, if you're going to quote 43.9 you might also consider throwing in 91.417. Then people might learn how long the records should be kept. :)
 
Tom-D said:
I'm wondering how many (%) of CFIs can read logs and determine if the ADs are all complied with and properly logged.

or if the repairs they can see are really properly done.
Click to expand...

They have the easy part. They don't have to determine if repairs are properly done, they just squawk them if they are questionable. Then it's up to us to deal with.
 
Last edited:
Fearless Tower said:
Well, for starters, when you look at the maintenance logs of a 70 year old airplane and the only entries are the annual inspection and that the airplane is airworthy without any other maintenance being performed.....that's a big red flag (and one I've unfortunately seen before).
Click to expand...
Depends on how simple the airplane is and how much it flies between annuals. The last couple annual inspections on my taildragger had very little in the way of maintenance entries, there just wasn't much that needed fixing.
 
bluerooster said:
A red flag showed up last week, as I was going over the logs on a Cherokee.
Last annual inspection was 2 years ago. short scribbled entry. A subsequent entry mentioned replacing brake pads, 14 months, and 60 hours after the last annual.
Then an oil change a few hours later. That, dry rotted tires, which should have been replaced 2 years ago, and the visible signs of intergranular corrosion in places underneath, caused me to just keep walking.

Seller all the while swears that the annual is not due until 12/2015.
Click to expand...
It's a biennial flight-plane review, right? :)
 
gismo said:
Depends on how simple the airplane is and how much it flies between annuals. The last couple annual inspections on my taildragger had very little in the way of maintenance entries, there just wasn't much that needed fixing.
Click to expand...

Possibly. The one I was talking about was a T-6 advertised as having top notch maintenance by a very big name in the warbird community.

When we opened it up for the pre-buy it was an absolute basket case including structural corrosion. It didn't get that way overnight.
 
Fearless Tower said:
Possibly. The one I was talking about was a T-6 advertised as having top notch maintenance by a very big name in the warbird community.

When we opened it up for the pre-buy it was an absolute basket case including structural corrosion. It didn't get that way overnight.
Click to expand...

Yes, I remember a pal asked to look over a very nice ( looking) T6 for a younger pilot and found it full of corrosion , low cylinder or two, big electrical problems. They passed. I'm always Leary of the logs signed by some rube who writes in such a way that neither his name , number or location is legible, knowing full well how important this is.
 
Jimmy cooper said:
Yes, I remember a pal asked to look over a very nice ( looking) T6 for a younger pilot and found it full of corrosion , low cylinder or two, big electrical problems. They passed. I'm always Leary of the logs signed by some rube who writes in such a way that neither his name , number or location is legible, knowing full well how important this is.
Click to expand...

I was once told by my PMI that bad hand writing was the A&P's best insurance.

I'm sure he was joking, but how true.
 
Fearless Tower said:
Possibly. The one I was talking about was a T-6 advertised as having top notch maintenance by a very big name in the warbird community.

When we opened it up for the pre-buy it was an absolute basket case including structural corrosion. It didn't get that way overnight.
Click to expand...

I was told a young buyer wanted some one to accompany them on a pre-buy. I told him I'd do it, He said no, you'd condemn every thing he could afford.

Some just don't get it.
 
A guy had me come out to look at a 1973 Baron he was interested in. When I got there I asked to see the logs and all they had was one logbook for the left engine. The rest? :dunno:

So that was kind of a red flag on that deal :rolleyes:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top