Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Maintenance Bay' started by Tom-D, Sep 13, 2020.
Amen! Finding discrepancies does not constitute an annual.
A small point. No where in the CFR does it make a requirement for a "log book".
It does make reference to "maintenance records". And a discrepancy list is indeed an "maintenance record". The inspection signoff will also state the inspection was completed, and a list of discrepancies was provided to the owner. And the owner is responsible for maintaining maintenance records.
So if an IA hands the owner a record showing an inspection signoff, and another record showing a discrepancy list, the owner is now responsible, not the A&P/IA.
Maintenance records, and they can be anything.
I won’t bore you with your quotes, but what you do is offer advice or make comments that members on PoA take to heart. Unfortunately, some of that advice is contrary to the rules and sets up said members to fail, especially the inexperienced ones. Just like your comments stating maintenance or inspections which are not signed off “never happened.”
I know of 3 people on PoA who believed your “advice” to include the person who caused my 1st post here. The other 2 were following your rabbit-hole of advice and almost dug themselves into a deep hole. It’s obvious your only concern is for yourself and winning the argument by any means as shown by your posts. And rarely do you back up any of your advice with supportive guidance as in this thread. So continue to play the victim while myself and a few others continue to set the record straight… with references.
FYI: if you read Part 43.9, 43.11, and 43.13 carefully… you’ll find that if any maintenance or inspection performed reaches the threshold as defined in Part 43 it will require some sort of aircraft record entry. Even the great PoA mx guru MB agrees on this point.
No. But as with as with any regulatory system it falls to the individual to follow it. And in the case of discrepancies it’s the legal responsibility of the owner per Part 91 to have those discrepancies fixed and entered in the aircraft logbook.
You know I didn't do any wrong, So don't make like I did.
I think POA'ers are smarter than that.
They know that if I suggest they get a tire changed, I am not require do the annual, like you suggest.
I don't see how taking a quick look at a plane and saying, "hmmm, doesn't look airworthy," and telling the owner that you don't want to go any further constitutes an "inspection" that must be logged.
I got a phone call from G&N aircraft who was tearing down the original gopher engine. They said "you're engine isn't in great shape." I said, are we talking like, I should go buy another engine. They said that would probably be advisable. They said they'd send me a complete report. I told them not to worry about reassembling it, just throw it in a box and I'd pick it up on my way back from Oshkosh.
I did get the report. It went on for a page and a half and ended with "Six of the sparkplugs need replacing."
I asked if that was pretty much the total of my engine: six sparkplugs were good?
I'm not an IA.
@Tom-D or @Bell206 I'm failing to understand why any IA is obligated to make log entries for any plane that pulls onto his ramp with outward appearing airworthiness issues? Even if the plane was pulled into the IA's hangar, I'm failing to see the obligation on the part of the IA to officially document anything. Isn't their a right to refuse work?
My own IA has 3 ramp rats parked off the edge of his ramp, with issues like Tom described earlier. Can't imagine my IA responsibility for reporting or documenting anything.
The owner is responsible for ensuring an annual inspection and maintenance is performed for part 91 AC's and all necessary paperwork is complete for the plane's maintenance records. Airworthiness is the responsibility of the PIC.
Maybe I just missed the whole point of the debate?
Ha. And once again you dodge the point of the above reply and type something that has zero context to that reply. But thankfully there are some PoA'rs that are smarter and take your advice with a grain of salt to use their words. Unfortunately there still are some who do believe you when you state things like: only an AD can force the compliance of an Airworthiness Section requirement, maintenance only "happens" if it's logged, and my favorite, only a prop shop can touch up a prop.
FYI: in typical PoA fashion, the conversation took a left at Post 21 then a right at Post 31. The replies above are to those two posts, i.e., when work is performed there is a requirement to log that work. Asking for an opinion from a APIA is not work performed.
You're not..an A&P can refuse to work for anyone. there are rules to follow when A&P must to follow FAR 43 has them covered.
but because the A&P-IA is present, does not mean they are on the hook for everything that occurred.
there was no point. all after you mention any thing about a annual was moot.
Post 21 Bell apparently does not understand what " IF " means. but that is Normal, when he tries to make a mountain into a mole hill.
When any A&P-IA is contemplating doing annual, and finds the job is way much to work, the A&P-IA should inform the owner.
That does not constituted an annual or any of it.
FAR 43-D tells us what a annual is, and tell the owner it is too much work isn't part of it.
Only his groupies. would think so.
NordicDave said: ↑
Maybe I just missed the whole point of the debate?
easy to do. when Bell doesn't understand what an annual is.
In Post 21 the "if" part was easy. It was your comment, " I simply don't sign the log" that was the issue. You must sign the log IF you perform the inspection regardless whether the owner likes your findings or not. Part 43.11 pretty specific about that. Can't hold your signature hostage from the owner.
Don't speak PNW-ese much. Are you saying there's too much work for a 20 minute annual?
OBTW, I understand the 210 will be crapped. And the FSDO is involved.
Post 21. you need to read the whole post. but you are good at that, read part of the post and jumping to a conclusion.
That is what you don't understand, I did not do the annual.
the rest is just Yack, more yack,
you've demonstrate you don't under what a Annual sign is.
Clear as mud that you’re not talking about the annual.
Does your medication instructions mention anything about not consuming alcohol while taking it?
Doing an annual inspection on a crap 172 with uncomplied ADs and with paint peeling and visible corrosion is the same as doing an annual inspection on a pristine 172. If the owner wants an airworthy aircraft after an annual inspection with all unairworthy discrepancies rectified, it's a separate negotiation/job. If the owner wants routine maintenance, oil, filter change, brake pads replaced etc., it's all in addition to the inspection. This should be discussed before anything is done. If one hour into the annual, something serious is found and the owner wants the annual discontinued--fine, it's his airplane and his dime. The IA charges him for the time he worked and gives the owner a list of what he's found and leaves. It's not an annual until the IA signs a maintenance record certifying that he completed an annual in accordance with Part 43 to the scope and detail of Appendix D.
I'm curious about people who hire someone to do a prebuy inspection on a prospective purchase. If the owner consents to the prebuy does he automatically allow the mechanic doing the prebuy to write whatever he finds into the aircraft maintenance record? I wouldn't.
That's all well and good, what happens when you can see that the discrepancies amount to an aircraft that you simply don't want to get in involved with.
depends....most of us can see it a mile away.
but....I don't log that either.
Curious. So if a mechanic does a prebuy which involves removal of various items like cowling, inspection panels, etc. and performs a compression test, you would not allow him to enter that work performed in the aircraft record? Or, what if he found a 10/80 cylinder during the compression check, you would not accept a discrepancy list from him for inclusion in the aircraft record?
We were just informed on this thread that the A&P doing the inspection can simply not make any entries and deny any inspection ever took place.
Just the difference when dealing with a shade tree mechanic or a professional.
I miswrote. I, personally, would not allow a prospective buyer to use his own mechanic to take apart my aircraft.
Maintenance must entered. Looking at aircraft ain't maintenance. If it were every old greeser in the hangar would get there pens out.
ya but.....Doc logs everything.
He will catch sh-- for too many 337s
So how many 337's have I filed?
Really? Isn't that pretty much the whole purpose and method of a pre-buy inspection? The buyer certainly isn't going to want YOUR mechanic to do it (which would mean he's checking his own work).
So, in the context of my last post that you quoted above in Post 69... stay with me now... when you perform a prebuy on an aircraft do you only "look" at the aircraft or do you also perform maintenance like remove cowling, check compressions, or open inspection panels to "look" closer?
My airplane, my rules. If I'm selling my aircraft and you want to do a prebuy, then I'm happy to go on a demo flight and to have the maintenance record available. You can look at everything you want to without disassembling my aircraft and possibly damaging it in the process. If you can't determine it's worth the price I'm asking without an obtrusive inspection, then too bad for me. I don't know you or your mechanic from Adam.
Do you also expect the same from a seller?
No doubt, it's your airplane, you can permit me or not permit me to do whatever you wish. But the typical purchase process allows a prebuy performed by the buyer's mechanic, and this generally does consist of some minor disassembly for looking around.
Your choice, of course, but if I wanted to buy your airplane, and you wouldn't allow my mechanic to even open up inspection panels and check for corrosion, I'd assume you're hiding something and would move on to the next one on my list.
Completely agree with you about this.
The seller can set up whatever rules wrt access he/she wants. However, I certainly wouldn’t buy a plane unless a mechanic I chose has the chance to look over the plane in detail. By the time it comes to a prebuy, I would expect that a tentative price be agreed upon, and the deal to be ready to sign subject to the prebuy. Might even already have money in escrow. If a seller didn’t allow that, my assumption would be that they had something to hide, and I would abandon the deal.
When I bought my airplane, it was being maintained by one of the well-recognized Bellanca shops in Texas. I still paid for a plane ticket for one of the other well-recognized Bellanca experts (located on the West Coast) to fly to Texas and inspect the plane. The owner had no issues with that.
Prior to buying my plane, I had gone through the price agreement stage, etc. on a Cessna 185. The mechanic I hired to do the prebuy got full access to the plane and discovered a lot of issues. Broken ribs, internal corrosion, frayed control cables, etc. Mechanic’s estimate to fix was in the $30-$40K range. Outside, the newly painted plane was gorgeous, but it had issues that the prebuy found. The seller wasn’t willing to drop the price to cover the cost of repairs. Needless to say, I walked. The mechanic did give the seller a list of discrepencies, but I doubt if the seller did anything but throw the list away. It sold a few months later.
Is removing and replacing inspection panels or cowling considered “maintenance”?
I’ve been involved with two prebuys on airplanes I wanted to buy. The first prebuy found enough issues that I walked. The second passed, and I bought the plane.
In both cases, the mechanic I chose did compression tests and opened inspection panels. One even snaked a camera into the tail to confirm that there were broken ribs in the horizontal stabilizer. Both prebuys lasted multiple hours and produced detailed squawk lists of the issues found.