Matronics Email Lists :: View topic - AD compliance documentation questions

Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists

Get Email Distribution Too! FAQ Search Memberlist Usergroups Register

Profile Log in to check your private messages Log in

AD compliance documentation questions

Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> RV-List

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author Message

recapen(at)earthlink.net
Guest

Posted: Mon May 15, 2006 6:12 am Post subject: AD compliance documentation questions

Folks,



I just added the hard-line for my prop governor.  There is also a Lycoming SB leading to an AD for this line.



After I comply with the requirements, how do I document the compliance?  I'm guessing that it should go in my engine Log-Book.



Here are the questions:  Am I authorized to make the entry?  I am the builder - but I don't have my ltd A&P for the airframe as it isn't flying yet.  Is there a specific text for the compliance?



Thanks,

Ralph Capen

RV6AQB N822AR (at) N06 Firewall Foreward



Building an experimental is supposed to be a learning experience - that's an understatement!

pitts_pilot(at)bellsouth.
Guest

Posted: Mon May 15, 2006 6:32 am Post subject: AD compliance documentation questions

Ralph E. Capen wrote:



 	  Quote: 	
		  



Folks,



I just added the hard-line for my prop governor.  There is also a Lycoming SB leading to an AD for this line.



After I comply with the requirements, how do I document the compliance?  I'm guessing that it should go in my engine Log-Book.



It should.
	




 	  Quote: 	
		  Here are the questions:  Am I authorized to make the entry?  I am the builder - but I don't have my ltd A&P for the airframe as it isn't flying yet.  Is there a specific text for the compliance?



I see your dilemma.  Since the aircraft is  going to be certified, along 
	


with the engine, in the experimental category, and there isn't any 

prohibition for you to build up your own engine in the first place, 

there really isn't a problem.  However, the DAR may see the entry and 

declare your 'certificated' engine as 'experimental' and increase your 

fly-off time.  If the engine/prop combination is experimental anyway, 

this would be a moot point.



If it were me, I'd add the logbook entry after I had my airworthiness 

certificate in hand.

Linn ..... IMHO, of course.

do not archive



 	  Quote: 	
		  Thanks,

Ralph Capen

RV6AQB N822AR (at) N06 Firewall Foreward



Building an experimental is supposed to be a learning experience - that's an understatement!

mrobert569(at)hotmail.com
Guest

Posted: Mon May 15, 2006 6:55 am Post subject: AD compliance documentation questions

Ralph,



If the plane isn't flying yet then nothing needs to be done.  If the plane 

is flying then a logbook entry would be in line.  Because its experimental 

you don't need any type of certificate.  Simply enter that date, and brief 

description of what you did, then sign it off and print your name.



AS you asked I will volunteer a brief description: " Complied with AD 

??-??-?? by installing stainless steel oil line."  Thats all that needed.



Mike Robertson

Das Fed

 	  Quote: 	
		  From: "Ralph E. Capen" <recapen(at)earthlink.net>

Reply-To: rv-list(at)matronics.com

To: lycomingengines-list(at)matronics.com, rv-list(at)matronics.com,        

rv6-list(at)matronics.com, RV7A(at)yahoogroups.com

Subject: AD compliance documentation questions

Date: Mon, 15 May 2006 10:11:34 -0400 (GMT-04:00)






Folks,



I just added the hard-line for my prop governor.  There is also a Lycoming 

SB leading to an AD for this line.



After I comply with the requirements, how do I document the compliance?  

I'm guessing that it should go in my engine Log-Book.



Here are the questions:  Am I authorized to make the entry?  I am the 

builder - but I don't have my ltd A&P for the airframe as it isn't flying 

yet.  Is there a specific text for the compliance?



Thanks,

Ralph Capen

RV6AQB N822AR (at) N06 Firewall Foreward



Building an experimental is supposed to be a learning experience - that's 

an understatement!

Bruce(at)glasair.org
Guest

Posted: Mon May 15, 2006 7:22 am Post subject: AD compliance documentation questions

Mike,



Because we're not subject to AD's don't you think he should state he

complied with the SB rather than the AD?



Bruce

www.glasair.org

 



--

mrobert569(at)hotmail.com
Guest

Posted: Mon May 15, 2006 2:55 pm Post subject: AD compliance documentation questions

You're choice, but as the AD calls out the SB I feel it would be better to 

call out the AD.  That way if any question should come up down the line you 

are able to point right to the entry instead of having to explain that the 

SB is called out in the AD and therefore the same.



Mike Robertson



[quote]From: "Bruce Gray" <Bruce(at)glasair.org>

Reply-To: rv-list(at)matronics.com

To: <rv-list(at)matronics.com>

Subject: RE: AD compliance documentation questions

Date: Mon, 15 May 2006 11:19:15 -0400






Mike,



Because we're not subject to AD's don't you think he should state he

complied with the SB rather than the AD?



Bruce

www.glasair.org

--

n395v

Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 450

Posted: Mon May 15, 2006 5:11 pm Post subject: Re: AD compliance documentation questions

Not everyone who will one day see the logbook or own the plane understand the regs (or lack thereof) governing experimentals.



As such in my opinion we should strive to make log entries as though it were a certified aircraft.



No harm is done by noting compliance with an AD. In my opinion it demonstrates professionalism and enhances knowledge and value of the aircraft.



do not archive.

_________________
Milt

ceengland(at)bellsouth.ne
Guest

Posted: Mon May 15, 2006 5:53 pm Post subject: AD compliance documentation questions

N395V wrote:



 	  Quote: 	
		  



Not everyone who will one day see the logbook or own the plane understand the regs (or lack thereof) governing experimentals.



As such in my opinion we should strive to make log entries as though it were a certified aircraft.



No harm is done by noting compliance with an AD. In my opinion it demonstrates professionalism and enhances knowledge and value of the aircraft.



do not archive.



--------

Milt

N395V

F1 Rocket




	


That's kinda like saying there's no harm in letting the cops do a 

warrant-less search of your car for drugs if you don't use drugs. Or 

letting the Gummint have a record of all your phone calls & emails if 

you aren't a terrorist.



Always consider carefully the precedents you allow to be set.



Charlie

Bruce(at)glasair.org
Guest

Posted: Mon May 15, 2006 6:22 pm Post subject: AD compliance documentation questions

Never, EVER give a law enforcement officer consent to search anything. Make

them jump through all the hoops, probable cause, warrant, etc.



The Supreme Court has already ruled that your incoming/outgoing phone number

list is NOT protected. No warrant is necessary. Same with emails and

content, no expectation of privacy.



Everyone says we failed to connect the dots, but fail to see that we need

the dots to connect first.



Bruce

www.glasair.org

 

Do not archive.



--

rv8ch

Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 250
Location: Switzerland

Posted: Mon May 15, 2006 11:31 pm Post subject: AD compliance documentation questions

 	  Quote: 	
		   Never, EVER give a law enforcement officer consent to search anything. Make

 them jump through all the hoops, probable cause, warrant, etc.

 

 The Supreme Court has already ruled that your incoming/outgoing phone number

 list is NOT protected. No warrant is necessary. Same with emails and

 content, no expectation of privacy.


	


I think Bruce is correct here.  The Supreme Court ruled that because

"it is doubtful that telephone users in general have any expectation

of privacy regarding the numbers they dial" that it was ok for

the police to record these numbers.



So, according to the Supreme Court, the more the average person

gives up their constitutional rights, the more all of our rights

are eroded.



I would be worried about writing too much in the aircraft logbook

since if this kind of twisted logic is used by the FAA during

a ramp check, then eventually, if lots of people start putting

unnecessary things in their logbook, you might fail a ramp check

because you did only what was legally required.

 	  Quote: 	
		   Everyone says we failed to connect the dots, but fail to see that we need

 the dots to connect first.


	


That's a can of worms!  From what I've read, there were FBI

agents in at least two parts of the country that were shouting

at HQ that they had potential terrorists getting flight training,

but the HQ people didn't listen.  Seems like we had more than

just "dots" to connect, we had stick men, but still didn't

get the picture.



I'm not sure more erosion of our liberty is the answer.



-- 

Mickey Coggins

http://www.rv8.ch/

#82007 finishing

do not archive

_________________
Mickey Coggins
http://www.rv8.ch/

n395v

Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 450

Posted: Tue May 16, 2006 3:25 am Post subject: Re: AD compliance documentation questions

 	  Quote: 	
		  That's kinda like saying there's no harm in letting the cops do a 

warrant-less search of your car for drugs if you don't use drugs 	




Actually I liken more to painting my house in a traditional color as opposed to pink and purple to enhance curb appeal and resale value.



Were I purchasing an RV 8 or a Rocket I would like to know if the fuel pump AD had been done or if any of the Crank SBs applied. Logbook notations to that effect would help. A sloppy or incomplete logbook to me would suggest a slopilly maintained or incompletely maintained aircraft.



If the FAA checks your logbooks on a ramp check it's cuz you #1 had them with you and #2 told them to look at them. Don't want them looked at don't carry them in the plane.



Now as for the Gumn't keeping records on our phone calls, yep we failed to connect the dots. Theyr'e probably also reading the e mail lists which those 9 black robed distinguished idiots would probably also say is ok.

_________________
Milt

Jekyll

Joined: 22 Feb 2006
Posts: 44

Posted: Tue May 16, 2006 7:37 am Post subject: Re: AD compliance documentation questions

 	  ceengland(at)bellsouth.ne wrote: 	
		  N395V wrote:



That's kinda like saying there's no harm in letting the cops do a 

warrant-less search of your car for drugs if you don't use drugs. Or 

letting the Gummint have a record of all your phone calls & emails if 

you aren't a terrorist.



	




Oh, please! Missed the point. It is about taking the extra (and easy) step now to avoid future arguements that may crop up in pre-sale negotiations or post-accident legal or insurance coverage hassels. This is an "ounce of prevention" being better than a "pound of cure".



Jekyll

n395v

Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 450

Posted: Tue May 16, 2006 7:43 am Post subject: Re: AD compliance documentation questions

 	  Jekyll wrote: 	
		   	  ceengland(at)bellsouth.ne wrote: 	
		  N395V wrote:



That's kinda like saying there's no harm in letting the cops do a 

warrant-less search of your car for drugs if you don't use drugs. Or 

letting the Gummint have a record of all your phone calls & emails if 

you aren't a terrorist.



	




Oh, please! Missed the point. It is about taking the extra (and easy) step now to avoid future arguements that may crop up in pre-sale negotiations or post-accident legal or insurance coverage hassels. This is an "ounce of prevention" being better than a "pound of cure".



Jekyll 	




Jekyl,



I am sure that it was a slip of the mouse when making the quote above but N395V did not write the quote attributed. That particular quote was in response to N395Vs post.



Do not Archive

_________________
Milt

Jekyll

Joined: 22 Feb 2006
Posts: 44

Posted: Tue May 16, 2006 8:20 am Post subject: Re: AD compliance documentation questions

Milt:



Quite right. My quoting ability was a mouse click or two from my desired results. Quotes inside quotes... something along the lines of riddles inside inigmas.



My appologies.



Jekyll

flyrv6(at)bryantechnology
Guest

Posted: Tue May 16, 2006 12:52 pm Post subject: AD compliance documentation questions

Mickey,



I would sure recommend not to carry the log books in the airplane, and if

for some reason you do, (going to an annual) Don't volunteer that you hav=

e

them in event of a ramp check.



I remember my private pilot learning tapes about getting that log out of =

the

plane.  It would be hard to fly with a log in there.  Log books not requi=

red

  My pilots log book as well, never goes with me.  If anything ever happe=

ns,

nobody has any idea where it might be.



Tim



Do Not Archive

 

----

ceengland(at)bellsouth.ne
Guest

Posted: Tue May 16, 2006 5:19 pm Post subject: AD compliance documentation questions

Jekyll wrote:

 	  Quote: 	

ceengland(at)bellsouth.ne wrote:

>N395V wrote:

>

>That's kinda like saying there's no harm in letting the cops do a 

>warrant-less search of your car for drugs if you don't use drugs. Or 

>letting the Gummint have a record of all your phone calls & emails if 

>you aren't a terrorist.

>    

>

Oh, please! Missed the point. It is about taking the extra (and easy) step now to avoid future arguements that may crop up in pre-sale negotiations or post-accident legal or insurance coverage hassels. This is an "ounce of prevention" being better than a "pound of cure".

Jekyll

The point is that AD's carry legal obligation. I believe that Das Fed 

will tell you that an AD has never been issued on a homebuilt. Yet.

Remember the uproar just a few weeks ago over Van issuing a 'mandatory' 

service bulletin? Do you really want something like that issued by the 

Feds with the force of law?

I'm not questioning the wisdom of carrying out some particular 

safety-related SB. I'm just saying that I don't want the Gummint 

treating my homebuilt like a factory plane. Making logbook entries that 

talk about complying with AD's are starting the slide down that slippery 

slope.

(BTW, the dots were visible and connected; the people at the top just 

refused to listen, just like they refused to listen to the CIA & 

military prior to the current Iraq situation.)

Charlie

gmcjetpilot(at)yahoo.com
Guest

Posted: Wed May 17, 2006 2:52 am Post subject: AD compliance documentation questions

We are experimental amateur built and don't have to meet any AD or is there any log book entry or maintenance regulation. All we have to do is have a condition inspection sign off in the last 12 months. Bottom line we have NO regulations and our aircraft are not certified or need to meet any particular regulation (unless noted in the operating limitations). 

   

  However from a common sense stand point and what I do is comply with AD's on my engine. I was on the fence about changing the prop Gov oil line from aluminum to a stainless steel part. If the aluminum is properly supported, chance of failure is nil (by the fact for many decades, on many planes, flown many hours with no problem). I ended up changing it because the parts where fairly cheap. 

   

  Ramp checks? Who has been ramped checked? I get checked about once a year, but that is airline flying. In private flying or as a corporate or CFI pilot instructor, never in 20 years of flying. The chance is your more likely to get ramped from a law officer because you just did a buzz job or wants to know if you paied the state sales / use tax on the plane.

   

  We have great freedom lets not goof it up by doing dumb things. Right now the FAA has a healthy we don't need to know and don't want to know, you are experimental, RIGHT wink wink nod nod. Fact is the FAA has a hard enough time doing their other jobs. This may be a hit on our collective ego's, but flying little planes that mostly seat two people is not a priority. However as HOMEBUILTS have progressed into 6 place pressurized turboprops that can fly in the flight levels (well above FL180). The FAA has a hard time ignoring this since they are mixing it up with the airline traffic. I predict (it already has happened) there will be two classes of amateur homebuilt experimental, small and large (turbine). 

   

  I hope we can stay off the Fed's radar and continue to enjoy minimal government oversight so we can continue to exercise judgment and self imposed (common sense) practices. I think by and large most homebuilts are very airworthy and flown safely. However if this changes things will change. Just do the prudent thing, but don't be paranoid. No one really cares about your AD status (at this time). It is experimental RIGHT?

   

  George



 __________________________________________________

mrobert569(at)hotmail.com
Guest

Posted: Fri May 19, 2006 2:06 pm Post subject: AD compliance documentation questions

George,



While I certainly support your opinion you do have something slightly wrong 

in your opening statement where you say that nothing needs to be entered in 

your logbook except the yearly condition inspection.

If you will look at your aircraft's Operating Limitations the very first 

paragraph should have something to the sound that you must obey the 

operating rules of FAR 91 and all additional limitations herein.

FAR 91.407(a) states that "no person may opeate any aircraft that has 

undergone maintenance.....unless(1) approved for return to service by an 

authorized person (in this case the owner is acceptable); and (2) The 

maintenance record entry required by 43.9 or 43.11, as applicable, of this 

chapter has been made.



Logbook entries for any maintenance are, therefore, required. Sorry.  But 

compliance with AD are optional.



Mike Robertson



 	  Quote: 	
		  From: <gmcjetpilot(at)yahoo.com>

Reply-To: rv-list(at)matronics.com

To: rv-list(at)matronics.com

Subject: Re: AD compliance documentation questions

Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 03:51:02 -0700 (PDT)






We are experimental amateur built and don't have to meet any AD or is there 

any log book entry or maintenance regulation. All we have to do is have a 

condition inspection sign off in the last 12 months. Bottom line we have NO 

regulations and our aircraft are not certified or need to meet any 

particular regulation (unless noted in the operating limitations).



   However from a common sense stand point and what I do is comply with 

AD's on my engine. I was on the fence about changing the prop Gov oil line 

from aluminum to a stainless steel part. If the aluminum is properly 

supported, chance of failure is nil (by the fact for many decades, on many 

planes, flown many hours with no problem). I ended up changing it because 

the parts where fairly cheap.



   Ramp checks? Who has been ramped checked? I get checked about once a 

year, but that is airline flying. In private flying or as a corporate or 

CFI pilot instructor, never in 20 years of flying. The chance is your more 

likely to get ramped from a law officer because you just did a buzz job or 

wants to know if you paied the state sales / use tax on the plane.



   We have great freedom lets not goof it up by doing dumb things. Right 

now the FAA has a healthy we don't need to know and don't want to know, you 

are experimental, RIGHT wink wink nod nod. Fact is the FAA has a hard 

enough time doing their other jobs. This may be a hit on our collective 

ego's, but flying little planes that mostly seat two people is not a 

priority. However as HOMEBUILTS have progressed into 6 place pressurized 

turboprops that can fly in the flight levels (well above FL180). The FAA 

has a hard time ignoring this since they are mixing it up with the airline 

traffic. I predict (it already has happened) there will be two classes of 

amateur homebuilt experimental, small and large (turbine).



   I hope we can stay off the Fed's radar and continue to enjoy minimal 

government oversight so we can continue to exercise judgment and self 

imposed (common sense) practices. I think by and large most homebuilts are 

very airworthy and flown safely. However if this changes things will 

change. Just do the prudent thing, but don't be paranoid. No one really 

cares about your AD status (at this time). It is experimental RIGHT?



   George



  __________________________________________________

Display posts from previous:

	Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> RV-List	All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Page 1 of 1

Jump to:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum