Newly Overhauled Engine, No Existing Logs?

[kortopates]

Agreed, Every log book entry I've seen includes an entry from the engine over hauler saying "this engine was overhauled IAW ,,,, " with details of the work and ends with "this engine is found to be airworthy condition and is released for service".

Since  the engine also needs a current annual inspection, the engine installer then completes an entry that they installed the engine in the airframe, added any airframe specific accessories, hose etc, does the engine setup and says they completed an annual inspection  of the engine with the required annual inspection phrase, "I certify this engine has been inspected IAW with an annual inspection and found to airworthy for return to service

Never seen a mention of break-in. I have read the calibrated gauges for breakin in with the Lyc instructions but that's pretty easy to do with a modern engine analyzer.

[jaylw314]

55 minutes ago, cliffy said:

The log book can be signed off as engine installed per-  and released for break in flight per SI XXXXXX

No different than an after maintenance flight check. 

Once the break in flight(s) are done and its leak checked and oil consumption is checked per the SI then I would sign it off as "break in" of overhauled engine complete per Lyc SI XXXX. Released as airworthy for continued service. 

There was a thread on here a few years ago about this IIRC.  A&P whacked for break in procedure. 

Not all engines are rated for T/O power continuously. Many larger Lycs have a 5 min limit hence the caution to reduce power.  

The "released for break-in flight" seems kind of unnecessary, right, since that is PART of the SI?  Also, since 43.9 specifies that a "signature constitutes the approval for return to service", couldn't the FAA come after you for signing such an entry since you were NOT returning it to service? 

In addition, since the test flight is part of the required maintenance after an overhaul, couldn't you simply have the owner fly the test flight and cite that you supervised him performing this required maintenance and sign off on it as such in the end (assuming you trusted him to complete the test flight profile)?

Sorry, I know George Carlin has a monologue about people like me in "Class Clown"

[jetdriven]

15 minutes ago, kortopates said:

Agreed, Every log book entry I've seen includes an entry from the engine over hauler saying "this engine was overhauled IAW ,,,, " with details of the work and ends with "this engine is found to be airworthy condition and is released for service".

Since  the engine also needs a current annual inspection, the engine installer then completes an entry that they installed the engine in the airframe, added any airframe specific accessories, hose etc, does the engine setup and says they completed an annual inspection  of the engine with the required annual inspection phrase, "I certify this engine has been inspected IAW with an annual inspection and found to airworthy for return to service.”

The annual sign off in the airframe log encompasses the annual inspection for the whole aircraft.  The engine and prop logs, if you choose, are signed with a similar statement as the airframe log but says something like “I certify this engine has been inspected IAW a 100-hr inspection and is in airworthy condition”.  But engines, props, and accessories, per se, don’t get annuals. 

I’d suppose it sounds strange but you could swap engines the week after the annual and perhaps not even make the above statement in the engine log, although I would. 

Edited February 22, 2018 by jetdriven

[cliffy]

In reference to engine analyzers, unless the system has been bench checked with in the last year for accuracy it can not substitute for calibrated gauges. Calibrated gauges come for the testing facility with a certification that they are accurate and a time limit of 1 year. All the tools that a A&P uses, torque wrenches, compression gauges, etc are required to be within calibration for use. If it has been more than a year since it was sent out for calibration by a laboratory certified to do this it can't be used.

All I'm doing is quoting the regs as printed. Some follow them and some don't. If a Mx shop get a ramp check by the FEDS all their tools had better be in calibration. All 135 operators have to follow this also. 

I've signed off many airplanes for test flight only and then afterwards signed off as test flight complete= no problems noted.

[kortopates]

14 minutes ago, jetdriven said:

The annual sign off in the airframe log encompasses the annual inspection for the whole aircraft.  The engine and prop logs, if you choose, are signed with a similar statement as the airframe log but says something like “I certify this engine has been inspected IAW a 100-hr inspection and is in airworthy condition”.  But engines, props, and accessories, per se, don’t get annuals. 

I’d suppose it sounds strange but you could swap engines the week after the annual and perhaps not even make the above statement in the engine log, although I would. 

Agreed on the annual, although most will sign off an annual on prop & engine too you are right. Regardless though, if we keep with 100 hr inspection on the engine, the recently overhauled engine which has just been newly installed in the aircraft no longer has a current annual or 100 hr inspection. You wouldn't want to re-annual the entire aircraft but it seems you do need a current 100 hr inspection on the engine to return it to service. 

 

15 minutes ago, cliffy said:

In reference to engine analyzers, unless the system has been bench checked with in the last year for accuracy it can not substitute for calibrated gauges. Calibrated gauges come for the testing facility with a certification that they are accurate and a time limit of 1 year. All the tools that a A&P uses, torque wrenches, compression gauges, etc are required to be within calibration for use. If it has been more than a year since it was sent out for calibration by a laboratory certified to do this it can't be used.

All I'm doing is quoting the regs as printed. Some follow them and some don't. If a Mx shop get a ramp check by the FEDS all their tools had better be in calibration. All 135 operators have to follow this also. 

I've signed off many airplanes for test flight only and then afterwards signed off as test flight complete= no problems noted.

You are right, good point, if a maintenance manual specifically calls out "calibrated" as it does here, its not really calibrated without the paperwork within the 12 months. I just wasn't thinking of instruments in the same way as a tool - my bad.

But if a maintenance manual doesn't specifically call out for using a "calibrated" tool, such as in torquing something, I don't think an A&P is legally required to use a calibrated wrench in the same way a Repair station is. 43.13(a) doesn't add that requirement but references to follow the maintenance manual and use tools accepted IAW industry practices... But I'd agree, its foolish not too, since if something does go wrong, from over stressing a bolt from over torquing, or it comes off from under torquing, the A&P that did the work is going to get violated then and worse sued without a good defense. So might as well stick to using calibrated tools even if not strictly required too.

[jetdriven]

30 minutes ago, kortopates said:

Agreed on the annual, although most will sign off an annual on prop & engine too you are right. Regardless though, if we keep with 100 hr inspection on the engine, the recently overhauled engine which has just been newly installed in the aircraft no longer has a current annual or 100 hr inspection. You wouldn't want to re-annual the entire aircraft but it seems you do need a current 100 hr inspection on the engine to return it to service. 

I guess the questions are:

is the annual inspection for the aircraft good for the whole year and the whole aircraft if the engine is changed?

What if the same scenario but instead,  the wing is changed?

Is the 100-hr statement required to be in the engine log if the annual is current?

is an engine log book. per se, even required? 

I haven my thoughts but I’d like to know yours and cliffy’s. 

[kortopates]

11 minutes ago, jetdriven said:

I guess the questions are:

is the annual inspection for the aircraft good for the whole year and the whole aircraft if the engine is changed?

What if the same scenario but instead,  the wing is changed?

Is the 100-hr statement required to be in the engine log if the annual is current?

is an engine log book. per se, even required? 

I haven my thoughts but I’d like to know yours and cliffy’s. 

Well I am no authority on this, but its my understanding that this falls on 43.15 (a) (1)

(a) General. Each person performing an inspection required by part 91, ..., shall

(1) Perform the inspection so as to determine whether the aircraft, or portion(s) thereof under inspection, meets all applicable airworthiness requirements.

The actual example I am given from my IA gleim study materials uses this an an example:

"For example if an aircraft receives a replacement engine between annual inspections, only the engine portion of the annual inspection needs to be performed at the time" 

The practice IA test had questions to this very topic as well. 

Also under (c) (2) it adds before approving the engine to determine satisfactory performance in accordance with the manufacturers recommendations of-

 (i) power output (static and idle RPM),

(ii) Magnetos

(iii) Fuel and oil pressure; and 

(iv) Cylinder and oil temperature

If that's not a correct interpretation I could take the question to Mike B. to see what he says. But that is where I drew my understanding from.

But no on a separate log book.

But if a wing was replaced with a different (e.g., salvaged wing I believe just the wing would need to be inspected.

I think you could legally get by with just an annual inspection entry for everything in the airframe logbook, but a more detailed entry in an engine log book adds real value though not required (IMO).

[cliffy]

Any maintenance done to an airplane has to be in some sort of record. A log book per se is not required, just a record of what was done, by whom and to what standard. A sheet of paper saying a hundred hour inspection was done to the engine would suffice. Just the statement that the aircraft meets had an annual inspection doesn't quite cover it. Any "maintenance" done after the annual must be logged somewhere.  BTW, once the work is repeated the old record can be thrown away. 

Change a wing? The work has to be logged somewhere not just saying that the annual was completed.

An "annual" is an INSPECTION, maintenance is MAINTENANCE. Never the twin shall meet. 

The annual inspection is only stating that at that moment in time the airplane met its airworthiness standards by INSPECTION. Something may change that tomorrow like a wing change. The regs only say that an annual must be completed every year. In that the IA is certifying that the airplane meets its Type Certificate standards. Even down to all required labels and placards, seat belt certs sewn in on each, you got a fire extinguisher?, have you maintained it according to the makers requirements (weight check every month?), look that one up, I'll give you a couple of days on that. 

You want to talk about calibrated tools here's some reference from the FAAFAST team

https://www.faasafety.gov/files/gslac/library/documents/2010/Apr/42911/Nuts and Bolts 10-01.pdf

[EricJ]

13 minutes ago, cliffy said:

You want to talk about calibrated tools here's some reference from the FAAFAST team

https://www.faasafety.gov/files/gslac/library/documents/2010/Apr/42911/Nuts and Bolts 10-01.pdf

That's interesting but one can also argue that the spec was either incomplete or not realizable if there was no tolerance indicated.   If an exact torque spec is indicated, e.g., 60 ft-lbs, then there is no way to assure that that can be met exactly, and some tolerance must be specified somewhere.   Usually calibrations (of anything) indicate the tolerance range of the calibration.   If there is a tolerance specified, e.g., torque to 55-65 ft-lbs, or 60 ft-lbs +/- 5 ft-lbs, then you may not need to show that your torque wrench was "calibrated", just that it performs within the tolerances indicated.

Processes and procedures tend to be put in place to try to give a reasonable chance that things get done within overall system tolerance without generating undue burden or inefficiency.   When a regulatory system and guidance have a lot of logical holes in them, and the quantity of holes *always* goes up with the complexity of the regulatory system, then it's understandable that such logical conflicts will arise between practitioners and regulators.   Regulations, regulators, and practitioners are all imperfect so conflict can always be expected.   Very often there is no "right".

[jetdriven]

I used a fancy clicker torque screwdriver on my valve cover screws set to the Lycoming recommended torque. 4 fell out on the first hour flight after the gasket was changed. Since then I installed those using a different process and haven’t lost one yet 

Edited February 23, 2018 by jetdriven

[cliffy]

YUP sometimes experience trumps the best laid plans.  (pun intended:-)

[cliffy]

I'll throw one back-

Can an annual inspection be signed off as complete even though the airplane is not airworthy?

[kortopates]

I'll throw one back-

Can an annual inspection be signed off as complete even though the airplane is not airworthy?

43.11 a 5 covers that very clearly with a list of discrepancies.

But I can’t tell from your earlier response if you are saying a engine overhaul requires a 43.11 entry or merely a 43.9 entry. The engine replacement or wing replacement are not so clear in the regs.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[kortopates]

2 hours ago, cliffy said:

Any maintenance done to an airplane has to be in some sort of record. A log book per se is not required, just a record of what was done, by whom and to what standard. A sheet of paper saying a hundred hour inspection was done to the engine would suffice. Just the statement that the aircraft meets had an annual inspection doesn't quite cover it. Any "maintenance" done after the annual must be logged somewhere.  BTW, once the work is repeated the old record can be thrown away. 

Change a wing? The work has to be logged somewhere not just saying that the annual was completed.

An "annual" is an INSPECTION, maintenance is MAINTENANCE. Never the twin shall meet. 

The annual inspection is only stating that at that moment in time the airplane met its airworthiness standards by INSPECTION. Something may change that tomorrow like a wing change. The regs only say that an annual must be completed every year. In that the IA is certifying that the airplane meets its Type Certificate standards. Even down to all required labels and placards, seat belt certs sewn in on each, you got a fire extinguisher?, have you maintained it according to the makers requirements (weight check every month?), look that one up, I'll give you a couple of days on that. 

You want to talk about calibrated tools here's some reference from the FAAFAST team

https://www.faasafety.gov/files/gslac/library/documents/2010/Apr/42911/Nuts and Bolts 10-01.pdf

On the calibrated tools - Funny, that's the exact article on calibrated tools I was drawing my statement that as an A&P we aren't required to use a calibrated tool (like a repair station) unless the maintenance manual calls it out. With the caveat that if we use a really out of wack tool, we could be violated and sued after the failure.  

As per the monthly weight check, I assume you are referring to maint & testing portable fire extinguishers  http://www.health.state.mn.us/divs/fpc/engineering/fireext2.pdf which requires monthly checks for "Fullness – confirmed by weighing or lifting" among other things. 

[kortopates]

2 hours ago, jetdriven said:

I used a fancy clicker torque screwdriver on my valve cover screws set to the Lycoming recommended torque. 4 fell out on the first hour flight after the gasket was changed. Since then I installed those using a different process and haven’t lost one yet 

If you are referring to the Real silicone gaskets, I had a terrible time with a new leaky one even though I torqued it to 25 inch/lbs per their instructions too. But in fairness, they do say to re-torque a second time after first flight to 20 in/lbs. But it took me more than 2 tries on one of them.

Edited February 23, 2018 by kortopates

[cliffy]

Not many know of the fire extinguisher requirements as it comes under DOT regs for pressure vessels not FARs. The FAA defers to those regs.  NFPA takes it from DOT. 

[cliffy]

1 hour ago, kortopates said:

But I can’t tell from your earlier response if you are saying a engine overhaul requires a 43.11 entry or merely a 43.9 entry. The engine replacement or wing replacement are not so clear in the regs.

 

Inspections are Inspections (43.11) and Maintenance is maintenance (43.9) If its not an "inspection, its maintenance. 

[jetdriven]

8 hours ago, cliffy said:

I'll throw one back-

Can an annual inspection be signed off as complete even though the airplane is not airworthy?

Certainly.  In fact. If a shop holds your airplane hostage ask them if the inspection is complete. If so, then they have to put it in the log. Get the list of discrepancies, take your plane and leave. 

Edited February 23, 2018 by jetdriven

[Shadrach]

14 hours ago, cliffy said:

I'll throw one back-

Can an annual inspection be signed off as complete even though the airplane is not airworthy?

Absolutely. I’ll add that making it airworthy doesn't require inspection authorization.

Edited February 23, 2018 by Shadrach

[jaylw314]

18 hours ago, jetdriven said:

Certainly.  In fact. If a shop holds your airplane hostage ask them if the inspection is complete. If so, then they have to put it in the log. Get the list of discrepancies, take your plane and leave. 

The danger there is if the shop refuses to put your plane back together, and you still have to get your ferry permit signed.  I'd certainly be polite until the point the plane was back together, the ferry permit signed, and then plane back on the ramp, but then I would be immediately start dropping f-bombs left and right.

[cliffy]

You can always pull out of their hangar and hire a gypsy A&P to get the ferry permit. It'll cost a few bucks but its an option.  BTW, the "list" doesn't go in the log book. It is specifically noted to be a list to the owner, not in the log book. Any A&P can complete the items on the list making the airplane airworthy because the "ANNUAL INSPECTION" has been completed and signed off. Only maintenance items remain to be done. 

[ArtVandelay]

You can always pull out of their hangar and hire a gypsy A&P to get the ferry permit. It'll cost a few bucks but its an option.  BTW, the "list" doesn't go in the log book. It is specifically noted to be a list to the owner, not in the log book. Any A&P can complete the items on the list making the airplane airworthy because the "ANNUAL INSPECTION" has been completed and signed off. Only maintenance items remain to be done. 

How do you go about finding a gypsy A&P?

[cliffy]

Most airports have them hanging around. Ask around with based aircraft owners. They may need a permit from the airport but they can't be legally stopped from helping in an "emergency".  The bigger the airport the more hurdles but it can be done

[DonMuncy]

I wonder what kind of wording an A&P uses, or if he uses any at all for some of the problems. For example, if you ran into an IA who decided that your plane was past TBO, and he would not sign off on that basis. I would suppose his "discrepancy" would read "engine past TBO". Then your (more reasonable) A&P looks at the discrepancy list and decides that doesn't make the plane un-airworthy. Does he just tell you "that is not a problem, and you should throw away the discrepancy list". Or would he make a logbook entry saying "I have examined the engine and determined it to be air worthy." I don't think that should be proper, as the logbook (as I understand it) should only list maintenance done, and since he didn't do any maintenance, there should be no entry. What would you A&Ps do?

[Andy95W]

I would discuss the situation with him and not sign off any sort of inspection if he didn't want.  I would simply log all of the work that I accomplished and release the airplane back to him.