Newly Overhauled Engine, No Existing Logs?

[cliffy]

First, if the IA doesn't sign off the annual inspection complete in the aircraft log book (nothing in the log book) and refuses to do so because of a separate list that says "beyond TBO" then go to another IA for the annual inspection as beyond TBO has no bearing on a Part 91 airplane. He has no idea what he is doing. TBO is optional for almost all of us unless we rent our airplanes to flight schools. TBO is not a limiting factor.   If the engine runs fine and as per the airplane requirements TBO has no effect on airworthiness for Part 91. 

Now if it has other indicators like metal in the filter then other "maintenance" needs to be done, still TBO has no effect. 

Have someone else do the annual that understands the regs. 

If he signed it off IN THE LOG BOOK as unairworthy due to TBO time, he has no idea what he's doing. He might even be liable for a lawsuit as diminished value of your airplane is your injury.

A lot of this discussion is hypothetical unless someone can chime in with direct evidence that an IA wouldn't sign off an annual because it was beyond TBO. 

[jetdriven]

37 minutes ago, cliffy said:

First, if the IA doesn't sign off the annual inspection complete in the aircraft log book (nothing in the log book) and refuses to do so because of a separate list that says "beyond TBO" then go to another IA for the annual inspection as beyond TBO has no bearing on a Part 91 airplane. He has no idea what he is doing. TBO is optional for almost all of us unless we rent our airplanes to flight schools. TBO is not a limiting factor.   If the engine runs fine and as per the airplane requirements TBO has no effect on airworthiness for Part 91. 

Now if it has other indicators like metal in the filter then other "maintenance" needs to be done, still TBO has no effect. 

Have someone else do the annual that understands the regs. 

If he signed it off IN THE LOG BOOK as unairworthy due to TBO time, he has no idea what he's doing. He might even be liable for a lawsuit as diminished value of your airplane is your injury.

A lot of this discussion is hypothetical unless someone can chime in with direct evidence that an IA wouldn't sign off an annual because it was beyond TBO. 

Isnt an IA required to sign off the annual inspection if he did it?  H Dont you have to log maintenance and inspections if done? Maybe he isnt satisfied with the condition of the airplane or the TBO status, and thats a valid issue. but I didnt think he could withold the signoff, per se.

I havent seen an IA refuse to sign off on an engine past TBO but I've heard of a few that refuse to sign off a TBO engine, and the owner knows that, so they have to use someone else.

If they're so strict on TBO, then how about refusing to sign off any engine past 12 years as well, thats also stated in the MFR's TBO suggestion.

[jaylw314]

12 hours ago, teejayevans said:

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

 

11 hours ago, cliffy said:

Most airports have them hanging around.

Sorry, I don't know why that exchange made me bust out laughing, but I found something about that image funny 

[kortopates]

Isnt an IA required to sign off the annual inspection if he did it?  H Dont you have to log maintenance and inspections if done? Maybe he isnt satisfied with the condition of the airplane or the TBO status, and thats a valid issue. but I didnt think he could withold the signoff, per se.
I havent seen an IA refuse to sign off on an engine past TBO but I've heard of a few that refuse to sign off a TBO engine, and the owner knows that, so they have to use someone else.
If they're so strict on TBO, then how about refusing to sign off any engine past 12 years as well, thats also stated in the MFR's TBO suggestion.

Like Byron, i've never known of an IA to refuse to sign off an inspection because of an engine at or beyond TBO. But through Savvy Aviation we do see shops that refuse to annual an aircraft with an engine that's past TBO. But usually the shops use a arbitrary cutoff of 10-20% past TBO rather than right at. Mike has been successfull at educating a few why doing so shouldn't increase there liability, but not all. You'd think age would be a concern too but don't hear about that much. But when a shop does refuse to do an annual, at least in the cases I know, the shop has been upfront about it from beginning before they accept the aircraft and begin any work; usually at the time of scheduling.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[cliffy]

Again guys we're going around in circles on hypotheticals. Most shops that have issues with TBO will know that upfront before any work begins. If they do, take it to someone else. If an A&P does "maintenance" he's required to sign off what he did and he's only responsible for that work.

If an IA doesn't want to sign off an annual inspection (if he did it) so be it, he doesn't need to get paid  Either it passes an annual inspection or it doesn't with an accompanying letter of discrepancies. Either way the annual inspection has been done and should be signed off. Don't pay for what you don't get. The IA should realize that its only an inspection and it either passes with flying colors or it has discrepancies as noted to the owner.

Don't over think this folks.

[ArtVandelay]

They will annual it but they have told me they won’t do any major work on it (new cylinders, etc). First thing they check is compression. Fortunately I was 70+ in all cylinders. I’ve been told it’s rare for Lycoming IO360 to make TBO. Someday....

[RobertGary1]

Its a myth that a plane must be airworthy (real or in the IA’s head) to be signed off. Signing the annual just means you did it. If there are airworthiness issues those are listed as part of the annual sign off. Those discrepancies can then be cleared by someone else (not necessarily an IA). 

So refusing to sign that you did the inspection would be a very odd way of addressing a concern

 

-Robert 

[Guest]

Does the Annual Inspection log entry include determined to be “Airworthy”. I’m curious because it’s not something we have to to attest to here.

Normally an aiplane is determined to be “Airworthy”(meeting its type certificate and supplemental type certificate(s) when it’s C of A is being issued at manufacture or for us during import.  Other than that we are stating the maintenance meets the applicable standards.  We can release an airplane after completing the Annual Inspection, together with details of the work completed, and a list of outstanding deficiencies if there are any.  This list goes in the journey log book so that any pilots may review the list and determine if the airplane is fit for flight.

For example, one could say the position lights don’t work, fine for day VFR flight. Or the left wing spar is cracked at station123.5, the pilot then knows he can’t fly the airplane in that condition.

Clarence

[DonMuncy]

I apologize for starting a discussion that wound up mostly about TBOs. I intended that only as an example, because I couldn't think of a better one. 

My original thought was what if an IA believed a discrepancy existed, which most A&Ps would not consider a discrepancy. If the IA hands the owner a discrepancy list with only that item listed, and the owner takes the plane to an A&P to have that discrepancy resolved. If the A&P doesn't think there is a discrepancy at all; thus nothing to repair, what would he, or the owner do? Ignore the discrepancy list and fly on? Naturally the smart method would be to have the IA talk to the A&P, preferably before making the discrepancy list, and come to some resolution.

Or is this too crazy a hypothetical to even be discussing.

[jetdriven]

1 hour ago, teejayevans said:

They will annual it but they have told me they won’t do any major work on it (new cylinders, etc). First thing they check is compression. Fortunately I was 70+ in all cylinders. I’ve been told it’s rare for Lycoming IO360 to make TBO. Someday....

 The only thing that makes it rare for an IO360 to make TBO is the cam and lifters. Aside from that they probably will run 4000 hours. 

[jetdriven]

6 minutes ago, DonMuncy said:

I apologize for starting a discussion that wound up mostly about TBOs. I intended that only as an example, because I couldn't think of a better one. 

My original thought was what if an IA believed a discrepancy existed, which most A&Ps would not consider a discrepancy. If the IA hands the owner a discrepancy list with only that item listed, and the owner takes the plane to an A&P to have that discrepancy resolved. If the A&P doesn't think there is a discrepancy at all; thus nothing to repair, what would he, or the owner do? Ignore the discrepancy list and fly on? Naturally the smart method would be to have the IA talk to the A&P, preferably before making the discrepancy list, and come to some resolution.

Or is this too crazy a hypothetical to even be discussing.

It depends on the writeup but if the IA said windshield to milky and hazy in the discrepancy list and you found an A&P who agrees with you that you think that it’s not, he could write inspected windscreen found OK for continued service and sign it off and then it’s done. Same with TBO engine, Inspected and found airworthy condition, OK for continued service. Sometimes there are cracks in. Non-critical areas such as ribs. And maybe the guy who did the annual wants to open a wing up and replace the rib. But you can stop drill the crack. Same thing. 

Edited February 25, 2018 by jetdriven

[jaylw314]

6 hours ago, M20Doc said:

Does the Annual Inspection log entry include determined to be “Airworthy”. I’m curious because it’s not something we have to to attest to here.

Normally an aiplane is determined to be “Airworthy”(meeting its type certificate and supplemental type certificate(s) when it’s C of A is being issued at manufacture or for us during import.  Other than that we are stating the maintenance meets the applicable standards.  We can release an airplane after completing the Annual Inspection, together with details of the work completed, and a list of outstanding deficiencies if there are any.  This list goes in the journey log book so that any pilots may review the list and determine if the airplane is fit for flight.

For example, one could say the position lights don’t work, fine for day VFR flight. Or the left wing spar is cracked at station123.5, the pilot then knows he can’t fly the airplane in that condition.

Clarence

I suppose in the example of the position lights, the "repair" done on the discrepancy would be for the A&P to tell the owner, "hey, you know your position lights are broken and you need that working to fly IFR or VFR at night, right?"  I'd let an A&P charge me for the 5 minutes it took to discuss that  Hey, for that matter, does anyone know if things that are "preventative maintenance" can be resolved by the owner/pilot after an annual results in a discrepancy list, or MUST it be resolved by an A&P?

The wing spar is black and white, too.  If the discrepancy is to be "'repaired", I imagine there aren't too many A&P's who would think any amount of talking could resolve a discrepancy like that.

The grey areas in between, of course, are where things may get interesting...

 

[cliffy]

GEEZ guys, we're still going round and round in circles

Maintenance is maintenance, inspections are inspections.

If the IA signs the annual as "completed- discrepancy list given to the owner" then its up to the owner to get the items fixed (he's ultimately responsible to the Feds for the airworthiness of the airplane), get the items fixed in a manner acceptable to the FAA Administrator. If that means it falls under the Preventive Maintenance that an owner/pilot can do then its acceptable for him to do it (landing light wiring). Although he MUST sign it off properly in the log books.  If it is something outside of that then an A&P OR the owner working in close proximity with an A&P can do it and the A&P signs it off. 

If as you state the position lights are inop, one must address that before even VFR Day flight as the system needs to be fixed OR taken out of service and placarded in accordance with the FARs. Just because its not needed for day VFR doesn't mean you can just charge off into flight day VFR. 

Canada and Australia do things different (That's why the colonies broke away from Mother England :-)

Down here (USA) most every annual sign off goes something like "Annual Inspection completed and aircraft found to be in an airworthy condition". This is after the entries of MAINTENANCE that have been done following the actual inspection (100 hr on the engine, etc)and what it found. The other way would be "Annual inspection completed and a list of discrepancies has been given to the owner". Airplane can't fly until the discrepancies are cleared. Both ways satisfy the "Annual Inspection" requirement, only one airplane can fly away. 

There really isn't any gray areas. Either the airplane meets its Type Certificate mandated condition or it doesn't. Period. Everything that came on the airplane when new from the factory OR has been modified in an appropriate way has to be working properly or disabled and placarded correctly OR the airplane isn't legal to fly (this is the purpose of the annual inspection). This includes autopilots that don't work. Now, we all know that many do not follow the rules tightly but those are the rules and the owner is responsible to see that they are followed or he is liable for violations for every flight that the airplane makes with items inop. You can follow the rules or not, its your choice. I'm just the messenger.

[jetdriven]

Well said cliffy