Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 17 of 17

Thread: Annual condition inspection sign-off

  1. #11

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Clarklake, MI
    Posts
    2,195
    Quote Originally Posted by 1600vw View Post
    The one who said the airplane is airworthy is the FAA when they gave it its airworthy certificate.
    The FAA makes no such proclamation, nor do they offer a certifying statement saying the aircraft is airworthy. The special airworthiness certificate is simply an authorization to operate in US airspace.

    In the history of aviation an A&P has NEVER been sued over a Condition Inspection.
    I wouldn't wager anything on that statement I didn't want to lose because it has indeed happened.

  2. #12

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Clarklake, MI
    Posts
    2,195
    Quote Originally Posted by 1600vw View Post
    I am amazed how many A&P's do not know this. I would say 80-90% are not aware that this is the rules for an Experimental aircraft.
    I like to see your poling data on that.

  3. #13

    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    1,560
    Quote Originally Posted by martymayes View Post
    The FAA makes no such proclamation, nor do they offer a certifying statement saying the aircraft is airworthy. The special airworthiness certificate is simply an authorization to operate in US airspace.



    I wouldn't wager anything on that statement I didn't want to lose because it has indeed happened.
    Everything I stated I heard in a webinar. Not the one I posted but another. I will post the webinar but it does no good if no one watches or lessens to it. But I will post them. It comes from a couple different webinars.

    Tony

  4. #14
    EAA Staff Joda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Oshkosh, Wisconsin, United States
    Posts
    109
    The fact is, a homebuilt aircraft cannot meet the FAA definition of "Airworthy", which is why the condition inspection sign-off does not use the word "Airworthy" but rather states that the aircraft is in a "condition for safe operation". Here's an explanation of the definition of "Airworthy", as found in FAA Order 8130.2....


    200. Definition Of The Term “Airworthy” for U.S. Type-Certificated (TC) Aircraft.
    Although the term “airworthy” is defined in 14 CFR § 3.5(a), a clear understanding of its meaning is essential for use in the FAA’s airworthiness certification program. Below is a summary of the conditions necessary for the issuance of an airworthiness certificate. A review of case law relating to airworthiness reveals two conditions that must be met for an aircraft to be considered “airworthy.” Title 49, United States Code (49 U.S.C.) § 44704(c) and 14 CFR § 21.183(a), (b), and (c) state that the following two conditions necessary for issuance of an airworthiness certificate:

    a. The aircraft must conform to its type design. Conformity to the type design is considered attained when the aircraft configuration and the engine, propeller, and articles installed are consistent with the drawings, specifications, and other data that are part of the TC. This includes any supplemental type certificate (STC) and repairs and alterations incorporated into the aircraft.

    b. The aircraft must be in a condition for safe operation. This refers to the condition of the aircraft relative to wear and deterioration, for example, skin corrosion, window delamination/crazing, fluid leaks, and tire wear.

    Note: If one or both of these conditions are not met, the aircraft would not be considered airworthy. Aircraft that have not been issued a TC must meet the requirements of paragraph 200b of this order.


    The note at the end is telling. Since a homebuilt aircraft does not have a "type design" and does not have a type certificate, it cannot meet BOTH requirements found in the definition of "airworthy". Thus, it can be in "a condition for safe operation" but not "airworthy" in the eyes of the FAA.

    Check the FAA's sign-off in the logbook of a homebuilt. You'll see the the FAA (or DAR) does not mention anything about airworthiness or even "condition". The sign-off only states that the aircraft "meets the requirements of the certificate requested". In other words, it's legal. The builder/owner (applicant) must make the statement in the logbook that the aircraft is in a "condition for safe operation" (but not "airworthy")

    Hope this helps!
    Cheers!

    Joe

  5. #15

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    WA
    Posts
    852
    What if the A&P doing the condition inspection finds discrepancies? Should he submit a list of discrepancies to the owner and sign the log as per 43.11(a)(5)?

  6. #16

    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Tehachapi, CA
    Posts
    182
    Quote Originally Posted by Bill Berson View Post
    What if the A&P doing the condition inspection finds discrepancies? Should he submit a list of discrepancies to the owner and sign the log as per 43.11(a)(5)?
    No. Part 43 does not apply to EAB aircraft, per 43.1(b). So the ONLY document that tells the A&P (or repairman) what to write in the logs is the specific aircraft's Operating Limitations. Mine say to write approximately this:

    "I Certify that I inspected this aircraft (N83MZ) on July 20th, 2017 in accordance with the scope and detail of Appendix D to Part 43 of the FAR's and found it in a Condition for Safe Operation."

    The actual language is in the passive voice, but I like to write in the active voice, so this is how I phrase it.

    When I do CI's on other people's aircraft (and I do about 30/year), I use whatever language their OL calls for. Since it says "inspected and found in a etc.", I ONLY sign off CI's if I found the aircraft in a condition for safe operation. In about 1/4 of the CI's I do, I find stuff that keeps me from signing off the CI. I give the owner the option to either hire me to do the work, or to do the work himself, prove to me that he did it in a manner that I approve (pics, description, whatever) and THEN I sign off their logbook with the approximate wording above. When I find safety related stuff that keeps me from signing off the CI, I give the owner a written list of the residual items (that's what I call them) but I don't write anything in the logs, since there's no requirement in the OL's to do so - only to sign it off as safe if I find it safe, and the airplane cannot be flown legally if it hasn't been signed off.

    So no signing a log if it's not in a condition for safe operation, and a signoff when it is.

  7. #17

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Alabama
    Posts
    1,971
    Thanks for that, Marc; it's pretty much how I figured it would go.

    Kinda like a Flight Review - if one is substandard, the CFI simply doesn't sign off.
    The opinions and statements of this poster are largely based on facts and portray a possible version of the actual events.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •