50 Hours or Three Years (General Aviation News)

[Neal]

Interesting thought. For example, do we really need a condition inspection annually on a new(er) plane?

50 Hours or Three Years — General Aviation News

Should aircraft inspections move to a "50 hours or three years" schedule? Explore the potential benefits, economic impacts, and FAA hurdles of this proposed maintenance shift.

generalaviationnews.com

 

[Cactus Charlie]

I would oppose any regulatory change that required inspection after 50 hours. I have no intention of doing two condition inspections each year.

Even aircraft in commercial service only require inspection every 100 hours. Reducing that to 50 hours for non-commercial use would be ridiculous.

 

[ve6yeq]

This does not follow the evidence that inspections and maintence induces failures. For example Quantifying Maintenance Risk - SavvyAviation

 

[Neal]

Don't agree with 50 hours, what interests me more is extending the inspection cycle from 1 year to 2 or 3. I don't know what applies to corporate jets for example but their down time is probably costly beyond the cost of inspection.

 

[Cactus Charlie]

Two years or one hundred hours would have my support.

 

[ve6yeq]

The data from Savvy Aviation suggests that 300 hrs or 24 months is closer to optimal.

This year, since I have the plane down south for the winter, I am going to hit 100 hrs in the next few weeks before I reach 12 months. It does not take many ~18 hr XC trips to use up the hours. As I have not updated the operating conditions for phased inspections, all inspections must occur at the same time, so I expect a couple of days of inspections in April after I hit 100 hrs.

 

[Neal]

Correct me if I'm wrong but 100 hour does not apply to experimental. EX-3/FX-3 is both experimental airframe and engine. Only condition inspection - annual.

 

[ve6yeq]

Correct me if I'm wrong but 100 hour does not apply to experimental. Only condition inspection - annual.

In Canada, “Amateur Built Aircraft” do not fall under the “Experimental Aircraft” category. So I need to follow the same maintaince requirements as certified aircraft. For non-commercial use of certified small piston powered aircraft, the requirement is to follow the AMM which must include a specified list of inspections at a minimum of once every 12 months. As the default Cubcrafter’s AMM, specifies 100 hr inspection tasks, I am on the same 100 hr (as per AMM) or 12 months (as per regulations) schedule as commercial use aircraft.

So if I update the AMM, it is possible to make the case to Transport Canada for only the 12 month annual inspections. However, when I get around to doing that paperwork, I really should restructure the AMM to allow for phased inspections (so I can do different inspections at different times). This way, I can do the inspections that I am confident in myself and then arrange for help with the remaining inspections at a different time.

It is my understanding that larger aircraft are normally maintained with phased inspections on a 200 hr / 24 month schedule (e.g. Why Annual Inspections? - SavvyAviation) so maybe I could ask for that and see what happens.

 

[Cactus Charlie]

For non-commercial use of certified small piston powered aircraft, the requirement is to follow the AMM which must include a specified list of inspections at a minimum of once every 12 months. As the default Cubcrafter’s AMM, specifies 100 hr inspection tasks, I am on the same 100 hr (as per AMM) or 12 months (as per regulations) schedule as commercial use aircraft.

There is no CubCrafters AMM. There is only a template that can be used by the builder to create their own AMM.

What is stopping you editing the AMM template to change maintenance and inspection intervals to whatever you think appropriate?

I have made several edits to my AMM template, and to the inspection checklists, but I do not invoke the AMM or the inspection checklist for my condition inspection sign-off. I am not required to refer to, or follow, either.

 

[ve6yeq]

There is no CubCrafters AMM. There is only a template that can be used by the builder to create their own AMM.

There is only a PDF copy of the Carbon Cub AMM template in the DropBox. I have asked for an editable version (like they provide MS Word files for the POH) but no luck,

What is stopping you editing the AMM template to change maintenance and inspection intervals to whatever you think appropriate?

I ran a PDF to MS Word converter and I am now in the process of cleaning up the content (e.g. removing EX-2 specifics) and formatting of the Word file. Hopefully, I will have a few quiet rainy days to work on this.

Any changes to the maintaince and inspection content and intervals have to be approved by Transport Canada so I want clean it up the best that I can before filing the paperwork.

 

[Neal]

Correct me if I'm wrong but you're not the builder (manufacturer) @ve6yeq? This has to be considered @Cactus Charlie as you know.

 

[ve6yeq]

Correct me if I'm wrong but you're not the builder (manufacturer) @ve6yeq? This has to be considered @Cactus Charlie as you know.

Under the Canadian "Amateur Built" rules, the "limits" on contracted labour used when building an aircraft differ from the FAA rules; hence, even though the assembly of the EX-3 kit was done on the Cubcrafter's assembly line by the Cubcrafters team under my direction, I am the legal manufacturer, not just owner. Also, in the Canadian system, each owner of an "Amateur Built" aircraft has the same rights and responsibilities as the original builder, so modifications, maintenance, inspections, etc., are all possible (no concept of airframe-specific maintenance rights for the builder as in the FAA system).