Aircraft Airworthiness

[ChicoC17]

I fly on my time off in a Aero Club where I'm stationed. A few weeks ago there was an FAA Inspection and the inspectors found some aircraft with what they call open discrepancies. Things like Autopilot Inop, Landing Light Inop etc. etc. All the pilots that flew those airplanes received letters from the FAA saying an investigation was under way for flying unairworthy aircraft due to open discrepancies, and to give any evidence or statements regarding the matter.

My understanding of FAR 91.213 is that if the instruments or equipment inop are not required for the flight the airplane is still airworthy. If I get back from a flight and the autopilot is inop the person flying the airplane after me is ok to take the airplane and fly it. I have flown in many flight schools and there were many discrepancies after flights and we never grounded airplanes for open discrepancies. I hope to hear your comments about this matter. Thanks!

 

[Rick1128]

The problem is that they were not deferred. An open write-up can and does make the aircraft un-airworthy in the eyes of the FAA. Since the aero club is semi- "commercial" they tend to get held to a higher standard than a private owner. The biggest thing is that someone with the proper authority needed to close out the write up, before the aircraft left again. By regulation the club does not need an MEL, but they might want to consider writing one for their aircraft.

 

[ChicoC17]

ok thanks for taking your time to answer my question. So what should the Pilots do to avoid a violation or anything that can affect their records? And how does an aircraft owner flies an aircraft with open discrepancies like this? I'm just really confused regarding this matter. Thanks!

 

[KickSave]

I believe the key issue is what type of operation the pilot is acting under. If you are acting under part 91, then you are governed by 91.213 (d). Assuming there is no MEL for the aiplane, you have several requirements to meet before you can fly with inoperative equipment. They are:


(d) Except for operations conducted in accordance with paragraph (a) or (c) of
this section, a person may takeoff an aircraft in operations conducted under this
part with inoperative instruments and equipment without an approved
Minimum Equipment List provided --
(1) The flight operation is conducted in a --
(i) Rotorcraft, nonturbine-powered airplane, glider, or lighter-than-air aircraft
for which a master Minimum Equipment List has not been developed; or
(ii) Small rotorcraft, nonturbine-powered small airplane, glider, or lighter-thanair
aircraft for which a Master Minimum Equipment List has been developed;
and
(2) The inoperative instruments and equipment are not --
(i) Part of the VFR-day type certification instruments and equipment prescribed
in the applicable airworthiness regulations under which the aircraft was type
certificated;
(ii) Indicated as required on the aircraft's equipment list, or on the Kinds of
Operations Equipment List for the kind of flight operation being conducted;
(iii) Required by §91.205 or any other rule of this part for the specific kind of
flight operation being conducted; or
(iv) Required to be operational by an airworthiness directive; and



So if the equipment that is inop does not meet the preceding conditions, you may fly under part 91, provided you do the following:




(3) The inoperative instruments and equipment are --
(i) Removed from the aircraft, the cockpit control placarded, and the
maintenance recorded in accordance with §43.9 of this chapter; or
(ii) Deactivated and placarded "Inoperative." If deactivation of the inoperative
instrument or equipment involves maintenance, it must be accomplished and
recorded in accordance with part 43 of this chapter; and



The key catch is 213(d) (3) (ii) which states that if the de-activation requires actual maintenance, then the deactivation of the inop equipent must be made and recorded in the logbook in compliance with part 43. Just slapping a sticker that says "Inoperative" on the face of an instrument or on a light switch, does not always qualify as properly deactivating under part 43.

And so if all that stuff has been done, so long as the following is also made, then you are legal to fly under part 91, according to (4) below:

(4)A determination is made by a pilot, who is certificated and appropriately
rated under part 61 of this chapter, or by a person, who is certificated and
appropriately rated to perform maintenance on the aircraft, that the inoperative
instrument or equipment does not constitute a hazard to the aircraft. An aircraft
with inoperative instruments or equipment as provided in paragraph (d) of this
section is considered to be in a properly altered condition acceptable to the Administrator.


Deferring the equipment until maintenance is not a requirement of 91.213. So long as the above requirements are met, you do not need to have your broken ADF or LORAN fixed at the next 100 hour or annual to remain airworthy to fly under part 91.

 

[midlifeflyer]

ok thanks for taking your time to answer my question. So what should the Pilots do to avoid a violation or anything that can affect their records? And how does an aircraft owner flies an aircraft with open discrepancies like this? I'm just really confused regarding this matter. Thanks!

Assuming you're dealing with 91.213(d), here's a quick outline:

1. Start with the base concept is that you cannot operate an airplane with =any= inoperative equipment. Everything after that is an "unless.."

2. If the equipment is not required, you may fly it if the inoperative equipment is deactivated or removed, and the inoperative equipment placarded.
(a) The question of whether a piece of equipment is "required" involves various rules and documents, from FAR 91.205 to the POH equipment list to the TCDS.
(b) An problem area is involves the word "deactivated". Take an inoperative AI for example. Is covering it so that it doesn't play a part in the operation of the aircraft enough to "deactivate" it?

3. If the deactivation or removal involves "maintenance", there must be a log entry made.

4. "Maintenance means inspection, overhaul, repair, preservation, and the replacement of parts, but excludes preventive maintenance." (FAR1)

 

[avbug]

In addition to the above explainations, an understanding of what constitutes "airworthy," is in order. The FAA has determined that airworthiness is determined by two equally important issues. One is that the part or aircraft conforms to approved data. The second is that it is in a condition for safe flight.

The former, conforms to approved data, means that the aircraft as a whole, and every single part of that aircraft, conform to the type certification of the aircraft, any applicable ammendments, any alterations by STC or other means acceptable to the administrator, and any maintenance or continued airworthiness publications or documents relating to the airplane.

In this case, this means properly alterted and acceptable to the administrator in accordance with 14 CFR 91.213.

A condition for safe flight is a little more subjective, but all standards applicable in the aircraft maintenance publications, airworthiness directives, service bulletins, and industry standard publications (AC 43.14) will be held out as a minimum acceptable level of safety.

Technically, an aircraft with a single bolt that dosesn't have at least one threat above the plastic on a fibrelock nut, is unairworthy. An aircraft which has had a radio changed, but no log entry made is unairworthy. The airworthiness certificate is invalidated, in accordanc with line 6 of the airworthiness certificate itself.

Open discrepancies of their own rite are not acceptable. Every time a pilot flies an airplane, he is making a statement regarding the airworthiness of an airplane. He is stating that the airplane is airworthy, and setting forth to prove it. A pilot may be held in violation for failure to ensure that the aircraft is in an airworthy condition.

In cases where a grounding item, or an item not meeting full airworthiness criteria is not in evidence or is hidden, a pilot may often be excused from the duty to determine airworthiness. A cracked fan blade or damaged oil pump is such an example. However, when discrepancies are in the open, known, and obvious, a pilot may have little recourse or salvation during enforcement proceedings against him.

 

[nosehair]

Kicksave is right. 91.213 (d)(2) is your "checklist" to determine the airworthiness unless you're operating other than part 91 or you have an MEL.
Additionally, I would give you a "heads-up" that some FSDO Inspectors who have a military / airline background, do not think in "part 91" terms, so they think these write-ups MUST be corrected like in part 135 / 121 / military...even to the point of writing a "Letter of Investigation".
Research 91.213 and be sure that has not been violated, and write a letter of response asking what part of 91.213 did you violate?

 

[A Squared]

>>>>>So what should the Pilots do to avoid a violation or anything that can affect their records?

At this point? Hire an attorney. What's done is done, and you and your buddies need to minimize any penalty that might come from the investigation of what you've done.

To have prevented this? Not flown the airplanes with open equipment discrepancies. Know the regulations, don't document violations of them.

Sorry if this sounds unsympathetic, I'm not really. Those are just the facts.

Yeah, flying an airplane on a VFR day with an autopilot squawked inop, but not resolved, is a pretty small sin, in the grand scheme of things. There's probably very few of us who haven't done something similar.....but, it's still a violation. And by accepting and flying an airplane with an open Mx item, you've documented that violation. Ultimately, paperwork exists for one reason and one reason only: To hang you. To make you show that you've violated a regulation.

I'd bet that in this case, there's someone with an axe to grind at the bottom of this, maybe someone doesn't like Military aviators and wants to violate a few. That's unfortunate, I wish you the best of luck with this, but don't fail to take it seriously. Get an attorney.

 

[KickSave]

But, a plane is legally airworthy with openly squawked items, so long as the entire checklist of 213(d) is followed to the letter. An item being written up in a squawk log as inop does not make an airplane no longer un-airworthy on it's own. It would be un-airworthy only if it's flown and the inop item is not dealt with per 213 (d). Knowing about an inop item and doing nothing then flying it makes the plane illegal, and the pilot liable. But having an open item in a log, does not automatically disqualify the plane from being airworthy. 213(d) allows for planes to be flown with inop equipment, so long as it's done in accordance with the FARs.


And again, I'm strictly talking part 91 here. I know at my 141 school, any plane with any squawk was grounded until the MX resolved the item. 135 and 121 are obviously not the same as what I'm referring to.

 

[A Squared]

But, a plane is legally airworthy with openly squawked items, so long as the entire checklist of 213(d) is followed to the letter. An item being written up in a squawk log as inop does not make an airplane no longer un-airworthy on it's own. It would be un-airworthy only if it's flown and the inop item is not dealt with per 213 (d). Knowing about an inop item and doing nothing then flying it makes the plane illegal, and the pilot liable. But having an open item in a log, does not automatically disqualify the plane from being airworthy. 213(d) allows for planes to be flown with inop equipment, so long as it's done in accordance with the FARs.

Yes, all of this is true, but we're talking about squawks which have *not* been addressed under the provisions of 91.213(d) When I spoke of "open" or "unresolved" equipment discrepancies, I meant ones which had been reported but no action had been done. If I understand corectly, this is what the original poster is speaking of. If 91.213(d) had been complied with, the discepancies would not have been "open" or "unadressed" they would have been addressed by Mx procedures, placarding, and logbook entries.