2008 03 kick the tires part ii

VINTAGE INSTRUCTOR

THE

BY DOUG STEWART

Kick the tires Part II In last month’s article on preflight inspections, I wrote about a pilot I knew who missed the fact that the fuel cap on his Cessna 195 was not securely fastened. It ended up with the beautiful airplane being destroyed in a forced landing, and the lucky pilot and his passenger escaping with nothing more than minor injuries.

In that article I also alluded to other losses one might incur in such a situation, although the only thing to get damaged might be the ego.

In the book FARs Explained by Kent Jackson, he relates a situation where a pilot lost his private pilot privileges for 15 days after being found in violation of FAR 91.13, Careless or Reckless Operation. In the case of the Administrator v. Stimble EA-4177 (1994), “. . . the pilot failed to discover an improperly installed fuel cap during preflight inspection.” Now I am sure there wasn’t an FAA inspector just hanging out on a ramp watching pilots conduct preflight inspections who caught the unwary pilot.

Although I don’t know the rest of the details, I am sure that something else happened to bring the attention of the FAA to the improperly installed fuel cap.

Aside from the “catchall” 91.13, which will typically be used in an enforcement action, what other regulations are there to guide us, and keep us safe, in relationship to preflight inspections? There are four that specifically address the issue. They are 91.7, Civil Aircraft Airworthiness; 91.9, Civil Aircraft Flight Manual, Marking, and

32 MARCH 2008

Placard Requirements; 91.205, Powered Civil Aircraft . . . Instrument and Equipment Requirements; and 91.213, Inoperative Instruments and Equipment.

Let’s take a look at all of them; here’s where we will find an aircraft that might be totally safe to fly and yet still be unairworthy in the eyes of the FAA. (Which could lead to a disaster of another type, one usually settled by lawyers.) It is here that we can find what instruments and equipment we must have in an operable condition, and also how we should proceed if we find anything amiss during our preflight inspection.

Starting with FAR 91.7, we find that: “(a) No person may operate a civil aircraft unless it is in an airworthy condition.” And “(b) The pilot in command of a civil aircraft is responsible for determining whether that aircraft is in condition for safe flight. . . .” Well, how does one define “airworthy”? Reading the airworthiness certificate (you did ensure it was in the airplane, along with the registration, operating limitations, and weight and balance during your preflight inspection, right?), you will find verbiage that not only helps define “airworthy” but also what keeps it effective, which includes the requirement to be properly registered. If the aircraft is not currently and properly registered, it is unairworthy.

In the 1980 case of the Administrator v. Doppes, 5 NTSB 50, it was found that: “The term ‘airworthy’ comprises two different concepts, both requisite to the airworthiness

of an aircraft. These are (1) that the aircraft conforms to a type design approved under a type certificate or supplemental type certificate (STC) and to applicable airworthiness directives (AD); and (2) that the aircraft must be in condition for safe operation.”

What this is saying, in essence, is that we not only need to determine that the airplane is safe to fly, but that the airplane complies with its type certificate data sheet (TCDS) as well as any applicable STCs and/or ADs to be considered “airworthy.” For those of us flying antique or vintage airplanes, it means that we might have to become sleuths of the FAA website to find the TCDS for our airplane. It takes some patience and perseverance, but by searching through the http://RGL.FAA.gov website, one can find a TCDS for the vast majority of the airplanes we fly. The website is much easier to use than the older printed versions, since you can search by model number rather than having to remember the name of the newest owner of the type certificate. (If I was able to do it, surely anyone can.)

Having found the TCDS, you now must make certain, as you inspect your airplane, that it complies with the TCDS and any STCs (meaning that you cannot have any modifications that are not included in those documents) for that particular airplane.

You must also be sure that any and all ADs have been complied with.

Although there are times when we might question the reason for an AD, compliance is for our own good.

One example goes back to the fuel cap issue. I heard of a fuel starvation situation where fuel would not feed due to a venting problem with caps replaced with an improperly vented cap, which had been addressed in an AD issued way back in 1952.

Sometimes ensuring that all the ADs have been complied with can be almost impossible for our older airplanes. As an example, a sharp-eyed mechanic discovered that an AD that had been issued for my Super Cruiser back in 1948 (one year after my PA-12 had been built) had never been complied with.

This was in 2004, 56 years after the AD had been issued. Needless to say, my Super Cruiser is now in compliance.

Continuing our look at the regulations, we move on to FAR 91.9, which says that we must comply with the “operating limitations specified in the approved Airplane Flight Manual . . . .”

Well, most of our older airplanes (those certified to CAM 4 and earlier) don’t have an AFM, but don’t despair, in part (b) of 91.9 it says: “No person may operate a US registered civil aircraft . . . (2) For which an Airplane Flight Manual is not required by 21.5 of this chapter, unless there is available in the aircraft a current approved Flight Manual, approved manual material, markings and placards, or any combination thereof.”

FAR 21.5 allows aircraft manufactured before March, 1, 1979, to be operated with a manual containing operating limitations and information required to be furnished in an AFM or manual material, markings, and placards by the applicable regulations under which the airplane was certificated.

Which means that all we really need here are the appropriate placards, which might very well be minimal, that were required when the aircraft was certificated, as well as any document that might serve as a “flight manual.” In my PA-12 that manual consists of a whopping eight pages.

Okay, so now that we have verified that the airplane has all the appropriate operating limitations, via manual, placards, and markings, we also have to be sure that we comply with FAR 91.205, which lists all the instru-

ments and equipment that must be installed and in “operable condition” for visual flight rules flight, both day and night, as well as for instrument flight rules flight, depending upon what type of flying we will be doing. Operable condition means that the instruments and equipment are “operating as intended by the manufacturer.” We must be sure that even though we might comply with the list provided in 91.205, there isn’t additional required equipment that might be found in an “aircraft equipment list,” a flight manual, or perhaps an AD. If we find inoperable instruments

. . . we will find an aircraft that might be totally safe to fly and yet still be unairworthy in the eyes of the FAA. and/or equipment during our preflight inspection, then FAR 91.213 gives guidance on how to proceed.

It states that if a master minimum equipment list (MMEL) for that type aircraft exists, upon which an MEL has been developed for your particular airplane, then that is the document that governs whether or not the aircraft may be flown. But since most of the airplanes that we vintage folks are flying do not have an MMEL or MEL, 91.213 (d) (1) (i) says that “a person may take off an aircraft in operations conducted under this part with inoperative instruments and equipment” as long as the inoperative instruments and equipment: are not required by the TCDS, STCs, or ADs; are not required by the aircraft’s equipment list; and are not required

by FAR 91.205, or any other rule specific to the kind of flight operation being conducted (as an example, the need for a transponder in Class B or

C airspace).

However if we do choose to fly, it then goes on to say that the inoperative instruments and equipment must either be (a) “removed from the aircraft, the cockpit control placarded, and the maintenance recorded…” or (b) “Deactivated and placarded inoperative….” If you find yourself with inoperable instruments or equipment, referring to “Advisory Circular 91-67 Minimum Equipment Requirements for General Aviation Operations Under FAR Part 91” will give guidance on how to go about removing, deactivating, and placarding those items.

So we can see, after reviewing all the applicable regulations, that it might be possible to have an aircraft that is completely safe and flyable; however, that same aircraft might also be unairworthy. If we fail to detect this in our preflight inspection, it is quite possible that we might end up in an enforcement action by the FAA, and find ourselves with a suspended pilot certificate for a period of time.

More importantly, as I stated in last month’s article, if we are distracted, in a hurry, or complacent in our inspection, the possibility of missing something that would make the airplane unsafe for flight becomes more likely. The potential of finding ourselves in a much more serious situation than that of an enforcement action becomes much more probable. Please be sure, as you preflight your airplane, that you are careful, methodical, systematic, and meticulous. Thus you will be not only legal, but also and-more importantly-safe when beckoned by . . . blue skies and tail winds.

(Thanks to my friend Al Miller, a principle maintenance inspector with the Albany, New York, flight standards district office (FSDO), for help in preparing this article.)

Doug Stewart is the 2004 National CFI of the Year, a NAFI Master Instructor, and a designated pilot examiner.

He operates DSFI Inc. (www.DSFlight. com) based at the Columbia County Airport (1B1).

VINTAGE AIRPLANE 33