 |
Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
pitts_pilot(at)bellsouth.
Guest
|
 Posted: Mon Jan 26, 2009 8:12 pm Post subject: Alternator failure and experimentals |
 |
|
OK, I asked my Guru:
So what did the Guru say? <G>
For certified components, FAR 43.13 is the controlling document. We are
required to have the manufacturer's current maintenance instructions to
work on a component. Be that an airframe, engine, prop, wheel and
brake, or an alternator.
For experimental (and the FSDO seems to suggest that it can't be
experimental if it has a certified dataplate on it.... this came up at a
safety meeting, where an experimental owner was saying he didn't want to
comply with an AD on his engine, since it was experimental. The FSDO
inspector asked: "Does it have a data plate on it?" and the answer was
"Yes", and the FSDO inspector said you must comply with the AD or it is
not airworthy, experimental or not.) we are probably relieved of the
requirement to have the manufacturer's data, since as you say, there is
no TC, etc.
I didn't see what all they are arguing about, but I've had FBOs lend me
tools rather than accept the liability for the work. Especially in
cases like my Ford Truck Alternator install on the way home from OR with
my Project Tiger, where it was clear I knew more about the workings than
they did.
Bob Steward, A&P IA
Birmingham, AL
Bob is one of my Grumman experts ....
It appears the the dataplate (and liability) are the controlling items.
They're everywhere in our experimental planes, from carbs to avionics to
... and without real data from the FBOs (which may be like opinions)
we'll never know ... until the crap hits the prop! 
Linn
Kelly McMullen wrote:
| Quote: |
Disagree. A shop may say that, indeed. However, it is simply an
excuse, unless they are a repair station with restrictions on the
station license. A&P Mechanics can work on anything they are familiar
with, without anything more than AC43-13-1B, and/or appliance manuals
especially an experimental, since there is no type certificate and
manufacturer's maintenance manual for it. A Lycoming is a Lycoming. A
Ford aircraft alternator is identical, whether installed on a Cessna
or a Glastar or an RV. Ditto Slick or Bendix magnetos.
But you already knew that as part of your license.
On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 2:06 PM, David McNeill <dlm46007(at)cox.net> wrote:
> Ditto, except that the mechanics can not work on your airplane. unless your
> are carrying a manual for continued airworthiness, most shops will say that
> since they do not have the manuals they will lend you the tools but they can
> not work on it. Had this happen at the premier FBO at Austin TX airport.
> Secondly a backup battery or a backup (vacuum pad driven) alternator is a
> must for IFR. And you are correct, the aircraft alternator is $350+
> exchange. Lastly my tool box always weighs about 25 pounds which contains
> both many tools and critical spare parts, i.e. seviceable spark plugs, extra
> regulator, master contactor, start relay, fasteners, washers, tie wraps etc.
> ________________________________
>
|
| | - The Matronics RV10-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Kellym
Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 1705
Location: Sun Lakes AZ
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 26, 2009 8:39 pm Post subject: Alternator failure and experimentals |
|
|
You will find a lot of opinions, but the opinions narrow when you refer
to the actual regulation. Your guru didn't refer to the reg.
His opinion isn't what 43-13 says. I quote:
"a) Each person performing maintenance, alteration, or preventive
maintenance on an aircraft, engine, propeller, or appliance shall use
the methods, techniques, and practices prescribed in the current
manufacturer's maintenance manual or Instructions for continued
airworthiness prepared by its manufacturer, OR OTHER METHODS,
TECHNIQUES, AND PRACTICES ACCEPTABLE TO THE ADMINISTRATOR EXCEPT AS IN
43.16.
He shall use the tools, equipment, and test apparatus necessary to
assure completion of the work in accordance with ACCEPTED INDUSTRY
PRACTICES. If special equipment or test apparatus is recommended by the
manufacturer involved, he must use that equipment or apparatus or its
equivalent acceptable to the Administrator."
Emphasis added by me.
43.16 applies to commercial operations and is a narrower
standard(eliminates the alternative methods). It is those aircraft that
require a mechanic to be working directly from the manual.
Practices acceptable to the Administrator are defined in 43.13-1B. The
emphasize sections are what lets a mechanic work based on his knowledge
of common parts without the manual for a Lycoming O-360 installed in a
Glastar(as opposed to one in a Cessna).
So, only if you fall under 43.16 are you required to have the manual and
follow it. No experimental falls under 43.16 as OBAM aircraft are not
approved for commercial operations(other than transition training).
Given that you are the manufacturer, you can write down whatever
recommendations you want, and that is the guidance to the mechanic.
linn Walters wrote:
| Quote: |
OK, I asked my Guru:
So what did the Guru say? <G>
For certified components, FAR 43.13 is the controlling document. We are
required to have the manufacturer's current maintenance instructions to
work on a component. Be that an airframe, engine, prop, wheel and
brake, or an alternator.
For experimental (and the FSDO seems to suggest that it can't be
experimental if it has a certified dataplate on it.... this came up at a
safety meeting, where an experimental owner was saying he didn't want to
comply with an AD on his engine, since it was experimental. The FSDO
inspector asked: "Does it have a data plate on it?" and the answer was
"Yes", and the FSDO inspector said you must comply with the AD or it is
not airworthy, experimental or not.) we are probably relieved of the
requirement to have the manufacturer's data, since as you say, there is
no TC, etc.
I didn't see what all they are arguing about, but I've had FBOs lend me
tools rather than accept the liability for the work. Especially in
cases like my Ford Truck Alternator install on the way home from OR with
my Project Tiger, where it was clear I knew more about the workings than
they did.
Bob Steward, A&P IA
Birmingham, AL
Bob is one of my Grumman experts ....
It appears the the dataplate (and liability) are the controlling items.
They're everywhere in our experimental planes, from carbs to avionics to
.... and without real data from the FBOs (which may be like opinions)
we'll never know ... until the crap hits the prop!
Linn
Kelly McMullen wrote:
>
>
> Disagree. A shop may say that, indeed. However, it is simply an
> excuse, unless they are a repair station with restrictions on the
> station license. A&P Mechanics can work on anything they are familiar
> with, without anything more than AC43-13-1B, and/or appliance manuals
> especially an experimental, since there is no type certificate and
> manufacturer's maintenance manual for it. A Lycoming is a Lycoming. A
> Ford aircraft alternator is identical, whether installed on a Cessna
> or a Glastar or an RV. Ditto Slick or Bendix magnetos.
> But you already knew that as part of your license.
>
> On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 2:06 PM, David McNeill <dlm46007(at)cox.net> wrote:
>
>> Ditto, except that the mechanics can not work on your airplane.
>> unless your
>> are carrying a manual for continued airworthiness, most shops will
>> say that
>> since they do not have the manuals they will lend you the tools but
>> they can
>> not work on it. Had this happen at the premier FBO at Austin TX
>> airport.
>> Secondly a backup battery or a backup (vacuum pad driven) alternator
>> is a
>> must for IFR. And you are correct, the aircraft alternator is $350+
>> exchange. Lastly my tool box always weighs about 25 pounds which
>> contains
>> both many tools and critical spare parts, i.e. seviceable spark
>> plugs, extra
>> regulator, master contactor, start relay, fasteners, washers, tie
>> wraps etc.
>> ________________________________
>>
>
>
|
| | - The Matronics RV10-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List |
|
_________________
Kelly McMullen
A&P/IA, EAA Tech Counselor # 5286
KCHD |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dlm46007(at)cox.net
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 26, 2009 8:50 pm Post subject: Alternator failure and experimentals |
|
|
I think that in many cases we builders will find it hard to persuade an FBO
to work on our experimental for whatever reasons they so desire. A freelance
shade tree mechanic (A&P) will be more likely than an established FBO since
insurance, liability and regulations are less of a consideration or are
unspoken or unknown.
--
| | - The Matronics RV10-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
Get Email Distribution Too!
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
