who can 'ground' an aircraft?

[Guest pokey]

A former employer had the Fed’s show up and yanked all of the airworthiness certificates out of the machines for illegal operations. This action didn’t stop the HMFIC. He just showed up the next day, fired the machine up and went to work……

if the FAA yanks it,, its serious,, if some bug ate it?,,, just apply for a new one

[Guest pokey]

fter an annual inspection, the IA can approve the aircraft for return to service, but its not returned to service except by a pilot flying it.

 

.

 

HA HA ! ! are you F'n serious??!! OMG !!! no wonder i don't bother reading your posts

[Guest pokey]

. After an annual inspection, the IA can approve the aircraft for return to service, but its not returned to service except by a pilot flying it.

 

.

 

 

do you know how many annual inspections i have seen in log books that are followed by a pilot's signature returning the aircraft to service? NONE !!! OMG ! ! all of my annuals have been illegal & all the logbooks i have seen over the years too !! OH MY !!! lions, & tigers & bears OH MY ! !

(Toto? i don't think we are in Kansas anymore)

[avbug]

 

§ 65.85 Airframe rating; additional privileges.

(a) Except as provided in paragraph ( of this section, a certificated mechanic with an airframe rating may approve and return to service

 

 

You really are dense. Not just argumentative, but really, really dense. You really don't get it, do you?

 

The holder of an airframe rating on a mechanic certificate can approve for return to service, and may return to service items under the scope of that rating. A flap motor, for example. The holder of an airframe rating may install or remove a flap motor, sign it off, and test the motor, thus returning it to service. What he can't do is return an aircraft to service. An airframe or appliance, yes. An aircraft, no. You understand the difference between operating a flap motor and flying an aircraft, don't you?

 

do you know how many annual inspections i have seen in log books that are followed by a pilot's signature returning the aircraft to service? NONE !!! OMG ! ! all of my annuals have been illegal & all the logbooks i have seen over the years too !! OH MY !!! lions, & tigers & bears OH MY ! !

 

Perhaps we should continue this conversation until after you're older than 14. Would that be better for you? I can use small words, if you like. You don't seem to be grasping most of them.

 

A signature by a pilot isn't required for most operations. For certain ones, it is. Removal and replacement of the leading edge on a Learjet 25, for example, requires a test flight and re-certification at the hands of a factory test pilot, per the manufacturers approved maintenance instructions. You won't find that requirement in Part 43, not for a pilot to sign off a record, but you won't find anywhere in Part 43 that authorizes a mechanic to return an aircraft to service, either. You'll find places the mechanic can approve it for return to service.

 

An approval is not a return to service. It's an authorization for an aircraft to return to service. It's an authorization for someone who has the legal capability of returning that aircraft to service, and that requires a pilot certificate, to fly the aircraft.

 

no wonder i don't bother reading your posts

 

Not only do you read them, but you created this thread just to read them, as you've already stated for the record. Therefore, you lie.

 

You created this thread with the intent specifically of baiting me and making fun of my responses. You're doing a pathetic job so far, too.

 

43.9 does not?

The signature constitutes the approval for return to service only for the work performed.

 

No, 43.9 does not. Notice that you quoted the regulation stating that the signature constitutes approval for return to service. The signature does NOT return the work to service. It's an approval. Not a return.

Follow carefully.

Approval.

Return.

Two different things.

Can you count them? Lets count them: Approval (one!) and return to service (two!).

An approval to return to service is not returning an item to service. It's approving the item for return to service. Something other than that signature is actually returning it to service, and that's operating the aircraft.

I find it very difficult to believe you have remotely the experience you claim, but I have a very easy time, based on the extreme lack of understanding and knowledge you've displayed, believing that you've lied, and that you're a fraud.

You can cut and paste the regulation but you surely don't understand it (and apparently aren't very good at reading it, either).

A former employer had the Fed’s show up and yanked all of the airworthiness certificates out of the machines for illegal operations. This action didn’t stop the HMFIC. He just showed up the next day, fired the machine up and went to work……

 

The HMFIC then operated a grounded aircraft that lacked an airworthiness certificate. It was grounded none the less.

[Felix Matt]

The maintainer who finds a downing discrepancy, the maintenance contoller who has too many Maintenance Actions on one aircraft or a discrepancy in the mainenance documentation, the QA rep or CDI for finding shoddy work, Maintenance Admin who finds the wrong part installed on an A/C. Long story short, almost anyone involved in the maintenance and flying process.

 

The Maintainer has too many Maintenance actions. Aircraft Maintenance can further be simplified by simple steps and the job get more easier. Aircraft Maintenance companies have specified action plan to be things in control.

[Felix Matt]

The maintainer who finds a downing discrepancy, the maintenance contoller who has too many Maintenance Actions on one aircraft or a discrepancy in the mainenance documentation, the QA rep or CDI for finding shoddy work, Maintenance Admin who finds the wrong part installed on an A/C. Long story short, almost anyone involved in the maintenance and flying process.

 

The Maintainer has too many Maintenance actions. Aircraft Maintenance can further be simplified by simple steps and the job get more easier. Aircraft Maintenance companies have specified action plan to be things in control.

[PhrogGuy]

The Maintainer has too many Maintenance actions. Aircraft Maintenance can further be simplified by simple steps and the job get more easier. Aircraft Maintenance companies have specified action plan to be things in control.

I am referring to Marine Corps Aviation in which the Maintenance Control Shop (not the maintainers) have too many unscheduled maintenance actions (not scheduled inspections). Once that limit is exceeded, the aircraft in a down status until the Maintenance Action count returns below a certain level. This applies across disciplines (Airframes, Avionics, Flight Equipment, and Flight Line Mechanics) The plan is simple, work off the discrepancies.

[rotormatic1]

For part 91 operations, the term “grounding an aircraft” is an industry term that is not supported by the regulations.

 

The way the system is set up, a pilot can not operate an aircraft with a deficiency.

 

The deficiency needs to be corrected before the aircraft can be flown. If you fly the aircraft with a deficiency, you violate the FAR’s and may be subject to an enforcement investigation.

 

Even if the FAA sees a gear door broken on the ramp, they can’t ground the aircraft operated under part 91. They are suppose to issue a condition notice, which informs the pilot of a deficiency, and establishes that further operation of the aircraft may be in violation of the FAR’s. See page 14 in the link below:

 

http://fsims.faa.gov/wdocs/8900.1/v06%20surveillance/chapter%2001/06_001_004.pdf

 

Airworthiness Directives do not contain the term “ground” the aircraft. They require a specific action before the aircraft can be operated. Even the 787 AD is structured this way. It states:

 

"Before further flight, modify the battery system, or take other actions, in accordance with a method approved by the Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA."

 

Part 135 and part 121 is a different matter. Aircraft used under these operations can be grounded by the FAA, as noted in this attachment:

 

http://fsims.faa.gov/wdocs/8900.1/v08%20tech%20functions/chapter%2005/08_005_012.htm

 

Note the FAA can’t ground an aircraft for a technical non conformity (like the airworthiness certificate is missing):

 

“Issuance of Grounding Notice. An inspector must be able to substantiate a grounding action with factual justification of an unsafe condition. The grounding notice must not be issued unless it is clear to the inspector that, if operated in this condition, the aircraft would be subject to the probable danger of accident and likely to cause injury/damage to persons or property”.

 

So to answer the question that started this string, “Who can ground an aircraft?”

 

The FAA under certain conditions, limited to part 121 and 135 operations, as defined in FAA order 8900.1

Edited April 21, 2013 by rotormatic1

[rotormatic1]

Here is the requirement for a pilot to perform a flight check after certain types of maintenance or alterations have been performed on an aircraft.

 

After the flight check, they are required make an entry into the aircraft maintenance records.

 

Note the mechanic is required to return the aircraft to service before the pilot operates the aircraft.

 

Personnel allowed to occupy the aircraft before the flight check is limited to the pilot and required crewmembers. After the flight check, you can carry passengers. This does not have anything to do with returning the aircraft to service….

 

 

§ 91.407 Operation after maintenance, preventive maintenance, rebuilding, or alteration.

 

(a) No person may operate any aircraft that has undergone maintenance, preventive maintenance, rebuilding, or alteration unless—

 

(1) It has been approved for return to service by a person authorized under § 43.7 of this chapter; and

 

(2) The maintenance record entry required by § 43.9 or § 43.11, as applicable, of this chapter has been made.

 

( No person may carry any person (other than crewmembers) in an aircraft that has been maintained, rebuilt, or altered in a manner that may have appreciably changed its flight characteristics or substantially affected its operation in flight until an appropriately rated pilot with at least a private pilot certificate flies the aircraft, makes an operational check of the maintenance performed or alteration made, and logs the flight in the aircraft records.

 

© The aircraft does not have to be flown as required by paragraph ( of this section if, prior to flight, ground tests, inspection, or both show conclusively that the maintenance, preventive maintenance, rebuilding, or alteration has not appreciably changed the flight characteristics or substantially affected the flight operation of the aircraft.

 

Note that pilots can only return an aircraft to service after they have performed “preventive maintenance”:

 

 

§ 43.7 Persons authorized to approve aircraft, airframes, aircraft engines, propellers, appliances, or component parts for return to service after maintenance, preventive maintenance, rebuilding, or alteration.

 

(a) Except as provided in this section and § 43.17, no person, other than the Administrator, may approve an aircraft, airframe, aircraft engine, propeller, appliance, or component part for return to service after it has undergone maintenance, preventive maintenance, rebuilding, or alteration.

 

( The holder of a mechanic certificate or an inspection authorization may approve an aircraft, airframe, aircraft engine, propeller, appliance, or component part for return to service as provided in Part 65 of this chapter.

 

© The holder of a repair station certificate may approve an aircraft, airframe, aircraft engine, propeller, appliance, or component part for return to service as provided in Part 145 of this chapter.

 

(d) A manufacturer may approve for return to service any aircraft, airframe, aircraft engine, propeller, appliance, or component part which that manufacturer has worked on under § 43.3(j). However, except for minor alterations, the work must have been done in accordance with technical data approved by the Administrator.

 

(e) The holder of an air carrier operating certificate or an operating certificate issued under Part 121 or 135, may approve an aircraft, airframe, aircraft engine, propeller, appliance, or component part for return to service as provided in Part 121 or 135 of this chapter, as applicable.

 

(f) A person holding at least a private pilot certificate may approve an aircraft for return to service after performing preventive maintenance under the provisions of § 43.3(g).

 

(g) The holder of a repairman certificate (light-sport aircraft) with a maintenance rating may approve an aircraft issued a special airworthiness certificate in light-sport category for return to service, as provided in part 65 of this chapter.

 

(h) The holder of at least a sport pilot certificate may approve an aircraft owned or operated by that pilot and issued a special airworthiness certificate in the light-sport category for return to service after performing preventive maintenance under the provisions of § 43.3(g).

Edited April 21, 2013 by rotormatic1

[iChris]

Even if the FAA sees a gear door broken on the ramp, they can’t ground the aircraft operated under part 91. They are suppose to issue a condition notice, which informs the pilot of a deficiency, and establishes that further operation of the aircraft may be in violation of the FAR’s. See page 14 in the link below:

 

http://fsims.faa.gov/wdocs/8900.1/v06%20surveillance/chapter%2001/06_001_004.pdf

 

 

Part 135 and part 121 is a different matter. Aircraft used under these operations can be grounded by the FAA, as noted in this attachment:

 

http://fsims.faa.gov/wdocs/8900.1/v08%20tech%20functions/chapter%2005/08_005_012.htm

 

 

“Issuance of Grounding Notice. An inspector must be able to substantiate a grounding action with factual justification of an unsafe condition. The grounding notice must not be issued unless it is clear to the inspector that, if operated in this condition, the aircraft would be subject to the probable danger of accident and likely to cause injury/damage to persons or property”.

 

So to answer the question that started this string, “Who can ground an aircraft?”

 

The FAA under certain conditions, limited to part 121 and 135 operations, as defined in FAA order 8900.1

 

Why did you limit it to Part 121 &135

 

However, if an operations inspector finds an obviously unairworthy aircraft, it is the responsibility of the operations inspector to see that an Aircraft Condition Notice (FAA Form 8620-1) is issued. If accompanied by an airworthiness inspector, he or she may issue FAA. Form 8620-1.

 

However, an operations inspector may have to contact the nearest Flight Standards office to have an airworthiness inspector issue the notice.

 

Don’t limit it to Part 121 &135 and don't get hung-up on the word "Grounded"

 

FAR 1.1 Administrator - means the Federal Aviation Administrator or any person to whom he has delegated his authority in the matter concerned.

 

If you receive the following notice, can you legally fly that aircraft prior to correcting the deficiency or obtaining a Special Flight Permit?

 

 

Edited April 21, 2013 by iChris

[avbug]

Note the mechanic is required to return the aircraft to service before the pilot operates the aircraft.

 

Incorrect. The mechanic cannot return the aircraft to service before the pilot operates the aircraft.

 

The mechanic can (and must) approve the aircraft for return to service.

 

The pilot returns it to service.

 

This is an important distinction that many pilots don't understand. Apparently many mechanics, too.

[Counterrotate]

I have to agree with avbug on this. The mechanic cannot tell the pilot to get in and fly the aircraft. The pilot is the final authority on the airworthiness of that aircraft. The mechanic can say that the work was completed satisfactorily and the the aircraft is in an airworthy condition, but it is up to the pilot to ultimately make that decision of airworthiness and actually fly the aircraft.

[Guest pokey]

The mechanic cannot tell the pilot to get in and fly the aircraft. The pilot is the final authority on the airworthiness of that aircraft. The mechanic can say that the work was completed satisfactorily and the the aircraft is in an airworthy condition, but it is up to the pilot to ultimately make that decision of airworthiness and actually fly the aircraft.

 

§ 91.407 Operation after maintenance, preventive maintenance, rebuilding, or alteration.

(a) No person may operate any aircraft that has undergone maintenance, preventive maintenance, rebuilding, or alteration unless—

(1) It has been approved for return to service by a person authorized under § 43.7 of this chapter; and

(2) The maintenance record entry required by § 43.9 or § 43.11, as applicable, of this chapter has been made.

( No person may carry any person (other than crewmembers) in an aircraft that has been maintained, rebuilt, or altered in a manner that may have appreciably changed its flight characteristics or substantially affected its operation in flight until an appropriately rated pilot with at least a private pilot certificate flies the aircraft, makes an operational check of the maintenance performed or alteration made, and logs the flight in the aircraft records.

© The aircraft does not have to be flown as required by paragraph ( of this section if, prior to flight, ground tests, inspection, or both show conclusively that the maintenance, preventive maintenance, rebuilding, or alteration has not appreciably changed the flight characteristics or substantially affected the flight operation of the aircraft.

(Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control number 2120-0005)

 

 

 

spells it out pretty clearly, NO?

 

 

[Guest pokey]

The mechanic cannot tell the pilot to get in and fly the aircraft. The pilot is the final authority on the airworthiness of that aircraft. The mechanic can say that the work was completed satisfactorily and the the aircraft is in an airworthy condition, but it is up to the pilot to ultimately make that decision of airworthiness and actually fly the aircraft.

 

 

to further beat this dead horse:

 

§ 65.85 Airframe rating; additional privileges.

(a) Except as provided in paragraph ( of this section, a certificated mechanic with an airframe rating may approve and return to service an airframe, or any related part or appliance, after he has performed, supervised, or inspected its maintenance or alteration (excluding major repairs and major alterations). In addition, he may perform the 100-hour inspection required by part 91 of this chapter on an airframe, or any related part or appliance, and approve and return it to service.

( A certificated mechanic with an airframe rating can approve and return to service an airframe, or any related part or appliance, of an aircraft with a special airworthiness certificate in the light-sport category after performing and inspecting a major repair or major alteration for products that are not produced under an FAA approval provided the work was performed in accordance with instructions developed by the manufacturer or a person acceptable to the FAA.

[Doc. No. 1179, 27 FR 7973, Aug. 10, 1962, as amended by Amdt. 65-10, 32 FR 5770, Apr. 11, 1967; Amdt. 65-45, 69 FR 44879, July 27, 2004]

 

 

 

if the pilot refuses to believe the mechanic? well fine, yes ,, the pilot does have the final say as to if he/she wants to fly the aircraft. But remember- the mechanics signature has approved AND returned the said aircraft for return to service. Not a good way to get to 'know' the person that who is working on the aircraft you trust yours and your passengers/loved ones lives to. There is such a thing as the "mechanics creed"

 

 

[Guest pokey]

Upon my honor I swear that I shall hold in sacred trust the rights and privileges conferred upon me as a certified aircraft mechanic. Knowing full well that the safety and lives of others are dependent upon my skill and judgment. I shall never knowingly subject others to risks which I would not be willing to assume for myself, or those dear to me.

In discharging this trust, I pledge myself never to undertake work or approve work which I feel to be beyond the limits of my knowledge, nor shall I allow any non-certificated superior to persuade me to approve aircraft or equipment as airworthy against my better judgment, nor shall I permit my judgment to be influenced by money or other personal gain, nor shall I pass as airworthy, aircraft or equipment about which I am in doubt, either as a result of direct inspection or uncertainty regarding the ability of others who have worked on it to accomplish their work satisfactory.

I realize the grave responsibility which is mine as a certified airman, to exercise my judgment on the airworthiness of aircraft and equipment. I therefore, pledge unyielding adherence to these precepts for the advancement of aviation and for the dignity of my vocation.

[avbug]

(a) Except as provided in paragraph ( of this section, a certificated mechanic with an airframe rating may approve and return to service an airframe, or any related part or appliance, after he has performed, supervised, or inspected its maintenance or alteration (excluding major repairs and major alterations).

 

Good Lord you really are dense.

 

Nowhere in that regulation is a mechanic authorized to return an aircraft to service. An airframe, after doing work on the airframe (that doesn't require a flight test), yes. An appliance, yes. An aircraft, NO.

 

After performing a hundred hour inspection or work on an airframe, the holder of an airframe rating on a mechanic certificate CANNOT return the aircraft to service. He or she may only give permission for it to return to service (approval).

 

A PILOT MUST RETURN IT TO SERVICE.

 

Additionally, if the mechanic has done anything that affects the flight characteristics of the airframe, he or she may not return it to service, because a flight check is required for that.

 

the pilot does have the final say as to if he/she wants to fly the aircraft. But remember- the mechanics signature has approved AND returned the said aircraft for return to service.

 

This is untrue, and represents your gross misunderstanding of the regulation. The mechanics signature has not returned the aircraft to service, and a mechanic cannot return to service an aircraft. An airframe or part of an airframe that does not affect the flight characteristics of the aircraft, yes. An aircraft, no.

 

You speak like a 14 year old and apparently can't do more than cut and paste regulation that you don't understand.

 

You're not beating a dead horse. You're providing false information and making an ass of yourself. You understand this, don't you?

 

Not a good way to get to 'know' the person that who is working on the aircraft you trust yours and your passengers/loved ones lives to. There is such a thing as the "mechanics creed"

 

That's not the most idiotic thing I've ever read on the internet, but it's really close.

 

I hope anyone reading this knows better than to listen to "pokey," because this is dangerous, bad counsel he's giving.

 

Doubt everything that your mechanic does or tells you. Question everything. If he's unhappy or whines about a mythical "creed," find another mechanic. There is no such "creed." "Pokey" would tell you that you ought not question your mechanic or the work he's done, for fear of offending him. Bullshit.

 

Trust, but verify, and don't take anything for granted.

 

If someone like Pokey tries to tell you that you're risking something by offending your mechanic, by verifying airworthiness of your equipment, it's proof positive that Pokey is a fraud.

 

As for the "creed," it's something that was made up by Jerry Lederer and sold commercially, along with mechanic patches, plaques, and other such trinkets, on a now-defunct site. Try again.

[rotormatic1]

Don’t limit it to Part 121 &135 and don't get hung-up on the word "Grounded"...

 

The question at the beginning asked who can ground an aircraft. Not hung-up about it. The FAA can only issue a "grounding" order for aircraft operating under 121 and 135.

[rotormatic1]

The pilot returns it to service.

 

 

The pilot operates the aircraft after it has been approved for returned to service by the mechanic. This action of the aircraft resuming operations (return to service) has nothing to do with the approval process for return to service.

 

See:

 

http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/agc/pol_adjudication/agc200/interpretations/data/interps/2010/Forshey.pdf

[avbug]

To reiterate from the Forshey legal interpretation:

 

"It should be clear that nothing in Part 65, which prescribes certification requirements and operating rules for airmen other than pilots, authorizes the operation (return to service) of an aircraft by someone who does not hold a pilot certificate."

 

Is that plain enough for you, "pokey?"

 

How about, from the same interpretation:

 

"Because, as you observed, an aircraft is not in service until it is flown or operated, a mechanic, unless he or she is the holder of a pilot certificate, cannot legally "return the aircraft to service." Flying an aircraft is not a privilege bestowed by any regulation in Part 65."

 

Before you rabbit on about the legal interpetation; the Chief Legal Counsel speaks for the Administrator in these matters, and represents the defensible legal official interpretation of the regulation. Aside from the regulation there are three sources to which one can turn for an understanding: case law or precedent, Federal Register preambles, and Chief and Regional Legal Counsel letters of interpretation.

 

This action of the aircraft resuming operations (return to service) has nothing to do with the approval process for return to service.

 

That depends on the operation. It's always a follow-on to having received approval, insofar as the aircraft can't be operated without the approval. In certain cases, it's a necessary part of the approval; the aircraft can't be approved for return to service until having been test flown, at which point the final approval can be given, a pilot must sign the logbook, and the aircraft can then be returned to service when the aircraft is next flown.

Edited April 21, 2013 by avbug

[iChris]

The question at the beginning asked who can ground an aircraft. Not hung-up about it. The FAA can only issue a "grounding" order for aircraft operating under 121 and 135.

You're still hung-up on that term, "grounding"

 

The OPs question was not very specific and intentionally vague to trap you around the term "ground".

 

Again, If you receive the following notice (that can and has been issued under Part 91) can you legally fly that aircraft prior to correcting the deficiency or obtaining a Special Flight Permit?

 

If you can't legally fly the aircraft, call it what you will. In this case it's called an "Aircraft Condition Notice Form 8620-1 issued by the FAA.

 

 

Edited April 22, 2013 by iChris

[Mikemv]

To reiterate from the Forshey legal interpretation:

 

"It should be clear that nothing in Part 65, which prescribes certification requirements and operating rules for airmen other than pilots, authorizes the operation (return to service) of an aircraft by someone who does not hold a pilot certificate."

 

Is that plain enough for you, "pokey?"

 

How about, from the same interpretation:

 

"Because, as you observed, an aircraft is not in service until it is flown or operated, a mechanic, unless he or she is the holder of a pilot certificate, cannot legally "return the aircraft to service." Flying an aircraft is not a privilege bestowed by any regulation in Part 65."

 

Before you rabbit on about the legal interpetation; the Chief Legal Counsel speaks for the Administrator in these matters, and represents the defensible legal official interpretation of the regulation. Aside from the regulation there are three sources to which one can turn for an understanding: case law or precedent, Federal Register preambles, and Chief and Regional Legal Counsel letters of interpretation.

 

 

That depends on the operation. It's always a follow-on to having received approval, insofar as the aircraft can't be operated without the approval. In certain cases, it's a necessary part of the approval; the aircraft can't be approved for return to service until having been test flown, at which point the final approval can be given, a pilot must sign the logbook, and the aircraft can then be returned to service when the aircraft is next flown.

 

I have always satisfactorily completed a post maintenance flight for return to service and made the proper entry in the aircraft log books. I have been trained as a functional check pilot for various airframes but it is just common sense to know what maintenance was performed, preflight, run-up and complete systems checks, fly the aircraft and post flight. Then make the appropriate entry and feel good about what you strap yourself into or put passengers in!

 

In and around service centers, I have been asked to do this on customers aircraft so when they showed up, everything was in order. I would make the appropriate entry into their logs also.

[eagle5]

Beating a dead horse can ground a topic!