Menu Sign In Contact FAQ
Banner
Welcome to our forums

Aircraft grounded by local CAA for expired Transponder / Pitot - Static bi-annual checks

Btw Peter, New York IFO no longer covers Europe….only Canada…. The Dallas/Ft Worth IFO has taken over for Europe…

http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/field_offices/ifo/dfw_ifo/

Last Edited by AnthonyQ at 24 Jun 20:03
YPJT, United Arab Emirates

The thing that I don’t understand is how they found that pitot checks were not done, after all we do not carry the aircraft’s maintenance logs with us.

Ben wrote:

thing that I don’t understand is how they found that pitot checks were not done, after all we do not carry the aircraft’s maintenance logs with us.

I think it’s good practice to carry a photocopy of the latest annual inspection plus the transponder and altimeter checks in the aircraft documents…along with certs gut things like O2 cylinder etc….

YPJT, United Arab Emirates

Good questions… clearly they were looking very closely for “something”.

It’s an extra good Q because you are not required to carry your maintenance records in the aircraft. I don’t.

Can an ICAO Contracting State ground an aircraft and demand proof of maintenance? I know they can because the UK CAA has famously grounded some Thai 747 which then sat at EGLL for years. But that plane was visibly dodgy.

This makes me think the Egypt incident might have been preceeded by some issue with the transponder Mode C return. That’s a really tricky situation because they are absolutely entitled to not let you fly in any airspace which requires Mode C (which in Egypt might be what??) and if you field-swap the transponder then you need another static system check which needs a FAA 145 company… (is that true if the transponder doesn’t contain the altitude encoder?)

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

Peter wrote:

The other thing is that if you have not had the FAA check done, and this is discovered in Egypt, your plane is not legal to fly, so what are your options? Is there an FAA 145 company in Egypt? You are grounded anyway. They can’t possibly let you fly out of there.

Other than getting the necessary people and tools there (and whatever is needed paperwork wise), you could try to negotiate a permit to move it somewhere more suitable.

Peter wrote:

if you field-swap the transponder then you need another static system check which needs a FAA 145 company… (is that true if the transponder doesn’t contain the altitude encoder?

A static check may be performed by an A&P. However, a static check is not normally required if the transponder is replaced, it is only required if you open up a static line. An altitude correspondence check between the altimeter and the encoder is not required unless the maintenance could have affected the encoder correspondence. In most cases, replacing the transponder does not trigger the correspondence check being needed.

In the US, log books are not part of a ramp check. The one performing the ramp check may request the logbooks, but they don’t need to be provided immediately. Usually a future date that is mutually acceptable and reasonable is used to provide these documents. The ramp check person may not enter the aircraft without the permission of the pilot and pilot’s are advised not to grant permission.Only certain records need to be produced and not the entire maintenance history.

KUZA, United States

In the US, there are provisions for allowing an aircraft that has a malfunctioning mode C or transponder to continue the flight to a place where repairs can be made. Also a request can be made to ATC to fly in transponder mode C required areas on a one off basis. This is almost always granted, particularly if the flight is to a place where maintenance can be performed. There would be no way for a ramp inspection to determine if the 91.413 transponder check had been accomplished within the prescribed period.

KUZA, United States

Peter wrote:

This makes me think the Egypt incident might have been preceeded by some issue with the transponder Mode C return. That’s a really tricky situation because they are absolutely entitled to not let you fly in any airspace which requires Mode C (which in Egypt might be what??) and if you field-swap the transponder then you need another static system check which needs a FAA 145 company… (is that true if the transponder doesn’t contain the altitude encoder?)

No doubt, SOMETHING alerted the National Authorities as is usual the case. Unfortunately, I don’t have the details fro the Egyptian Piper.

FAA A&P/IA
LFPN

NCYankee wrote:

In the US, there are provisions for allowing an aircraft that has a malfunctioning mode C or transponder to continue the flight to a place where repairs can be made. Also a request can be made to ATC to fly in transponder mode C required areas on a one off basis. This is almost always granted, particularly if the flight is to a place where maintenance can be performed. There would be no way for a ramp inspection to determine if the 91.413 transponder check had been accomplished within the prescribed period.

Sure, pilot’s rights, etc., etc.

So I ask you then : WHEN or HOW could you get called out on an out-of-date 91.411 and/or 91.413 (besides a post incident investigation) ?

FAA A&P/IA
LFPN

NCYankee wrote:

A static check may be performed by an A&P. However, a static check is not normally required if the transponder is replaced, it is only required if you open up a static line. An altitude correspondence check between the altimeter and the encoder is not required unless the maintenance could have affected the encoder correspondence. In most cases, replacing the transponder does not trigger the correspondence check being needed.

A “static check” is NOT a FAR 91.411 Altimeter system and altitude reporting equipment tests and inspection.

As a certified FAA A&P, I can certainly determine if the Static system does not leak , I have NO authority to perform a FAR 91.411 bi-annual test.

A static leak test performed by an A&P is just about useless if you don’t have a current 91.411 …

.
§ 91.411 Altimeter system and altitude reporting equipment tests and inspections.

(a) No person may operate an airplane, or helicopter, in controlled airspace under IFR unless—
(1) Within the preceding 24 calendar months, each static pressure system, each altimeter instrument, and each automatic pressure altitude reporting system has been tested and inspected and found to comply with appendices E and F ofpart 43 of this chapter;
(2) Except for the use of system drain and alternate static pressure valves, following any opening and closing of the static pressure system, that system has been tested and inspected and found to comply with paragraph (a), appendix E, ofpart 43 of this chapter; and
(3) Following installation or maintenance on the automatic pressure altitude reporting system of the ATC transponder where data correspondence error could be introduced, the integrated system has been tested, inspected, and found to comply with paragraph (c), appendix E, ofpart 43 of this chapter.
(b) The tests required by paragraph (a) of this section must be conducted by—
(1) The manufacturer of the airplane, or helicopter, on which the tests and inspections are to be performed;
(2) A certificated repair station properly equipped to perform those functions and holding—
(i) An instrument rating, Class I;
(ii) A limited instrument rating appropriate to the make and model of appliance to be tested;
(iii) A limited rating appropriate to the test to be performed;
(iv) An airframe rating appropriate to the airplane, or helicopter, to be tested; or
(3) A certificated mechanic with an airframe rating (static pressure system tests and inspections only).
(c) Altimeter and altitude reporting equipment approved under Technical Standard Orders are considered to be tested and inspected as of the date of their manufacture.
(d) No person may operate an airplane, or helicopter, in controlled airspace under IFR at an altitude above the maximum altitude at which all altimeters and the automatic altitude reporting system of that airplane, or helicopter, have been tested.

Last Edited by Michael at 26 Jun 08:45
FAA A&P/IA
LFPN
Sign in to add your message

Back to Top