Menu Sign In Contact FAQ
Banner
Welcome to our forums

Where is your plane registered recommendation? (EASA)

@mmgreve
Maintenance is EU law and even more since Part-ML effective 24.03.2020 no national variations to tbo/prop etc… are allowed. Private, non-commercial ops either via a CAMO/CAO or owner declared maintenance program you can basically do what you want except for ADs which are mandatory.

Thanks for all the replies so far, looking forward for more experiences.

always learning
LO__, Austria

so far all countries I know treat running “on condition” differently. Danish CAA where my Cherokee is registered allows for unlimited calendar ,provided the internals of the engine are inspected every 5 year for corrosion and also unlimited hours for private ops. In Estonia some idiot has written that you can run over calendar, but no major repairs are allowed, (for example changing of cylinder). We are trying to get a maintenance program approved that would allow for unlimited calendar time based on Lycoming SI1009 , we’ll see how it goes..

DK rules, google translate + original AIC_B_16_2012_2_pdf

Especially for smaller aircraft:
1. For aircraft maintained following an approved maintenance program based on 50 and 100/200 flight hours, the 100/200 hour inspection shall be performed within 1 year after the last documented 100/200 flight inspection (annual check).
2.1 A piston engine, with the exception of 450 kW hub and diesel engines, may remain in service beyond the number of flight hours and / or years recommended by the design holder if a Part 66 Certified Technician or an authorized workshop in connection with A 100 hour / year inspection finds that the engine’s performance and oil consumption are within the limits set by the design holder.
3.1.1 Except for propellers and hoses containing flammable liquids, engine components for which the design holder has a recommended calendar time limit for overhaul may remain in operation beyond the calendar time.
4.1.2 The same applies to engine components with flight time limit, if the designers’ recommended inspection requirements are met. This means the following components that are certified with the engine: Carburettor, starter, magnets, fuel system and turbocharger.
5. For the first time, the engine has been in service 10 years since new manufacturing, overhaul or total separation, a Part 66 Certified Technician or Workshop, regardless of engine flight time, must separate the engine or disassemble cylinders or covers to the extent that check all knots on the camshaft or camshafts, the surface of all cam followers, and inspect for corrosion and abnormal wear on the engine. Cylinders that are not disassembled must be inspected for corrosion and general condition using boroskop or similar equipment. The process must then be repeated at intervals of not more than 5 years.

Last Edited by ivark at 26 May 13:45
EETU, Estonia

Why not just go SDMP to avoid all this, and come up with your own pragmatic approach?

EIMH, Ireland

@snoopy

Maintenance is EU law and even more since Part-ML effective 24.03.2020 no national variations to tbo/prop etc… are allowed. Private, non-commercial ops either via a CAMO/CAO or owner declared maintenance program you can basically do what you want except for ADs which are mandatory.

Sorry, but do you have a reference for this? My understanding was that Germany is one of the few countries that allow you to run the prop on condition and the link from Ivark suggest that the Danes specifically exempt propellers and hoses from any extension.

Last Edited by mmgreve at 26 May 13:52
EGTR

Snoopy wrote:

Private, non-commercial ops either via a CAMO/CAO or owner declared maintenance program you can basically do what you want except for ADs which are mandatory.

Not if you’re on CAMO/CAO as you have to do what the CAMO/CAO wants and that depends on what the CAA wants.

Under the old part-M it was possible to employ a CAMO and still have an owner-declared maintenance programme. That possibility is gone with part-ML. (Actually this is the only thing in part-ML I’ve seen which is more restrictive than in the old part-M, but I think it has very limited practical importance.)

ESKC (Uppsala/Sundbro), Sweden

mmgreve wrote:

What about the prop? Is that the same thing?

As far as I understand, the prop can’t be used on condition [on SE-reg] as long as the aircraft is on an approved maintenance programme.

Last Edited by Airborne_Again at 26 May 14:11
ESKC (Uppsala/Sundbro), Sweden

I think for “running on condition” there are variation for different countries with something to do with maintenance of school aircrafts, for hire/reward or public transport as well as non-EASA aircraft maintenance types…

I think now if you are under part-NCO & CAMO/SDMP maintenance rules are crystal clear, especially if you are writing them?

Paris/Essex, France/UK, United Kingdom

Bear in mind, and as per many reports, most maintenance companies refuse to work on a plane which is on an SDMP.

Business politics always win.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

Peter wrote:

most maintenance companies refuse to work on a plane which is on an SDMP.

Do you really have enough data to make that claim? For all of Europe?

ESKC (Uppsala/Sundbro), Sweden

Not a peer reviewed publication, double blind and with a control group getting a placebo, no

A lot of stuff I post is expurgated versions of stuff which the source could never post themselves due to the risk of getting kicked off the airport.

Airfield politics is inversely proportional to how much money is sloshing around.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom
Sign in to add your message

Back to Top