Ah, fuel leaks….. reminds me of a C182 I flew around Namibia a few years ago. It had a – known – small fuel leak on the right wing root. A little bit dripping out…. no big deal, until we were about to leave Epupa Falls. A group of tourists arrived, waiting for their transfer airplane. While I did my preflight, some of them sheltered under the right wing – and then one lit a cigarette. She was told to get back out into the sun PDQ!
CFI is not honorary – it is an appointed individual on the CAA approval for the club/school.
As with most things in life there is a balance which has to be got right. Aircraft maintenance and defects should not be neglected, but deferred defects are quite normal and proper otherwise you will go out of business within weeks. Anyone looking at the tech log of the average airliner would realise that. You get students and renters at both ends of the spectrum – those that would get airborne with a wheel missing if you let them, and those that panic and moan about every insignificant fault that can be quite safely and properly deferred to the next Maint.
What about aircraft that are clearly airworthy (in the general meaning of the word), like say a relatively new Cirrus, but with a faulty fuel gauge (not uncommon on this mark)….even with fuel totalizer and visual inspection of tanks….is it airworthy? At least one examiner I know of would so no and refuse the flight (correctly, I would say) on the basis that fuel indication is mandatory
Right he is. Legally speaking, it is clearly not airworthy.
Airliners and large aircraft carry fuel tank indication defects routinely.
CFI is not honorary – it is an appointed individual on the CAA approval for the club/school.
For the non-UK people here (who maybe already know?), it is probably worth pointing out that CFI stands for Chief Flying Instructor as opposed to the US Certificated Flying Instructor
CFI is not honorary – it is an appointed individual on the CAA approval for the club/school.
OK – I mis-used “honorary” but it is a self-appointed title. If I started a flying school, or happened to be an instructor who put in the money to start it, I would just call myself the CFI, and that would go on the CAA forms.
If you have a totaliser and can visually check and quantify contents before departure, then perfectly good to go.
Is that actually true even if the POH describes the fuel gauges and how they should be used? In the absence of an MEL, is the aircraft airworthy without working fuel gauges? I don’t know the answer.
Taking a more risky scenario (no way to visually check oil pressure) what if the oil pressure gauge is faulty. If that isn’t an airworthiness issue I don’t know what is.
For example I do know that under FAA regs if a door is missing then you can’t fly (unless the type is certified – via a TC or STC – for flight without a door) even though it is self evidently possible to fly, and even though the door is not listed in any mandatory-airwothiness list any more than fuel gauges or the oil pressure gauge are not listed.
I am pretty sure all flying schools in the UK require a signature in the tech log confirming A check,
There is no legal requirement for any such thing. However, there was an ANO requirement for a post flight signature for Defects including a Nil Entry if there were none. But now we are all under EASA rules whatever they may be.
CFI is not honorary – it is an appointed individual on the CAA approval for the club/school.
And in the EASA World there is no requirement for a CFI in a PPL training organisation, only a Head of Training.
Taking a more risky scenario (no way to visually check oil pressure) what if the oil pressure gauge is faulty. If that isn’t an airworthiness issue I don’t know what is.
What if the oil pressure gauge acts up when cold but is fine in the air….and the maintenance organization “knows about it” and it’s on their list of things to fix at some point….som people think that is tacit approval to fly…even through it is clearly an airworthiness defect….another Minnesota product
In the absence of an MEL, is the aircraft airworthy without working fuel gauges?
Have you ever seen a working fuel gauge in a spamcan? I know we are discussing legalities here, but the fuel gauges are at the very bottom of my concerns when preflighting an aircraft.
For example I do know that under FAA regs if a door is missing then you can’t fly (unless the type is certified – via a TC or STC – for flight without a door)
Have you got a reference for that? I’ve flown (not normally as pilot) with the doors off so often, that this must either be not common knowledge and/or Cessnas are approved for this type of ops. I cannot find anything in the POH I have to hand.
