Hi @Bathman may I piggyback your work?
I’m going for registration in Austria and have decided to go the SDMP route as well.
Managing the books shouldn’t be too big of a deal, but outlining this MP is (for me) at the start.
Can you share your successful MP with me? What did you present, what did you have to create yourself and are you managing this digitally or physically?
(I ask because some in the US have gone fully digital, which is allowed there now)
Thanks! Congrats!
Hello AF
If my maintenance company allow it then by all means. However we put it all on hold for the time being. I’ve not spoken to them for a few weeks and they had put it on hold for the time being to. But they are looking at producing a maintenance program for say all PA28, All C172 etc and the owner agrees to that or is told to sod off.
When I get time I’ll have another chat with them as I am hoping to influence the program that they come up with.
Bathman, the use our program or sod off attitude is not what this should be about, the things I look for on an aircraft are based on its usage, a private Cessna 152 that flys 45 hours a year and is parked in the open needs different maintenance emphasis to a Cessna 152 that lives in a warm hangar and flys 300+ hours a year.
If maintenance is going to be one size fits all then may be it is time to look for another maintenance provider.
More backwards progress.
My maintenance company has drawn up a program that their CAA inspector is happy with. Sadly I’m not as it involves an annual check every 100 hours. And all the stuff I won’t out 6 year prop overhaul, 500 hour mag overhaul (The bit I don’t want is both overhauling at the same time), engine TBO replacement are still in.
To me it looks like more maintenance not less. Has anybody has any luck at all with this.
Presumably nobody should expect turkeys to vote for xmas, so this is predictable from the (any) CAA.
However it could also be that your maint company has a “relationship” with the CAA which precludes them pushing too hard for anything. Did they by any chance ever get busted? Remember the CAA “owns” their business (via licensing it) in the same way as the local police “own” anybody selling firearms 
Bathman wrote:
More backwards progress.My maintenance company has drawn up a program that their CAA inspector is happy with. Sadly I’m not as it involves an annual check every 100 hours. And all the stuff I won’t out 6 year prop overhaul, 500 hour mag overhaul (The bit I don’t want is both overhauling at the same time), engine TBO replacement are still in.
To me it looks like more maintenance not less. Has anybody has any luck at all with this.
There was a very good presentation on this at the PPL/IR annual meeting. I don’t have a copy and didn’t pay too much attention as it isn’t relevant for me, but I seem to recall the 100/hr annual is mandatory. On the other items I think it is up to you not the CAA what you declare so long as your maintenance organisation accepts that it keeps the plane airworthy.
That’s strange because historically on a G-reg you had a mandatory 150hr (not 100hr) service.
That service was practically an Annual and, for higher-hour owners and many syndicates, presented a major portion of the non-fuel operating costs of a G-reg. Accordingly, it was common for someone reaching the 150hr mark at say 10 months to either to the Annual then (effectively making the Annual 20% more expensive) or grounding the plane for a bit!
In the US you have a 100hr check which is almost an Annual but that is applicable only to planes used for paying passengers or used for training other people (not the owner). Some schools, upon reaching 100hrs, would limit that particular plane to self fly hire (not instruction) until the Annual.
AFAIK the 150hrs check is still the case for a G-reg, along with 6 year prop overhauls, etc. Can anyone confirm?
If the CAA is demanding an Annual at 100hrs for any custom maintenance programme, I can’t see many going for that! It has no airworthiness substance, forcing every 50hr check to be a major service. They may as well demand that you get yourself a Prince Albert
The whole idea is that the CAA do not need to approve the SDMP it so why did your Maintenance company gave it to them. Its just an agreement between you and the maintenance company. Sounds like their not aware of the SDMP requirements . No NAA/CAA involved…
maybe write your own SDMP
http://publicapps.caa.co.uk/modalapplication.aspx?appid=11&mode=detail&id=7578
https://www.caa.co.uk/WorkArea/DownloadAsset.aspx?id=4294983466
I was speaking to somebody from the CAA general Aviation unit a few weeks back and he said. If we have any queries on anything GA related give them a call or an email and they will do their best to answer.
General Aviation Unit
Civil Aviation Authority
Aviation House, 2E
Gatwick Airport South
West Sussex
RH6 0YR
Email: [email protected]
Tel: +44 (0) 12 9357 3988
Peter wrote:
Some schools, upon reaching 100hrs, would limit that particular plane to self fly hire (not instruction) until the Annual.
I’m not sure that’s right Peter, although I’ve flown planes past 100Hr point myself on that basis. In reality renting is a commercial operation and subject to 100Hr checks, which somehow are completed swiftly and economically in the US, unlike the gold plated 100Hr £5k EASA annual that we are being stiffed foisted with under MIPS.
“The whole idea is that the CAA do not need to approve the SDMP it so why did your Maintenance company gave it to them”
The maintenance company get audit by the CAA hence this is how it came to pass
Yes Peter they have.
