TBO and aerobatic airplanes

A friend of mine who has a Sukhoi aerobatic aircraft has just had is annual done, part of the TC requirements was every 6 years the wings have to be taken of and xray,d.
His CAMO under the MIP programme has deferred this check.

trevor_s wrote:

A friend of mine who has a Sukhoi aerobatic aircraft has just had is annual done, part of the TC requirements was every 6 years the wings have to be taken of and xray,d.
His CAMO under the MIP programme has deferred this check.

Deferred as it wasn’t due, extension (10%) or won’t be carried out at all?

If not carried out at all, I would wonder if this is legal, as it is part of type certificate limitations. From EU 2015/1088

3. The aircraft maintenance programme shall include all the mandatory continuing airworthiness requirements, such as repetitive Airworthiness Directives, the Airworthiness Limitation Section (ALS) of the Instructions for Continued Airworthiness (ICA) or specific maintenance requirements contained in
the Type Certificate Data Sheet (TCDS). In addition, the aircraft maintenance programme shall identify any additional maintenance tasks to be performed because of the specific aircraft type, aircraft configuration and type and specificity of operation

The MIP gives more freedom, yet quite some task are still required to be carried out.

It seems various CAA,s are interrupting the rules differently mainly due to language differences.
I had an email from a chap in Hungary who tells me that the Hungarian CAA interrupted the rules differently and are saying that any owners who want to self declared their own maintenance programme. Have to get this programme approved by the Hungarian CAA first.

The UK CAA have a new website.
So things have moved about a bit..
http://www.caa.co.uk/General-aviation/Aircraft-ownership-and-maintenance/Minimum-Inspection-Programme

MIP
What are the main changes?

Owners can self-declare their aircraft maintenance programme which can either be the MIP template or manufacturer’s recommendations. Annual inspection and issue of the Airworthiness Review Certificate (ARC) can be done at the same time by the Part M subpart F or Part 145 approved maintenance organisation, as long as the same authorised engineer certifying the inspection also carries out the airworthiness review An annual review of the maintenance programme will be carried out and recorded by the Part M Subpart F, G or Part 145 organisation or authorised engineer (if part of a Part M Subpart F, G or Part 145 organisation) at the same time as the airworthiness review is carried out. Part M Subpart F and Part 145 organisations can apply for additional new privileges to carry out airworthiness reviews and issue Airworthiness Review Certificates (new EASA Form 15c) for aircraft within the scope of their approval, for which they have carried out the annual inspection. Part M Subpart F and Part 145 organisations that apply for additional privileges will have to amend their expositions to include procedures for performing the airworthiness review, annual review and airworthiness review staff qualification. For Part M subpart G organisations will need an additional process for performing the airworthiness review.

Seems Amendement 11 has been “repealed”. What is the staus of TBO extension under Part-M now?

Gary

GaryStorm wrote:

Seems Amendement 11 has been “repealed”. What is the staus of TBO extension under Part-M now?

What is amendement 11? And to what?

Ref TBO,s see this document for EASA issued in March..
So should be able to design your own maintenance schedule under the MIP minimum inspection programme and therefore define our own TBO,s along the line of on condition.

The content of the owner-declared maintenance programme cannot be challenged up-front
either by the competent authority, the contracted CAMO/CAO, or the contracted maintenance
organisation.

https://www.easa.europa.eu/system/files/dfu/CRD%20to%20NPA%202015-08.pdf

Airborne,
Post #4 references Amendement 10 and 11.

This refers to Guidance material for Part-M.

Amendement 11 had a scheme for TBO extension, but since amendement 11 is now cancelled, I am confused how to do an TBO extension under Part-M as opposed to old national regulations.

This is an ELA2 aircraft, so MIP is not helpful. It is also under CAMO, and CAMO suggests sticking to the old regs which means pulling three jugs to look inside the otherwise perfectly good engine (10 years). This is IMHO waste of time and money, and is likely to introduce new maintenance induced problems.

G