shorty01423
Does a Student Pilot Certificate qualify for preventative maintenance privileges? The FAA issues that Certificate under Part 61. Please let me know the answer. Thanks.
Does a Student Pilot Certificate qualify for preventative maintenance privileges? The FAA issues that Certificate under Part 61. Please let me know the answer. Thanks.
No, see 14 CFR 43.5 and 43.7. And let’s not forget 43.9 that says any work done must be entered in the the logs!
My interpretation of the reg is that replacing brake linings is NOT Preventative Maintenance. Changing the oil may be considered servicing rather than maintenance I suppose. It is interesting that it isn’t listed in Appendix A. Of course, neither is refueling.
A lot of Preventative Maintenance depends upon the LOCAL interpretation of the FAA. I’m an A&P/IA and a customer was REMOVING brake assemblies for a Cleveland brake STC. I wasn’t there when the FAA guy peeked into the hangar and cited the individual for performing work not authorized as a pilot without an A & P. So I had to present my case that since he was only REMOVING , not installing the brake assemblies, that he shouldn’t be cited. That cleared the issue but you have to be careful what you are doing. As far as electrical wiring repairs, I doubt that most FAA folks would consider that Preventative Maintenance. If you are installing LED’s in lieu of incandescent bulbs, you MAY need an STC and a 337. And I can’t tell you how many aircraft I have worked on where the owner added AUTOMOTIVE brake fluid , NOT -5606! I highly recommend that owners work closely with an A & P or IA to stay out of trouble, and stick to those tasks that they are qualified to do.
If you answered yes to any of these there may be some hope of saving a few bucks on aircraft owner maint.
The FAA does not own and is not responsible for YOUR aircraft. Who does the maintenance is very little importance compared to just getting the maintenance done and done proper. That’s why most experimental aircraft are so well maintained. (Largest fleet of aircraft are Van’s Aircraft Homebuilts).
{91.3 Responsibility and authority of the pilot in command.
(a) The pilot in command of an aircraft is directly responsible for, and is the final authority as to, the operation of that aircraft.}
Dirty Harry in Magnum Force played by Clint Eastwood: “A Man’s Got to Know His Limitations”.
No matter what your mechanical expertise, 50 year A&P/IA or fresh minted Private Pilot, read the manuals and service publications. Determine whether you understand and have the proper tools? We all start out Ignorant in life and seek out education and knowledge… The piece of paper on the wall or plastic card in your wallet just shows you’re a ‘Seeker’ for knowledge in the category stated on the document. Doesn’t mean you know it, just means you seek it.
{91.403 General.
(a) The owner or operator of an aircraft is primarily responsible for maintaining that aircraft in an airworthy condition, including compliance with part 39 of this chapter.}
Props to Blinken for managing to rephrase “Nothing to see here!!!”
Can we pause for a moment to marvel at the irony of a Chinese “export” having U.S. made anything on it??
Next time be more careful, Mr. Jinping…
Chinese spies posing as tourists trying to get access to our bases are caught with surveillance equipment (i.e. as in drone), can leave sensors behind, as well, so says retired general Dave Deptula. Just do a search, folks. To bad actors, signs of weakness, are opportunities of encouragement.
https://nypost.com/2023/06/02/suspected-chinese-spies-tried-to-enter-alaskan-bases-report/
“Much . . . was made in the good old U.S.A”
Perhaps help with that USA/China balance of trade thing?
The US military has always had difficulty identifying off the shelf hardware that might serve their purposes.
Where did the Chinese even find any US made sensors? Whenever I’m looking online for electronic tschotschkes they all seem to be made in China.
Rubbing our face in it by using US equipment was their way of insulting us because they know their boy in the Oval Office.
Is he really their boy?
May be not and I dont think so.
But a facilitator that doesn’t see the dangers that the facilities can cause to the occident, may be.
“…Chinese-made sensors and cameras collected a trove of data but it appears none of it was sent back to China.”
Then just when, where and how did they expect to retrieve that recorded data if not transmitted? Doesn’t seem to be a great Plan A.
And another gigantic hoo-ha fades into history, carrying with it vast stores of the unlikely and largely fact-free speculations that masqueraded as “news” day after day.
I’m gonna go out on a limb and say they probably meant to say “US gear” that was made in Taiwan…
I am going to speculate that it was a negotiated joint press release. Anything is possible, except the truth, that results from “negotiations”. The goal was to make each side “look good”. Saving Face?