What's new
Van's Air Force

Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.

Condition Inspection in One Day

birddog486 said:
Walt, don't take this the wrong way, I'm genuinely curious about this. I assume this RV6 owner wasn't the builder therefore he has the A&P friend do the CI?

So did the owner ask you to do maintenance on this airplane or just the inspection? If just a condition inspection why would you have the plane for a month?

This reminds me of a Mike Bush webinar.

Travis
Click to expand...

Correct, owner is not the builder and he just wanted another set of eyes to have a look before his Alaska trip.

I've never had anyone bring me an airplane and ask for inspection only without intending to make the necessary repairs as a result of the inspection, personally I wouldn't accept a job like that. If the owner decided not to do the repairs then I would follow the procedures to do that and he could pick up the airplane.

Why a month, because that how long its going to take to fix everything :eek:
 
JonJay said:
That question has no answer. If your OPs limits state that the CI is to be performed within 12 months per xxxxxxx, that is what it is. The person signing off the CI takes responsibility for the aircraft being in airworthy condition. If you did the oil change a few weeks early, flew the airplane, then decided it didn't need to be changed at the CI, that is on you. If you deemed that was an acceptable time, so be it.
It's all good until it isn't.
Click to expand...

The oil change bit is interesting.

Say your CI came up and you only have 5 hrs since the last oil change. Lycoming only give procedures for 25/0/100/400 hr inspections, with no mention of annual (once ever year) items. I say that is OK and perfectly legal, inspect the other engine stuff and leave the oil alone.

The actual CI requirement that we sign off to is here -

https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/14/appendix-D_to_part_43

Note not much stuff to actually do on the engine.

(d) Each person performing an annual or 100-hour inspection shall inspect (where applicable) components of the engine and nacelle group as follows:

(1) Engine section - for visual evidence of excessive oil, fuel, or hydraulic leaks, and sources of such leaks.
(2) Studs and nuts - for improper torquing and obvious defects.
(3) Internal engine - for cylinder compression and for metal particles or foreign matter on screens and sump drain plugs. If there is weak cylinder compression, for improper internal condition and improper internal tolerances.
(4) Engine mount - for cracks, looseness of mounting, and looseness of engine to mount.
(5) Flexible vibration dampeners - for poor condition and deterioration.
(6) Engine controls - for defects, improper travel, and improper safetying.
(7) Lines, hoses, and clamps - for leaks, improper condition and looseness.
(8) Exhaust stacks - for cracks, defects, and improper attachment.
(9) Accessories - for apparent defects in security of mounting.
(10) All systems - for improper installation, poor general condition, defects, and insecure attachment.
(11) Cowling - for cracks, and defects.

That is what the FAA requires. :)
 
jbDC9 said:
Sloppy workmanship? Too lazy/cheap? Eh, sorry, I disagree.



Ha! Yep, that's kinda how I looked at 9GT's post...
Click to expand...

Its on the Condition check list,,,,it gets done, Period. Lazy and sloppy is no way to maintain an airplane.
 
Interesting thread. Everything from 4 hours to a couple of weeks. My experience is this. I'm just fishing up the 6th inspection on my 7A and I've done them all. The first couple took me about a week of 10 hour days. Of course there were very few squawks and nothing major because of the aircraft being new.... although I did find a few small easy fix things. With each one I've learned some things as well as better or quicker ways to do things. I'm currently 3 days into this inspection and without finding any significant maintenance issues it will be complete in about 6 more hours. I keep myself in check at all times with this thought. My grandchildren will be flying on this plane soon! :) My mindset for the first few inspections.... I was looking forward to it. Now it's more of an "Oh my God! Is it that time again???" I make sure I have plenty of ibuprofen handy before I begin!
 
9GT said:
Its on the Condition check list,,,,it gets done, Period. Lazy and sloppy is no way to maintain an airplane.
Click to expand...

How is not needlessly, wastefully repeating a task merely because it's on a checklist either lazy or sloppy? You went from "bad things could happen in 10 hours" as a reason to blindly following a checklist as a reason.

Another example...My tires need to be flipped due to wear. If I remove the tires 3 or 4 weeks prior to the date when I complete the CI, flip them, inspect them and the tubes, inspect and R/R the brakes and brake lines, and everything else associated with the gear, reassemble and test fly, you're saying I should do all of that *again* in what may be 10 hours of flight or less, just because?

I lube all of the rod end bearings regularly. Say I pull the access panels on the wings, lube and inspect all the control systems and wiring in the wings, check torques on bolts, etc etc., two weeks before the CI. Should I do all of that again, just because?

In heaven's name, *why*? You're making more work for yourself, with NO added benefit.
 
RV7A Flyer said:
In heaven's name, *why*? You're making more work for yourself, with NO added benefit.
Click to expand...

Let us not forget that we, as humans, are anything but immune to the Waddington Effect. More maintenance does not necessarily equate to a higher standard of airworthiness but rather it often equates to the opportunity for the introduction of more human-induced maintenance errors.
 
Appendix D to Part 43 - Scope and Detail of Items

RV7A Flyer said:
How is not needlessly, wastefully repeating a task merely because it's on a checklist either lazy or sloppy? You went from "bad things could happen in 10 hours" as a reason to blindly following a checklist as a reason.

Another example...My tires need to be flipped due to wear. If I remove the tires 3 or 4 weeks prior to the date when I complete the CI, flip them, inspect them and the tubes, inspect and R/R the brakes and brake lines, and everything else associated with the gear, reassemble and test fly, you're saying I should do all of that *again* in what may be 10 hours of flight or less, just because?

......
Click to expand...

Again, remember the FAA required statement you are signing the CI off to.

For the tire flip....

(e) Each person performing an annual or 100-hour inspection shall inspect (where applicable) the following components of the landing gear group:

(1) All units - for poor condition and insecurity of attachment.
(2) Shock absorbing devices - for improper oleo fluid level.
(3) Linkages, trusses, and members - for undue or excessive wear fatigue, and distortion.
(4) Retracting and locking mechanism - for improper operation.
(5) Hydraulic lines - for leakage.
(6) Electrical system - for chafing and improper operation of switches.
(7) Wheels - for cracks, defects, and condition of bearings.
(8) Tires - for wear and cuts.
(9) Brakes - for improper adjustment.
(10) Floats and skis - for insecure attachment and obvious or apparent defects.

Inspect them visually, no need to take them off again so soon...:)
 
9GT said:
Its on the Condition check list,,,,it gets done, Period. Lazy and sloppy is no way to maintain an airplane.
Click to expand...

In your not-so-humble opinion; no room for common sense, got it.

If you prefer to create more work for yourself, that's fine, have at it. But, as so eloquently stated in posts 52, 55 and 57 (az gila and RV7A Flyer), your method is technique, not required. For you to imply that those of us who use a CI checklist along with some common sense to be "Lazy and sloppy" is just silly.
 
az_gila said:
Again, remember the FAA required statement you are signing the CI off to.

For the tire flip....

(e) Each person performing an annual or 100-hour inspection shall inspect (where applicable) the following components of the landing gear group:

(1) All units - for poor condition and insecurity of attachment.
(2) Shock absorbing devices - for improper oleo fluid level.
(3) Linkages, trusses, and members - for undue or excessive wear fatigue, and distortion.
(4) Retracting and locking mechanism - for improper operation.
(5) Hydraulic lines - for leakage.
(6) Electrical system - for chafing and improper operation of switches.
(7) Wheels - for cracks, defects, and condition of bearings.
(8) Tires - for wear and cuts.
(9) Brakes - for improper adjustment.
(10) Floats and skis - for insecure attachment and obvious or apparent defects.

Inspect them visually, no need to take them off again so soon...:)
Click to expand...

My point was that I'm not going to go pulling wheel pants and fairings just to RE-inspect all the things I just inspected a couple of weeks prior to some imaginary "start date" for the annual CI (I visually check the tires every preflight :) ).

There seems to be some (mis-)understanding that one must do everything on the list all at one time or the CI sign-off is illegal or something. Reference the linked thread from a few years ago, a lot of more knowledgeable builders and owners have said that's not necessarily true, nor do I think it's grounded in common sense or good practice.
 
One sticking point. I see a lot of language in this thread about "airworthiness". One person says the individual signing off a CI is assuring the airworthiness of the aicraft. That's an inaccurate statement. About the only place the term airworthiness is found in an EAB aicraft is on the Special Airworthiness Certificate and passenger warning displayed in the cockpit.

The FAA limits the term "airworthiness" to type certificated aircraft and components. That's part of the reason for the passenger warning placard. You will notice in posts above Scott and other FAA licensed mechanic types are careful to avoid the terms "airworthy" and "airworthiness" and instead stick to the specific wording of the OLs with respect to inspection signoffs. If you see an entry in an RV logbook signing off a CI stating the aicrraft was found to be "airworthy" or in an "airworthy" condition it's a bad entry.

Jim
 
Last edited:
I too was witness to a Saint Aviation NASCAR pit crew style condition inspection. Very thorough with a well oiled professional crew. To be fair they had just finished a complete avionics installation with the airframe opened up for a month which gave them a good look at everything. And granted they are an RV specific shop so they knew what to do without many questions. I had asked the aicraft owner if the CI was current before we flew it home and discovered it was due. Jesse and his guys kicked things into high gear and completed the checklist in a matter of hours. It was impressive to watch and confidence boosting. There were a couple of SB items for recurring inspections and Jesse pointed out a couple of items to watch.

Point being, if you take a crew of 4 or 5 mechanics who build, modify and work on RV airframes every day and are a cohesive team, the required man hours are there while the chronological time can be short.

Jim
 
jliltd said:
If you see an entry in an RV logbook signing off a CI stating the aicraft was found to be "airworthy" or in an "airworthy" condition it's a bad entry.

Jim
Click to expand...

My OP Limits state the notation to be ? in condition for safe operation ?, which is how I word it. However, it also states ?or similar entry?.
 
9GT said:
Absolutely change the oil again after 10 hours AND cut that oil filter open and inspect that. A lot of bad things can happen in 10 hours and quality CI without an oil/filter change and inspection is sloppy workmanship. If your too lazy, or too cheap to shell out $100 for a oil & filter change,,,well that's on you.
Click to expand...

So you do oil changes every ten hours? Using that logic you should change it every flight, a lot of bad things can happen in seconds. We are not talking about a plane that flew 10 hrs in a year, were talking about an oil change that was done recently. If the oil hasn't been changed in six months that's one thing, but if your putting over a hundred hours a year on your plane, changing oil that was just changed a month ago is not sloppy, just practical. By the way, every oil change gets all screens pulled and the filter cut if not that's sloppy work.

Bob
 
n82rb said:
By the way, every oil change gets all screens pulled and the filter cut if not that's sloppy work.
Click to expand...

Since you are arguing wasted work vs safety value, an argument can be made that pulling the finger screen every oil change is also a waste of time, assuming the oil filter is opened and examined per Lycoming's recommendation.
If there is not small particles in the filter, larger particles in the finger screen are highly unlikely.....
 
rvbuilder2002 said:
Since you are arguing wasted work vs safety value, an argument can be made that pulling the finger screen every oil change is also a waste of time, assuming the oil filter is opened and examined per Lycoming's recommendation.
If there is not small particles in the filter, larger particles in the finger screen are highly unlikely.....
Click to expand...

but sb480f says you will.....yes i know sbs are not mandatory, but......

bob burns
 
bcam37 said:
For the last 9 years I've done my RV9A's condition inspection with the help of my local shop for the engine. But approaching 10 years, I thought it was time to have an RV expert look it over. Living in FL, I thought of Jessie Saint's operation in Dunnellon X35. I call and arranged to fly in. We allocated 2 days.

But with the help of Isaac, Phillip and Jessie we finished by 5:30pm the first day. This was a complete inspection including changing oil and filter and repacking the wheel bearings. My RV is pretty clean, but Jessie did find and replace a couple of bolts that were too short by a couple of threads (despite their holding well for the last 9 years).

It usually took me a week or more in the past and I had to do almost all of the work. The price was very reasonable and included a free lunch. My only regret was that I didn't think of this sooner.

If you looking for a reason to fly to FL, this might be a good one. I'll be back next year. Thanks guys.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the input. I will likely be in Florida next month, just a few miles from X-35, so that could be a great option if he's still operating. Do you have contact info for his shop?
 
Remember as part of a condition inspection (or annual for type certficated airframes) an inspection is required, but maintenance is not. In other words if you have 5 hours on an oil change there is no reason to change it at a condition inspection. However, there are certain things that are considered maintenance that have to be done as part of the inspection. Take wheel bearings as an example. While you do not have to re-pack them officially you do have to "inspect" the axle and bearings. You can't do a thorough inspection of the bearings without putting them in the parts washer first. So you will be packing the wheel bearings when you are done with the inspection as a matter of course. Also using Part 43 Appendix D for inspection items is a good idea. Just don't treat it as a bible. If you did everything it specifies you would be loosing and re-torquing engine bolts an studs and the propeller bolts/studs from within their specified sections.
 
Last edited:
Here in the southeast we have something called a "Waffle House Annual". Yeah, it's what you think...buy breakfast for an A&P, collect the signatures. The stains on the pages are bacon grease, not Aeroshell 5.

Even with serious, by-the-book inspection, there can be issues no mechanic can know about without tearing down components not typically dismantled. I mention this little detail because if you're the owner of a recent purchase, you need to decide if you want to meet the oversight requirement (i.e. the logbooks have signatures), or the "fly the children" standard for which a good checklist is just a place to start. Point is, if the airplane is new to you, and your mechanic suspects monkey business, put away your pride and pay him to take a look.

Easy example, Recently removed a propeller and found this. Yep, four threads engaged, and the one on the right is starting to deform threads. Installed by an A&P, according to the logbooks. For sure that A&P had signed the last couple annuals. We don't typically remove propellers for CI's. And things got worse as I worked aft.

Threads Engaged 2.jpg
Threads Engaged.jpg
 
Last edited:
DanH said:
you need to decide if you want to meet the oversight requirement (i.e. the logbooks have signatures), or the "fly the children" standard
Click to expand...
That's an important distinction, seen all too often.

The 4-threads engaged issue is just flat scary, and I'm willing to bet it's not all that uncommon.
 
airguy said:
The 4-threads engaged issue is just flat scary, and I'm willing to bet it's not all that uncommon.
Click to expand...

Exactly.

Here the good news was that the airplane had already caught fire on the runup pad. Poor history, bad mechanics, no pre-buy, and no personal inspection by the new owner. It nearly killed them.


To Greg's point, there's not much merit in debating if a an oil change is required to be a complete annual. There are plenty of trash airplanes out there with Waffle House annuals. Let's concentrate on them.
 
I’m a lucky guy. As a non-builder I have an A&P do my condition inspections. But more important than him being an A&P, he has built and still flys an RV4, RV6, and a Rocket.

I serve as his assistant and “get me tool guy”. He never tells me how long it will take to do the condition inspection. Therefore, I never plan my next flight until he is done.

He directs (and supervises) me to do little jobs and over the years he has taught me a lot . For example, he will say to me “go ahead and open up the gascolator so I can inspect the screen.” He does other checks while I tangle with the RV12 gascolator cover. A couple hours later he will say “how’s it coming?” My reply, “ I got three bolts out one more to go!” To which he replies “you’re making headway.” 🤦‍♂️
 
Sure appreciate all the feedback. Having owned aircraft, I know for most planes, like cars, there are "book times" for given jobs and assumed the same with the RV's. Having heard lots of pilot's unpleasant experiences over the decades with an occasional bad shop here or there, I only want to have a "realistic" idea of time, and you have all provided me with exactly that. Thank you all! Personally, I want perfection, safety and peace of mind and have no problem spending extra time to get just that. Mainly want to avoid paying for a annual condition inspection of a super connie when all I have is a RV. Pun intended!
 
That is quite the read, Dan. The epilog was particularly interesting. Life goes on - maybe. Nice photo, but where is the number? :)

Technically, by stress analysis (etc ) 3 threads is enough to carry the strength of the bolt but everything has to be perfect and there is no excess load tolerance. This is why we have safety factors, infinite fatigue calculations a the like.

That project (and report) is revealing in several ways. How robust the RV truly is, and how lucky a lot of buyers are.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top