Tyre changing

[stickandrudderman]

Is it legal for a PPL holder to change a tyre/innertube or repair a puncture on a public transport cert SEP, or must it be done by a licenced engineer?

[Mike Cross]

Art 16(6) of the ANO
(6) A certificate of release to service shall not be required to be in force in respect of an aircraft to which this article applies of which the maximum total weight authorised does not exceed 2730 kg and which is a private aircraft if it flies in the circumstances specified in paragraph (7).

Art 155
‘Private aircraft’ means an aircraft which is neither an aerial work nor a public transport aircraft;

'Aerial work aircraft' means an aircraft (other than a public transport aircraft) flying, or intended by the operator to fly, for the purpose of aerial work;

‘Public transport aircraft’ means an aircraft flying, or intended by the operator of the
aircraft to fly, for the purpose of public transport;


Regulation 12 of the The Air Navigation (General) Regulations 2006 lists what you can do.

All of this is in CAP 393 (http://www.caa.co.uk/application.aspx?catid=33&pagetype=65&appid=11&mode=detail&id=226)

My reading is that you can do it but that you cannot then undertake a PT or Aerial Work flight without a new certificate of release to service from an LAE.

PS. There is no such thing as a "public transport cert SEP" any more. Whether or not it can be used for PT will depend on how it has been maintained.

[SNS3Guppy]

I'm a certificated mechanic (engineer) in the US, and am not familiar with the regulations governing in the UK. I am fairly certain, however, that you'll be required to perform the work to the same standard as a certificated mechanic, using all the practices, publications, tools, and techniques that the certificated mechanic would have to use.

This may sound more simple than it really is. Many wheel assemblies, for example, require far more than simply unbolting and slapping a new tube or tire on. Replacement of the wheel half packing (o-ring seal), and often dye penetrant or other examination of the integrity of the wheel assembly is required, as is cleaning and a thorough inspection of all the components. It's got to be done precisely in accordance with the manufacturers approved maintenance documentation, using the tools and procedures called out for in those documents. You also need to be aware of any supplementary maintenance documentation (Airworthiness Directives, in the US, for example) which apply to that component. You may be able to do the basic work, but the examinations may require certification, specific tools and training, or a separate signoff by a certificated mechanic. Simply patching or fixing a flat generally does not suffice.

Additionally, assembly practices such as the proper torquing pattern and procedure for the wheel assembly or the final installation on the airplane must be followed exactly, with prop torque done (if I do it, for example, I need to use a calibrated torque wrench; do you have one?).

In the US, we have something similiar, which is considered preventative maintenance, which an owner can do on the aircraft. One of the restrictions here is that the operation can't involve complex assembly or disassembly, and that can quickly nullify the ability of the owner to do most operations. Even though the UK regulation is different, I'm fairly certain that the person doing the work will be required to uphold the same standards as any certificated mechanic would...right down to the use of up to date and current maintenance publications.

Maintenance is often the smallest part of the job; often the paperwork takes longer than the work performed on the aircraft, and it's going to be more closely scrutinized. Remember that whatever the regulations under which you're operating, if you touch the airplane, you're also responsible for the paperwork being executed correctly. My two cents worth.

[smarthawke]

Any work carried out on an aircraft in the UK that is to be used for the purposes of 'Public Transport' (eg private hire) or 'Aerial Work' (eg paid instruction and aircraft hire) requires a Certificate of Release to Service (CRS).

The CRS can only be signed by a licensed engineer, so as has been said already, anyone can do the actual work but the aircraft can't be used for those purposes unless the work has been signed for by a licensed engineer.

[On-MarkBob]

If your aircraft is certified in the 'Transport Category' The Cof A remains thus even if you use it 'Privately'. It does not "revert" to the private category at all! unless you subsequently have it re-certified as such. Even in the 'Private' category the work can be done by the aircrafts owner, but technically he is not allowed to disturb any 'Locking Devices' such as locking wire or split pins or tab washers. If he does, he neds a Licensed Aircraft engineer, duly 'Type Rated' on the type, to certify the work carried out. If your wheel has an inner tube, then a new 'creep mark' will have to be painted after the inner tube has been properly positioned and the tyre inflated. Furthermore, if your aircraft is being used for hire and reward, then it may come under the umberella of an 'Approved Aircraft Maintenace Organisation' as part of an AOC (Air Operators Certificate). If this is the case that organisation would have to approve any person (licenced or not) to carry out any task on the aircraft.

Bob.

[stickandrudderman]

Thanks for the replies.
Nothing's simple is it?

[smarthawke]

Bob

In these days of EASA, there are no 'Public Transport' or 'Private' CofAs for EASA aircraft (ie those that aren't orphaned machines like Chipmunks that come under the term 'Annex II'). Now we have a non-expiring CofA which may be 'normal' or 'aerobatic' for instance, revalidated by an ARC (Airworthiness review Certificate).

As Mike says, if you do carry out pilot allowed maintenance, the aircraft can then only be used for 'Private' use until recertified by an LAE or approved organisation (JAR145). JAR145 is required for AOC use (ie pleasure flying) but not for flying training/PPL hire.

What a pilot can do is listed in the ANO (see Mike's post). As for tyre changes, as SNS3G says, repairing a punctured tube on an aircraft is not quite the same as on a bicycle - probably cheaper and a lot less hassle in the long run to have it done by a 'qualified' engineer.

[Mike Cross]

Bob

Actually reading the regs will prevent you from getting it wrong:-
technically he is not allowed to disturb any 'Locking Devices' such as locking wire or split pins or tab washers. If he does, he neds a Licensed Aircraft engineer, duly 'Type Rated' on the type, to certify the work carried out.

Not so. You can replace defective safety wiring or split pins excluding those in
engine, transmission, flight control and rotor systems

And as smarthawke says, your views on certification are out of date.

I'd refrained from publishing the full list of what you can do in the hope that people would look it up using the reference I gave. However here it is:-
Pilots maintenance—prescribed repairs or replacements
12. For the purposes of article 16(7)(a), the following repairs or replacements are prescribed—
(a) replacement of landing gear tyres, landing skids or skid shoes;
(b) replacement of elastic shock absorber cord units on landing gear where special tools are not required;
(c) replacement of defective safety wiring or split pins excluding those in
engine, transmission, flight control and rotor systems;
(d) patch-repairs to fabric not requiring rib stitching or the removal of structural parts or control surfaces, if the repairs do not cover up structural damage and do not include repairs to rotor blades;
(e) repairs to upholstery and decorative furnishing of the cabin or cockpit interior when repair does not require dismantling of any structure or operating system or interfere with an operating system or affect the structure of the aircraft;
(f) repairs, not requiring welding, to fairings, non-structural cover plates and cowlings;
(g) replacement of side windows where that work does not interfere with the structure or with any operating system;
(h) replacement of safety belts or safety harnesses;
(i) replacement of seats or seat parts not involving dismantling of any structure or of any operating system;
(j) replacement of bulbs, reflectors, glasses, lenses or lights;
(k) replacement of any cowling not requiring removal of the propeller, rotors or
disconnection of engine or flight controls;
(l) replacement of unserviceable sparking plugs;
(m) replacement of batteries;
(n) replacement of wings and tail surfaces and controls, the attachments of which are designed to provide for assembly immediately before each flight and dismantling after each flight;
(o) replacement of main rotor blades that are designed for removal where special tools are not required;
(p) replacement of generator and fan belts designed for removal where special tools are not required;
(q) replacement of VHF communication equipment, being equipment which is not combined with navigation equipment.

As with all things, while it may be legal for you to do something it my well not be sensible.

Also worth pointing out that these operations can only legally be carried out by the holder of a Pilot's License who is the owner or operator of the aircraft. From Art 16 of the ANO:-
(7) The circumstances referred to in paragraph (6) are:
(a) the only repairs or replacements in respect of which a certificate of release to service is not in force are of such a description as may be prescribed;
(b) such repairs or replacements have been carried out personally by the holder of a pilot's licence granted or rendered valid under this Order who is the owner or operator of the aircraft;
(c) the person carrying out the repairs or replacements shall keep in the aircraft log book kept in respect of the aircraft under article 22 a record which identifies the repairs or replacement and shall sign and date the entries; and
(d) any equipment or parts used in carrying out such repairs or replacements shall be of a type approved by EASA or the CAA either generally or in relation to a class of aircraft or one particular aircraft.

[Shunter]

repairing a punctured tube on an aircraft is not quite the same as on a bicycleIndeed not; it's way quicker and easier than a bicycle. Deflate tyre, undo the handful of bolts which hold the 2 halves of the rim together, swap tube, bolt back together, inflate, done. Takes longer to remove the wheel from the aircraft than it does to actually change a tube or tyre!

[SNS3Guppy]

Indeed not; it's way quicker and easier than a bicycle. Deflate tyre, undo the handful of bolts which hold the 2 halves of the rim together, swap tube, bolt back together, inflate, done. Takes longer to remove the wheel from the aircraft than it does to actually change a tube or tyre!


Ah, no. Its really not that simple. Hence the reason why you really shouldn't be doing it unless you know what you're doing and have the current publication, proper materials,and appropriate tools in hand.

[Rod1]

“Ah, no. Its really not that simple.”

Its not?:ugh:

OK, why is it so complicated to fix a puncture? I have repaired one on my LAA aircraft (perfectly legally). The only problem I had was breaking the tire seal on the carbon rim which required a great deal of care so as not to damage the rim. There were certain criteria regarding the tightness of bolts etc but it was not much harder than a bike. :ok:

Just out of interest, what would you charge to work your magic?:rolleyes:

Rod1

[S-Works]

Quote:
Indeed not; it's way quicker and easier than a bicycle. Deflate tyre, undo the handful of bolts which hold the 2 halves of the rim together, swap tube, bolt back together, inflate, done. Takes longer to remove the wheel from the aircraft than it does to actually change a tube or tyre!
Ah, no. Its really not that simple. Hence the reason why you really shouldn't be doing it unless you know what you're doing and have the current publication, proper materials,and appropriate tools in hand


At the risk of a fight, please can you explain why? I have a Cessna and have done exactly as shunter describes in 30 minutes with basic tools.

[SNS3Guppy]

The particulars of changing a tire vary with the airplane. Some require a wheel packing, some don't. Most require a wheel inspection, and many require stripping the wheel and performing a magnaflux or other inspection. Generally at a minimum a thorough inspection with a 10X magnification lens is necessary.

Prior to removing the wheel assembly, a thorough inspection should be made of the wheel, the tire, it's wear (important clues about the tire, the condition of the wheel, the axle, and the gear which may have a bearing on future maintenance and your current project). Look for uneven wearing on one side, shoulder wear, etc. Look the brake assembly over very carefully.

When the wheel is removed from the aircraft, the bearings come off with it. Additionaly for the mainmounts on most light airpalnes, disassembly of the brake is also required to remove the wheel. The bearings must be kept in their respective places, and should be thoroughly cleaned, air dried, inspected, and repacked. The races must inspected and lubricated. Generally the bearing packings are different on each side and must be kept separate. The axle area and brake assembly should also be inspectd and cleaned at the same time. The brake pucks often tend to extend, rebleeding the brakes is usually appropriate. You should inspect the brake pads for cracking, leakage around the pucks, etc. Check the brake lines for conditiona and security.

When the wheel is removed, it should be deflated. Deflating a tire assembly has been known to cause injury just as inflation has; mechanics have been injured or killed going both ways (usually overinflation, but during disassembly, too. One sure mistake, and I've seen several make it, is attempting to undo the wheel bolts prior to tire deflation. When the assembly is deflated, the bead on the tire must first be broken before undoing the wheel bolts. The bolts are then removed. If this is done carelessly, the mating flange can be damaged as it chatters. The wheel halves must be kept oriented to ensure that the same bolts and holes are used; each half should be marked to keep it's relative position to the other for reasons of both stress and balance.

The wheel halves should be thoroughly washed in solvent, then usually in hot water and dried. Any rubber deposits should be removed. Care must be taken in cleaning the wheel assembly to avoid damaging any metal treatment or coating, unless it's required to be removed. A thorough inspection at a minimum should be made using a 10X power magnifying glass for distortions, cracks, excess wear, dents, etc, with particular care being made with rim areas, the bead areas, and the mating surfaces at the inner flange. Some wheel assemblies have life limits or require specialized dye penetrant or other inspections, and as airplanes get larger (many twins, on up), the requirement is often nearly universal.

In all cases the bolts should also be equally inspected, and in many cases the bolts must be subject to dye penetrant or other inspection means, as well. Pay close attention to the locking nuts to see that they still conform to standard, meet the minimum exposed thread, and are within specification with respect to finger tightness and condition before futher use.

Many wheel assemblies use an o-ring packing at the mating halves to seal them; this generally for tubless assemblies. A new packing must be used.

Properly done, the wheel assembly should be checked for balance prior to mounting the tire, and this is done by reassmbling it witout the tire, and putting it ona balancer to note the heavy spot. It is then again disassembled, the tire put in place, and reassembled. When assembled it must be torqued. This isn't a matter of simply tightening down the nuts. the bolt heads must be kept steady and only the nuts turned, and these must be turned in the proper order. A pattern is used, generally with a two-step torque process. This involves tightening all the nuts to a predetermined torque in specific cross-bolt pattern, then retightening them to their final torque. Failure to do this can result in wheel failure in operation, or simply under the load of inflation, and can crack the wheel assembly now or later. Absolutely ensure that washers areunder each bearing surface of the fasteners, particularly under any rotating surface (such as the nut, for example), lest you induce stress risers which can also cause part failure.

If you've installed a tube, ensure it isn't pinched by slightly inflating it with the needle valve removed, prior to tightening down the wheelhalves. You'll also have wanted to make sure you have placed the heavy point on the wheel (marked with paint from the factory) opposite to the heavy point on the wheel/tube assembly (typically, but not necessarily) opposite the valve stem, if there is one). With the tire in place, the entire assembly is then again placed on a spindle balancer and checked for balance. The wheel is rotated around inside the tire repeatedly until it's found to be closely balanced, then weights are applied (3 oz. max) to bring the wheel assembly fully into balance.

Ideally the process should then take place inside an inflation cage; mechanics have been maimed or killed with wheel assemblies that failed during inflation. Using nitrogen, the wheel assy should be inflated partially, using direct air through the stem and no stem valve, until the tire bead seats. It should then be deflated, and reinflated with the valve stem in place. Once inflated, it should be checked again for final balance, as this does sometimes change, and adjusted as necessary. A thorough inspection of the completed assembly with a soap or leak detection fluid used on the valve stem and tire bead areas should be performed. A notation should be made regarding the final pressure. The bearings are then repacked with the appropriate grease and reinstalled, and the wheel remounted on the axle, and the brake reinstalled on the wheel assembly. The brake usually requires proper safety wiring, and if the puck(s) are at all extended, then the brake assembly should also be bled. The axle nut should be reset in accordance with the maintenance manual, which is a several step process in most cases involving torquing, loosening, and retightening, with new bolts or a cotter pin installed. How you install the cotter pin makes more than a 50% difference in it's strength, and lest you think that's too much, I've seen improperly installed ones depart the aircraft.

You're not done. 24 hours observation is required with a leakdown check the next day to determine how much pressure has been lost (also in many cases to see if you've pinched the tube; you may not know right away), reinflating the tire to it's proper pressure, and of course, making the appropriate paperwork complete. That's one tire, and a simple one. This hasn't addressed the appropriate use of chocks and jacks, etc. Jacking one wing is generally not appropriate, and that depends very much on the airplane in question, too. I've see airplanes damaged from imprope jacking, and not just from dropping one; tipping the airplane or sideloading the gear, or attempting to jack while tied down or putting uneven twist or presure or tension on the airplane can do it, too.

Sure, you've probably been cranking them out in a half hour...but you've not been doing it properly, either.

What do I charge? Base rate 50.00 dollars an hour. However, there's nothing preventing you from doing the work yourself. You just need to make sure you've done it properly. Do you know how to do that? Does anything I just described sound foreign to you? Do you have the appropriate tools? Are your tools calibrated? Have you performed the work before (properly)? Are you using nitrogen? Do you have the manufacturer's current publication before you? Not just a copy of the mx manual, but a current copy? Do you have all the appropriate data? Not just the airframe manufacturer's manual,but the wheel manufacturer's manual, the brake manufacturers manual, any relevant supplemental type certificates, service bulletins, and airworthiness directives, and are you able to comply with all of them?

These are minimum performance standards for any mechanic (engineer) doing the work; you're expected to abide by no less.

[S-Works]

No wonder engineers bills are so high. Changing an inner tube does not require that much work on a Cessna in my humble experience. That kind of work gets done on my annuals.

But like I said I am not getting into a fight so will respect your way of doing it.

[stickandrudderman]

There appears to be some confusion here between "changing a tyre", "repairing a puncture" and "complete and thorough dis-assembly, inspection and overhaul as necessary".

What I had in mind in my original post was this:

You're at an airfield with no maintenance facility, a long way from home.
Your tyre goes flat.
You have either a spare tube, a puncture repair kit, or a tin of tyre weld.
You also have access to any tools you need.
Your regular maintenance organisation can't come out to you for a week because they're too busy and it's too far.
You're very experienced in things mechanical.

Do you get the train home and wait for the licenced engineer to find time to get to the aircraft, or do you effect a repair and fly home or to an airfield where maintenance is available?

I know what I'd do!

[bjornhall]

And then comes the interesting bit:

After you did your field repair, do you let your maintenance organization take it apart again and ensure you did it properly? Would you do such repairs a lot? Are you prepared to foot the whole bill, no insurance valid, in the unlikely event that the wheel comes off on landing?

And the even more interesting bit:

Would you fly a plane that others, gods know who and when, have made such repairs to? Is it ok that, out of a sample of 10,000 pilots, 100 do such repairs and 5 get it wrong, bending their planes or worse? Would you fly a plane where nobody is even providing updated mx documentation anymore, or where nobody ever has?

Not at all rhetorical questions by the way, just thinking out loud on the differences between CofA and experimental... And why I'd never rent a non-CofA...

[Shunter]

My aircraft is a Cessna also. When I changed the tubes and tyres I had a licensed engineer close at hand, as I always do when working on the aircraft. Despite having substantial mechanical engineering experience myself, I always ensure my work is checked as satisfactory.

Make sure you deflate first so you don't get half a wheel embedded in your face when you crack the last bolt off. Make sure you don't snag the tube when you bolt the wheel back together. Make sure you align the tyre correctly. Maybe other aircraft are more complex (I've only worked on my own, so couldn't comment), but changing Cessna tyres is not difficult.

[SNS3Guppy]

No wonder engineers bills are so high. Changing an inner tube does not require that much work on a Cessna in my humble experience. That kind of work gets done on my annuals.


Fortunately we have airworthiness standards which take your opinion completely out of the picture. Airworthy implies both legal and safe; without both, it's not airworthy.

One might as well suggest that going to dental school is a waste, and dentists charge too much. It's not time for the annual checkup, so go ahead and drill the tooth and do your own root canal or filling...have the dentist checkit at the annual checkup.

Then again, some of us underwent several years of training, and many more years of on the job experience, for something, one would hope.

It's not just a simple change, like a bicycle.


What I had in mind in my original post was this:

You're at an airfield with no maintenance facility, a long way from home.
Your tyre goes flat.
You have either a spare tube, a puncture repair kit, or a tin of tyre weld.
You also have access to any tools you need.
Your regular maintenance organisation can't come out to you for a week because they're too busy and it's too far.
You're very experienced in things mechanical.

Do you get the train home and wait for the licenced engineer to find time to get to the aircraft, or do you effect a repair and fly home or to an airfield where maintenance is available?

I know what I'd do!


By all means, tell us what you'd do. Apparently not do it right, at the very least.

I'm not sure what tire weld is, but presumably you're talking about a can of fix-a-flat or something along those lines. I'm not aware of "puncture kits" made for aircraft, so presumably you're talking about something you've come up with at the automotive store of a bicycle repair shop. Red flags should be flying already, but apparently you're comfortable with this, so let's move on...

Aside from the fact that you have no idea why the tire is flat...aircraft tires seldom go bad because there's a nail through the tire...you're talking about using unapproved and unsafe methods to effect the "repair." You're talking about taking a wild shot in the dark at the repair. Where a car or bicycle gets a puncture and leaks, aircraft wheel assemblies generally do not. There are usually two places that the leak will occur, neither of which are addressed by, or handled by a can of fix-a-flat or a bicycle repair kit.

Leaks generally take place in the wheel parting half (most commonly through the tube and then the wheel parting half if you've using a tube, and then most commonly because the assembly has been done incorrectly and a tube has been pinched), or in the valve stem. Often a leaky valve stem may be corrected by tapping the valve core, as this is the most common source for the leak. The valve is reseated, and a little spit on your finger can be used to assure that no more bubbles are coming from the valve...problem solved. In other cases, a simple adjustment with a valve stem tool will do the trick,when the valve stem core has backed out a little. Do it a little too tightly, however, especially on an older assembly or older tube,and you may have it comeflying back in your face. I've seen people nearly lose an eye that way.

Leaks from the wheel parting halves are taking place internally, with the leakage taking place through the axle area, past the wheel bearings. This is occasionally due to an improperly assembled wheel or an imperfect seal, but more likely due to damage. If it's damaged, then there is absolutely no excuse for failing to obtain a very thorough inspection of the wheel itself. You could very easily have a failure. I was director of maintenance for a corporate department some years ago that operated among other things a Sabreliner 60. Shortly after I left, my replacement failed to properly inspect a wheel assembly and it failed during a landing, destroying the aircraft. You may think it's okay, you're only in a 172...that little wheel assembly and that little tire are all that's separating your airplane from the ground...that little aluminum or magnesium fragile assembly. It's cracked and leaking, do NOT go fly. Wait for proper maintenance.

There is absolutely NO excuse for get-home-itis, that urge to get home at all costs, that leads one to excuse shoddy maintenance or quick-fixes in the interest of getting by in a pinch. Just don't do it. It's not legal, it's not safe. Justification is the narcotic of the soul; don't become an addict by trying to justify your way out of something you should not.

You may or may not be "very experienced in things mechanical." If you're talking about shooting a tube of fix-a-flat into your tire, then you're not that experienced, or you have very poor judgement. If you have all the tools in the world available to you, then what on earth are you doing proposing a scenario in which you cobble the repair together and go home?

When you shoot that can of fix-a-flat or tire weld or whatever you want to call it into that tire, severly unbalancing it and replacing the inert nitrogen atmosphere inside the tire with flammable gas, you also put the rubber compound in which gasses as the tire heats with use, further increasing the potential for a blowout or explosion (and don't bother bringing it to me for repairs after you've shot that junk into the tire...it's your problem now). You might as well trash the tire too.

So, you have a wheel assembly which may be damaged, you have know way of knowing, and you know what you'd do; you'd cobble it together and go fly because you don't want to wait. You have an unlimited supply of tools available, anything you need (calibrated torque wrenches, etc), but not a single mechanic in sight with whom to consult or get the job done properly? Interesting. Someone just happens to have a hangar full of the right equipment sitting open at this remote, abandoned airfield where you've gone? You've got a lot of luck on your side.

When you fly, you need to be prepared to drive home, wait for repairs, sit out weather, or even buy an airline ticket home; that happens. Don't go making excuses to get you on your way. I've heard them all. I ran into an individual years ago who threw a rod through his engine case on a Navajo, then wanted to put cardboard over the hole in the engine, fill it with oil, and fly it home. I kid you not. I've seen landing gear wired together, garden hose used to replace brake lines, parts held on with barbed wire. Each one had an excuse. Always made in ignorance, always trusting luck. Don't do that. If it's not legal and it's not safe, then don't do it.

Airplanes are mechanical, airplanes break. Accept that, and accept that repairs are necessary by qualified individuals performing to acceptable, legal standards. Cobbling things together isn't justifiable, nor safe. I've seen holes in exhausts wrapped up in beer cans and saety wire. I've seen duct tape used in ways you might not have believed possible. Not good. Not good at all. If you really want to be prepared for that flat tire, then carry a wheel assembly with you, ready to go. That's a lot of extra weight, and bulk, which is an inconvenience, so of course you won't. Unfortunately you appear ready to place safety second to convenience, and that's not way to make judgements in aviation.

[stickandrudderman]

You are of course absolutely right, apart from the assumptions and consequent judgements.

[Mike Cross]

Personally I'm happy with the manufacturer's service instructions and AC 43.13.-1B/2A (http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgAdvisoryCircular.nsf/0/99C827DB9BAAC81B86256B4500596C4E?OpenDocument). However if you want to think up your own personal schedule that exceeds that then I won't argue with you.

As I said before, the fact that something's legal doesn't automatically mean that it's sensible. I like to think that the process of qualifying for a license teaches us to understand our limitations and make good judgments.

[kwachon]

SNS3Guppy is obviously a very concientious engineer and probably quite wealthy in the process, he is, however absolutely correct in his observations, but, I used to carry a fully serviceable spare from an aircraft graveyard, never needed it but it was always going to be better than a tear down and a hell of a lot cheaper.

What is interesting is, I now fly a large corporate jet flying internationally and we carry a fully loaded spare, much cheaper to change a wheel than have a puncture repaired. It has been my experience that when a main lets go it is beyond repair anyway. We pay an engineer at home base to look after the repairs not an outstation somewhere else in the world.

[Rod1]

I would refer you to my previous comment;

“I have repaired one on my LAA aircraft (perfectly legally).”

But as Bose says, I am not getting into a fight.

Rod1

[smarthawke]

Correct me if I'm wrong but the original question was as to the legality of repairing a broken tyre on an aircraft use for the purposes of 'Public Transport'.

Now as to the public preening of who can change a tyre or tube quicker than who - it obviously goes without saying everyone and his dog can do it quicker than us licensed engineers. Well done, you're all very clever people......

[robin]

What a load of b*ll*cks

I have replaced my tyres and inner tubes on a number of occasions over the period I have owned my aircraft. I have timed it so that this happens close to or at the 50 hour or annual and have had absolutely no issues with any of the LAEs who have been involved in our maintenance.

Changing tyres and inner tubes is a doddle and anyone who says otherwise is either a rep from an engineering organisation or is a rep from H & S.

The more we get involved in the maintenance of our aircraft, the better. Tyres and inner tubes are probably the easiest item of maintenance of all and a good place to start.

True, you need to be aware of your own limitations, but why not give it a try under supervision

[LH2]

You all have way too much time in your hands, reading up on regulations and brake pad manuals [unless your line of work involves either, of course]. I think I prefer to hire a lawyer for the former and a mechanic for the latter while I enjoy myself flying :ok:

Now for a little lateral thinking in the scenario described, what about one deflates both tyres (thus helping with assymetric friction issues), takes off, (crash) lands at destination, hands aircraft off to mechanic to sort out the tyres and everything else one has probably bent in the process. Wouldn't that approach be adequately legal? After all, one has not done any significant maintenance other than let down the second tyre, and the aircraft would still be perfectly airworthy (it's just the going on the ground bit that kind of falters).

The aforementioned lawyer can then get involved to fend off the CAA trying to get at your license, but that's not what we're discussing here.

Yes, I know where my coat is, thank you and good night :E

[SNS3Guppy]

Wouldn't that approach be adequately legal?


No. A tire and wheel assembly not inflated to the proper pressure is not airworthy, and therefore not legal.

[ericferret]

All aircraft maintenance and repair has to be carried out in accordance with the aircraft manufacturers or failing that the component manufacturers maintenance data.

Can anyone supply me details of an approved repair scheme for an inner tube?