Flight Manual v. Pilot's Operating Handbook
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Barbados
Posts: 411
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All very confusing.
I have a PA28-181 from 1976 - I have an "Owner's Manual" nothing that relates it to my specific airplane and a set of supplements for my autopilots (i.e. the documents issued by their manufacturers), GPS etc. which I put together myself.
This has made me think - is the insurance invalidated by the lack of this document serialised to the airplane - I can but assume that such an original document would have disintegrated over the past 40 years.
In the annuals it has had since I've had it no one has ever queried the documents I use.
Mine is one of the first Archer II's from 1976 - it has a 60" pitch prop not the 62" from later to the current day in the III - so maybe the "Owner Manual" iss for a 62" prop airplane
I have a PA28-181 from 1976 - I have an "Owner's Manual" nothing that relates it to my specific airplane and a set of supplements for my autopilots (i.e. the documents issued by their manufacturers), GPS etc. which I put together myself.
This has made me think - is the insurance invalidated by the lack of this document serialised to the airplane - I can but assume that such an original document would have disintegrated over the past 40 years.
In the annuals it has had since I've had it no one has ever queried the documents I use.
Mine is one of the first Archer II's from 1976 - it has a 60" pitch prop not the 62" from later to the current day in the III - so maybe the "Owner Manual" iss for a 62" prop airplane
Moderator
In the good old days, many light aircraft had naught but the OEM's guidance - some had naught, full stop, with anything of vital interest being specified in the CofA.
As things evolved, the OEM data may well have been styled in various ways, eg, "Information Manual", "Owner's Manual", and so on - depended on the OEM's design organisation's idiocyncrasies. Some of these documents were, to say the least, lacking in detail and usefulness. Indeed, in Australia, the local NAA (then the Federal Department of Civil Aviation) issued its own generic Flight Manuals for light aircraft (Civil Mk I for singles and Civil Mk II for light twins, if the memory serves me). These weren't brilliant but, for the basic stuff one needed, they were a lot more useful than much of what came from the OEMs. As an Industry engineering consultant, I produced a number of these over a period of years. The advent of the GAMA format manual was much needed relief ....
The Design Standards, at some stage (I'll leave it to those enthusiastic enough to go search the FAA history to locate just when) required that some data be provided in the nature of a Flight Manual. Post the introduction of the GAMA Spec 1 manual, the OEMs progressively moved over to that more standardised format (at about the same time, ICAO put forth a similar document - Doc 9516 - memory is not adequate to recall which preceded what at this distance in time but, as I recall, there was not all that much in the datal differences). The POH co-opted the Flight Manual data and the relevant pages of the latter are readily identifiable.
The particular "Flight Manual" document, for any given jurisdiction would be controlled and approved by the relevant local NAA. It should not be surprising, at all, to see much the same aircraft in Country A issued with a Flight Manual somewhat different to that issued in Country B.
These days, no doubt due to litigation wariness, the OEM Flight Manuals/POH have gone from a sensible short document to literary works of art, extending on to 100s of pages.
I did observe during some performance testing that I did on this particular Twin Comanche, that the some of the performance tables offered in this document (which are not FAA approved, and not required to be provided at all, were very optimistic. I think that the marketing department had input.
One of concerns in Australia was just this and that, in the main, was the reason that DCA introduced the local generic manuals.
As things evolved, the OEM data may well have been styled in various ways, eg, "Information Manual", "Owner's Manual", and so on - depended on the OEM's design organisation's idiocyncrasies. Some of these documents were, to say the least, lacking in detail and usefulness. Indeed, in Australia, the local NAA (then the Federal Department of Civil Aviation) issued its own generic Flight Manuals for light aircraft (Civil Mk I for singles and Civil Mk II for light twins, if the memory serves me). These weren't brilliant but, for the basic stuff one needed, they were a lot more useful than much of what came from the OEMs. As an Industry engineering consultant, I produced a number of these over a period of years. The advent of the GAMA format manual was much needed relief ....
The Design Standards, at some stage (I'll leave it to those enthusiastic enough to go search the FAA history to locate just when) required that some data be provided in the nature of a Flight Manual. Post the introduction of the GAMA Spec 1 manual, the OEMs progressively moved over to that more standardised format (at about the same time, ICAO put forth a similar document - Doc 9516 - memory is not adequate to recall which preceded what at this distance in time but, as I recall, there was not all that much in the datal differences). The POH co-opted the Flight Manual data and the relevant pages of the latter are readily identifiable.
The particular "Flight Manual" document, for any given jurisdiction would be controlled and approved by the relevant local NAA. It should not be surprising, at all, to see much the same aircraft in Country A issued with a Flight Manual somewhat different to that issued in Country B.
These days, no doubt due to litigation wariness, the OEM Flight Manuals/POH have gone from a sensible short document to literary works of art, extending on to 100s of pages.
I did observe during some performance testing that I did on this particular Twin Comanche, that the some of the performance tables offered in this document (which are not FAA approved, and not required to be provided at all, were very optimistic. I think that the marketing department had input.
One of concerns in Australia was just this and that, in the main, was the reason that DCA introduced the local generic manuals.
While it depends on the country of manufacturer, in general, the POH is a "voluntary" industry document and the Airplane Flight Manual (AFM) is a regulatory required document for certain information. However, those terms were sometimes inter-changed by some OEMs prior to the AFM regulatory requirement. For example, for Cessna and Piper after March 1979 the FAA requires each TC holder to provide a current regulatory AFM at delivery. Prior to that date it was whatever document format and nomenclature the TC holder wanted to use.
Older Cessna's had a "Owners Manual". Newer ( i.e. 1976 and on) have a manual with the title "Pilots Operating Handbook". The POH is a required document in the aircraft equipment list.
My 1975 PA-28-180 Cherokee Archer came with a "Pilot's Operating Manual". It is specific to my serial number and is signed by a Piper representative. The front page says "This manual is incomplete without an APPROPRIATE FAA APPROVED AIRPLANE FLIGHT MANUAL..."
It seems the aircraft will still fly ok without that FAA approved flight manual as I don't think I have ever seen it.
It seems the aircraft will still fly ok without that FAA approved flight manual as I don't think I have ever seen it.
My 1975 PA-28-180 Cherokee Archer came with a "Pilot's Operating Manual". It is specific to my serial number and is signed by a Piper representative. The front page says "This manual is incomplete without an APPROPRIATE FAA APPROVED AIRPLANE FLIGHT MANUAL..."
It seems the aircraft will still fly ok without that FAA approved flight manual as I don't think I have ever seen it.
It seems the aircraft will still fly ok without that FAA approved flight manual as I don't think I have ever seen it.
Yes, there are some FAA approved pages, some of which are supplemental and have no applicability to my aircraft. The start of those FAA approved pages is titled "Airplane Flight Manual".
Some years ago the CAA produced a little blue book and in it stated that A Flight Manual relates to a Certified aircraft whilst a POH relates to a Permitted Aircraft. Long out of date, probably thrown away but that is the only document where I have seen an official explanation.
