I think your reference now makes it mandatory to "guarantee" the airworthiness of the aircraft until it's next periodical? (Even pink slips in NSW are only good for 14 days).
Except for an arse covering exercise by CASA over schedule 5 perhaps?
Pray tell, para. 2.7 is exactly what?
Whatever, it appears that "hard time" engine maintenance will be the new "recommendation" and dissolving AD/ENG/4 makes even less sense to aircraft owners and subsequently, operators etc.
Edited to add and remove some incriminating comment;
About 1996 I argued a case that culminated some time later with a Commonwealth Ombudsmans investigation into a "dodgy" MR and with subsequent apologies from Director of Aviation Safety with a promise to alter things.
The then Chairman of the CASA Board invited me to help compile a "Guide for the purchase of a light aircraft" which the AOPA office holds for distribution to those that want it. (if they haven't shredded it).
My "guide" was a rewrite of schedule 5 which at the time was one of the maintenance options open to an owner and gave the onus of responsibility by the LAME of the inspection to he, (or she), who commissioned the inspection. NOT the purchaser.
It now appears that schedule 5 removes the onus of responsibility from the Certificate of registration holder (or the operator), to the LAME to warrant the inspection until the next periodical. Tyres brakes come immediately to mind.
Reflecting on events;
1) CASA told me that schedule 5 made redundant the requirement for 4 yearly "major inspections" because things would be inspected annually therefor a better system.
2) Schedule 5 was a system of maintenance given as an option to the manufacturers system and at the time seemed a better idea because the manufacturers were probably only out to make a quid from their products?
3) Schedule 5 is now NOT a sysyem of maintenance in lieu of the manufacturer, but ONLY a schedule of maintenance.
I still can't see how repealing AD/ENG/4 makes any owner's life easier. The insurance implications as discussed shove everything back on the owner operator anyway.
As Bart Simpson said, I can't but half feel respsonsible for this.
Can anyone tell me exactly when para 2.7 came into existence?
Last edited by Bob Murphie; 2nd Apr 2008 at 05:42.