Airworthy Define ?

[Blob Monster]

Seems to be a lot of misunderstanding as to what the term Airworthy means . In fact the FAA kind of steer clear of it .

So what is the difference between an aircraft being Airworthy and an aircraft being safe to fly ???

And don't get me started on continued and continuing differences ....

[411A]

"Airworthy' is normally defined as...an aircraft that is fully in compliance with its Type Certificate Data Sheet (as amended) and is fully and continually maintained in conformity with an approved maintenance program.

Like my personal airplane...and it ain't cheap.:}

[john_tullamarine]

minor points of style .. one would normally refer to the TC, rather than the TCDS, and include an addition to 411A's words along the lines of "maintained by appropriately competent and authorised personnel"

[dixi188]

My thoughts.

Airworthy is, I think, when an A/C has a valid Certificate of Airworthiness.

i.e. when all Maintenance, ADs, SBs, Mods,etc. are up to date and properly certified.

Safe to fly may be when an A/C is ready for testing but does not have a valid C of A.

In the UK we used to have a "Fitness for Flight" certificate under "A" or "B" conditions for test flying when no C of A was valid. Not sure what is used now.

Hope this helps.

[john_tullamarine]

Airworthy is, I think, when an A/C has a valid Certificate of Airworthiness.

A necessary, but not sufficient, condition.

The CofA attests to TC (and operational regulatory) compliance at the time of inspection (and issue). There is an underlying requirement to continue with ongoing maintenance etc. to maintain that compliance.

[matkat]

Dixi, for clarification to be airworthy SBs need not be incorporated as they are only recommended and not mandatory.
And please no one to come up with an SB marked "mandatory" as this is and has been no more than a marketing tool so the SB issuers can have their SBs incorporated and they can charge the necessary fees for the SB itself and or the kit to do it.
The only way for an SB to be mandated is for it to be upgraded to an AD via the NAA of the state of design.

[ab33t]

An aircraft maybe airworthy as compliance to all regs but unsafe to fly due to a mechanical defect , so in theory the plane is airworthy but unsafe

[happybiker]

BM the FAA do not define "airworthy" in any regulation but you will find this definition in their order 8130.2F -- Airworthiness Certification of Aircraft and Related Products (REV F, CHG 1 - 4/1/05). You can look it up on the FAA FSIMS site.

9. INTERPRETATION OF THE TERM AIRWORTHY FOR U.S. TYPE‑CERTIFICATED AIRCRAFT. The term airworthy is not defined in Title 49, United States Code (49 U.S.C.), or in 14 CFR; however, a clear understanding of its meaning is essential for use in the agencys airworthiness certification program. Below is a summary of the conditions necessary for the issuance of an airworthiness certificate. A review of case law relating to airworthiness reveals two conditions that must be met for an aircraft to be considered airworthy. 49 U.S.C. 44704(c) and 14 CFR 21.183(a), (b), and (c) state that the two conditions necessary for issuance of an airworthiness certificate:

a. The aircraft must conform to its TC. Conformity to type design is considered attained when the aircraft configuration and the components installed are consistent with the drawings, specifications, and other data that are part of the TC, which includes any supplemental type certificate (STC) and field approved alterations incorporated into the aircraft.

b. The aircraft must be in a condition for safe operation. This refers to the condition of the aircraft relative to wear and deterioration, for example, skin corrosion, window delamination/crazing, fluid leaks, and tire wear.

NOTE: If one or both of these conditions are not met, the aircraft would be considered unairworthy. Aircraft that have not been issued a TC must meet the requirements of paragraph 9b above.

[Mad (Flt) Scientist]

To combine ab33t and happybiker's posts.

While the FAA definition in hb's post says "condition for safe operation" this does not exclude the case of a defect rendering the a/c unsafe yet still "airworthy" (as suggested by ab33t), provided the defect is latent, dormant or undetected. A design error may be the most obvious case where an aircraft complies with 9a (because the issue was missed at initial cert, say) and with 9b (because there's nothing obviously wrong with the a/c, and no-one could be expected to consider it unsafe on any reasonable inspection) but the a/c is, nonetheless, not "safe".

[dixi188]

J T

I agree about C of A, but I did say when all maintenance, etc., is up to date.

My understanding is that a C of A only remains valid as long as all ongoing requirements are met.

i.e. If something like an AD is overdue, the C of A is invalidated.

So even if the C of A is in date it may not be valid.

Matcat.

Agree about SBs, yes not mandarory unless also an AD.

Interesting subject.