ARC Controlled or Uncontrolled

[BoeingBoy]

Firstly, apologies if this should be in the Private Flying section. Mods feel free to move it if necessary.

___________________

Controlled or uncontrolled?

1977 Archer II. UK Registered.

I have just reached that pinnacle of aircraft ownership where having dug (very) deep into my piggy bank for an annual and ARC review I am being asked if I want to continue with controlled or uncontrolled maintenance. The company looking after the aircraft will have had it in their care for a year this April. There are no problems or snags and everything is up to date on directives and bulletins. Whilst not cheap, I have no major gripes with the current provider and anticipate staying with them.

Doing a quick comparison of costs I had been leaning to uncontrolled as it seems to provide greater flexibility to move to another company and offers the better options if an alternative maintenance scheme is provided either through Part M light or Brexit. (That said, my maintainers say they are not going to get involved in Part M light.)

However, having had an extensive ARC review carried out which has probably involved about 40 hours of research I am finding the prospect of just extending the ARC for the next two years more attractive. When the fact that strictly speaking this review needs to be done annually in the uncontrolled environment then it seems to make the controlled route more attractive. However, the maintainers admit that now they know the aircraft, and the fact that it lives in their hangar, mean that I should not have to be hit so hard next year.

Apart from reading about Part M light I have seen very little in practice about how to take advantage of it. I do not wish to declare my own schedule, and do not wish to work on the aircraft myself (apart from simple tasks) so staying within LAMPS and the Part M regime seems to be the only option. I am told that adopting the manufacturers schedule is even more expensive.

I would have hoped that ALPA or some similar body might have been offering more support on this issue but no information seems to be readily available.

So, all in all I am very confused as to which is the cheaper option to provide the best care for the aircraft and very much in the dark about what other options are available, either now or in the future.

Any help or advice appreciated.

BB

[Rigga]

I'm not sure how many cars you have, but I assume they are all dealer serviced and insured and that you pay what ever price the fuel pumps out at, although you quibble about it.
You probably go to the same garage(s) for servicing because you feel there is a good 'rapport' with the team there and you still pay up, possibly without blinking at the bill.

Your aeroplane should be no different.

Controlled: the garage knows what they did last year and should know what they need to do this year: The garage knows all about your machine and because of that, they know much about you too. Their ARC (if they do one) should be quite simple as they know what you've been doing.

Uncontrolled: You and your machine are complete strangers. The garage won't know who did anything to your aeroplane and will scrutinise everything they touch to make sure it's right - as far back as they can. They will be wary when talking to you and fairly rigid in any negotiations. If they do one, their ARC will always be another 40 hours or more.

Your maintainer should be your friend, not just a service facility.

[BoeingBoy]

Hi Rigga,

Actually four is the answer to your initial question and yes, I use specialist dealers who know me and all the cars well. The difference with the aircraft is that it will stay with the same company either way and now I have taken the big hit of having the initial ARC researched back to 77 I know that they will not hit me as hard next year.

My main choice centres on what benefits I get from going controlled when the same company will be doing the annual next year having had the aircraft hangared and looked after by them for a full twelve months.

They have said they won't do the whole review again (as long as it's not taken away) so on the cost side simply extending next years annual seems logical and going into a controlled environment the best option. However I am wondering if staying flexible for whatever new legislation or political change may be coming offers a better plan. I suppose the question here is how easy is it to revert to an uncontrolled environment. I have read of companies causing problems and raising charges for the privilege although as long as the aircraft remains with its current company I doubt they would do that.

Rest assured that I value the relationship that I have with my Part M company and wish to maintain it. They are not pushing either path to me and so in a way I am left confused.

Thanks for your reply.

[NutLoose]

The previous issue of the ARC should have done the review, did it come with the aircraft? If it has and is up to date then your new company simply needs to check those items from the that date if they are satisfied they have all previously been carried out and properly recorded.
I know what you mean about researching, and it makes it worse if you have log books missing. Once it is all done and recorded I personally tend to do it every year and issue an ARC as opposed to renewing it as it is then a simple case of checking anything new or reoccurring and that's all done on the pc. I find it makes it more flexible for myself.

For what it's worth you will always take a hit as you put it moving between companies, the simple reason is once you get to know an aircraft you will know what the problems are and what has been done and what isn't due, a new company is in essence taking it on blind so have to inspect everything to ensure all is in date and has been checked. Additionally different people will pick up on different things and what one engineer may deem to be OK another engineer may not, such is life.

[BoeingBoy]

Thanks NL.

The present company rather 'prided' themselves in wanting to do a full research back to 1977. (I have all the logbooks to manufacture and worksheets back to 1990.) I did tend to read this as a way of racking up the bill but I do accept that a chief engineer is being asked to put his signature to clear out an aircraft that he has not seen before so I accept that it's the move to a new company that's really been the main cost this time round.

As the aircraft will now stay with the present company regardless of being in or out of a controlled environment I am really trying to find the positives and negatives of each. I am more than happy to spend the money keeping the aircraft in good condition, but like most people don't want to throw money into a system or an environment that achieves the same level of serviceability at larger expense.

I suppose now that the company know the aircraft a mere extension of all that's been done this year is the cheaper option for the next two years and the controlled route is best.

I suppose it comes down to whether I trust them not to repeat the whole investigation again next year and accept that since they've had it in their hangar and in sight for a year then they will treat next years annual as not much more than a controlled extension?

[NutLoose]

Yep, can't fault their attitude, I also went back to day one on all of the ones I look after, as you can't be sure the previous companies had carried out everything they said they had... They had, but it's all about ensuring everything is done.

Don't get the arc and annual mixed up, the arc is a paperwork exercise, the annual is maintenance, depends how many hours you do, but I know owners that do about 50 hours a year, that way the 50 Hr and Annual are both one and the same, if you did say 70 hours a year you would be paying for a 50 hr then an annual 20 hrs later if that makes sense. It just gives you something to think about when planning it.

[ericferret]

What happens when historic documentation is missing? Lots of older aircraft do not have a complete set of log books. Not unusual to see a log book for the engine starting from it's last overhaul and maybe airframe books going back 15 to 25 years out of a 50 year life.

[NutLoose]

Only had one case of that Eric and I simply complied with those items I couldn't find as being carried out in the paperwork, often you could see they had been complied with / installed when physically checking the aircraft, I then simply recorded them as having previously been embodied following inspection.

Engine wise we were lucky as most of our engines were factory zero timed overhauls, so I went from that date, though it should be the engine overhaulers responsibility to ensure all mods etc have been embodied and the engine leaves fully compliant and certified as such..