Light Aircraft Costs Schedule 5 v.s. Manufacturer Maintenance Schedules etc.
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2014
Location: wollongong
Age: 31
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Light Aircraft Costs Schedule 5 v.s. Manufacturer Maintenance Schedules etc.
Hi Guys,
Just wondering if some of the more experienced guys out there could give me some info on the differences in costs between servicing your light aircraft on CASA Schedule 5 compared to other maintenance schedules like the Manufacturer Maintenance Schedule or anything else you guys use.
For private owners, is it really economically viable to use a more detailed maintenance schedule and are people using Schedule 5 to cut their costs?
What is driving light aircraft maintenance in reality? Is safety the most important factor or is this too expensive for some owners and using a less detailed machinate schedule is their only option?
Some real life actual cost figures of what it costs you per year to maintain your aircraft, and on which maintenance program you use and why would also be great!
Thanks in advance!
Steven.
Just wondering if some of the more experienced guys out there could give me some info on the differences in costs between servicing your light aircraft on CASA Schedule 5 compared to other maintenance schedules like the Manufacturer Maintenance Schedule or anything else you guys use.
For private owners, is it really economically viable to use a more detailed maintenance schedule and are people using Schedule 5 to cut their costs?
What is driving light aircraft maintenance in reality? Is safety the most important factor or is this too expensive for some owners and using a less detailed machinate schedule is their only option?
Some real life actual cost figures of what it costs you per year to maintain your aircraft, and on which maintenance program you use and why would also be great!
Thanks in advance!
Steven.
The more important choice is that of the maintenance organisation. You must choose one that has a deep understanding and long experience in the maintenance of the type and model being maintained.
Most manufacturer's maintenance schedules require too much unnecessary maintenance and not enough necessary maintenance, resulting in the Waddington Effect. Unfortunately, the person considering whether to approve a System of Maintenance must take into consideration the manufacturer's maintenance schedule when deciding whether to approve the System of Maintenance, so often the same outcome is produced.
Incompetent, misguided or pencil-whipped maintenance produces the same practical outcome, whether it's done under the manufacturer's maintenance schedule, the CASA maintenance schedule (i.e. Schedule 5) or an approved system of maintenance.
An experienced maintainer will know how and when to do more of the necessary maintenance and less of the unnecessary maintenance. Schedule 5 will give you more flexibility to do that, if you have the option to use Schedule 5. If you can get the same flexibility enshrined in an approved system of maintenance for the aircraft, so much the better, but the manufacturer's maintenance schedule may get in the way.
(Typical example of this and the Waddington Effect: Injectors on fuel injected piston engines. They are constantly cleaned in operation by a wonderful solvent called 'AVGAS'. The greatest risk of them becoming partially or completely blocked arises during removal, cleaning and replacement required by maintenance schedules. Some engineers may produce scary pictures of dirty solvent after injectors have been removed and 'cleaned'. The dirty stuff comes almost entirely from the outside of the injector. An engine monitor and knowing how to use it will tell you if you have a partially or completely blocked injector.)
Unfortunately, the drive for getting rid of Schedule 5 or an equivalent and imposing more maintenance more often is driven by people who think that more maintenance more often must equal more reliability and more safety, and who - surprise surprise - make money from doing maintenance or regulating the doing of maintenance.
Most manufacturer's maintenance schedules require too much unnecessary maintenance and not enough necessary maintenance, resulting in the Waddington Effect. Unfortunately, the person considering whether to approve a System of Maintenance must take into consideration the manufacturer's maintenance schedule when deciding whether to approve the System of Maintenance, so often the same outcome is produced.
Incompetent, misguided or pencil-whipped maintenance produces the same practical outcome, whether it's done under the manufacturer's maintenance schedule, the CASA maintenance schedule (i.e. Schedule 5) or an approved system of maintenance.
An experienced maintainer will know how and when to do more of the necessary maintenance and less of the unnecessary maintenance. Schedule 5 will give you more flexibility to do that, if you have the option to use Schedule 5. If you can get the same flexibility enshrined in an approved system of maintenance for the aircraft, so much the better, but the manufacturer's maintenance schedule may get in the way.
(Typical example of this and the Waddington Effect: Injectors on fuel injected piston engines. They are constantly cleaned in operation by a wonderful solvent called 'AVGAS'. The greatest risk of them becoming partially or completely blocked arises during removal, cleaning and replacement required by maintenance schedules. Some engineers may produce scary pictures of dirty solvent after injectors have been removed and 'cleaned'. The dirty stuff comes almost entirely from the outside of the injector. An engine monitor and knowing how to use it will tell you if you have a partially or completely blocked injector.)
Unfortunately, the drive for getting rid of Schedule 5 or an equivalent and imposing more maintenance more often is driven by people who think that more maintenance more often must equal more reliability and more safety, and who - surprise surprise - make money from doing maintenance or regulating the doing of maintenance.
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Queensland
Posts: 686
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Everything Creamy said 
. Also make sure that whoever you choose has experience on your model aircraft . It's an expensive time consuming exercise paying a maintence organization to make mistakes and learn the idiosyncracies of your pride and joy. 
. Also make sure that whoever you choose has experience on your model aircraft . It's an expensive time consuming exercise paying a maintence organization to make mistakes and learn the idiosyncracies of your pride and joy.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: AMONGST BRIGALOW SUCKERS
Posts: 330
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Are Yr sure about that?
As a bit of research, (in yr spare time), have a look at the differing requirements of a Baron electric fuel pump under both schedules (sch 5 vs manufacturer)
As a bit of research, (in yr spare time), have a look at the differing requirements of a Baron electric fuel pump under both schedules (sch 5 vs manufacturer)
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: australia
Posts: 1,044
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Find someone that won't change it if the manufacture says it has to. Fact is if it goes pear shaped and you have not complies with what the manufacture has said then who holds the blame. Bit like SIDS really.
Gp back and read some over threads as this issue has already been spoken about.
It's no different to manufactures SBs.
Gp back and read some over threads as this issue has already been spoken about.
It's no different to manufactures SBs.
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: australia
Posts: 1,044
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And creamy the super hero of all aviation as you would know shed 5 is only work sheets to do a check. It's only one part of a whole maintence program which is listed on your lbs. So while you may op for shed 5 casa can and have said no and have you do a Som or manufactures. As we'll you still must comply with ADs and SB and limitations in the m/m.
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: AUSTRALIA
Posts: 209
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I believe that everyone has to comply with an AD. An SB on the other hand is not an AD, and the operator/owner could elect not to have the SB done if not thought applicable. The maintenance organisation gets a waiver signed, and the responsibility for not having the SB carried out is the operators. Am I wrong yr right?
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: In my Swag
Posts: 490
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Chief Engineer tells me it is the CAR30 organisation that is responsible for the aircraft being released with ALL due maintenance carried out.
The Service Bullitens that I have seen are mandatory, recomended or customer convenience. The mandatory ones are carried out without reference from CASA of other regulator.
CASA Schedule 5, part 2 is the minimum maintenance required for issue of the MR.
I had a look at one of the helicopter Log Book Statements, which could be likened to the Aircraft Maintenance Program of larger machines, it lists OEM schedules, Schedule 5 for EIR,as well as components hard landing etc etc.
CAR 41 1 states that components are to be included in maintenance schedule
To answer the OP question, my first inspection by my maintenece org was a little expensive, but after that I have paid about 3,000 per 100 hourly for cessna 206
The Service Bullitens that I have seen are mandatory, recomended or customer convenience. The mandatory ones are carried out without reference from CASA of other regulator.
CASA Schedule 5, part 2 is the minimum maintenance required for issue of the MR.
I had a look at one of the helicopter Log Book Statements, which could be likened to the Aircraft Maintenance Program of larger machines, it lists OEM schedules, Schedule 5 for EIR,as well as components hard landing etc etc.
CAR 41 1 states that components are to be included in maintenance schedule
41 Maintenance schedule and maintenance instructions
(1) The holder of the certificate of registration for a class B aircraft must ensure that all maintenance required to be carried out on the aircraft (including any aircraft components from time to time included in or fitted to the aircraft) by the aircraft’s maintenance schedule is carried out when required by that schedule.
Penalty: 50 penalty units.
(2) A person must not use a class B aircraft in an operation if there is
not a maintenance schedule for the aircraft that includes provision
for the maintenance of all aircraft components from time to time
included in, or fitted to, the aircraft.
(1) The holder of the certificate of registration for a class B aircraft must ensure that all maintenance required to be carried out on the aircraft (including any aircraft components from time to time included in or fitted to the aircraft) by the aircraft’s maintenance schedule is carried out when required by that schedule.
Penalty: 50 penalty units.
(2) A person must not use a class B aircraft in an operation if there is
not a maintenance schedule for the aircraft that includes provision
for the maintenance of all aircraft components from time to time
included in, or fitted to, the aircraft.
Last edited by Eddie Dean; 4th Oct 2014 at 01:52.
Another round of the decades-old, pointlessly circular argument. Feels suspiciously like the usual spiral dive...
But never fear: The new, simple 1998 regulations will make it all crystal clear.
But never fear: The new, simple 1998 regulations will make it all crystal clear.
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: In my Swag
Posts: 490
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Death spiral? OP is asking about costs. And that could cause a death spiral I guess.
Out in the GAFA, the maintenance seems to be done to the owners whimsy.
Maybe there needs to be a tightening up of standards, and a separation of private and "commercial" operations and maintenance.
Oh look CASR 1998 is nearly here.
Now there is pause for thought, if an AD or other mandatory requirement is missed who bears legal responsibility, should an accident occur?
Out in the GAFA, the maintenance seems to be done to the owners whimsy.
Maybe there needs to be a tightening up of standards, and a separation of private and "commercial" operations and maintenance.
Oh look CASR 1998 is nearly here.
and the responsibility for not having the SB carried out is the operators. Am I wrong yr right?
Last edited by Eddie Dean; 4th Oct 2014 at 09:34. Reason: Thoughts
A test, ED and yr right:
What does the periodic removal and cleaning of injectors on injected piston engines achieve?
I'm not interested in generalities or references to legislative bullsh*t.
I'm interested in knowing what contaminants, precisely, build up where, precisely, on injectors on piston engines. What gets cleaned when injectors are removed and cleaned?
What risk is being mitigated, and why, when injectors on injected piston engines are removed, cleaned and replaced?
I repeat: I'm not interested in generalities or references to legislative bullsh*t.
Give us the hard facts from experts at the coal face.
What does the periodic removal and cleaning of injectors on injected piston engines achieve?
I'm not interested in generalities or references to legislative bullsh*t.
I'm interested in knowing what contaminants, precisely, build up where, precisely, on injectors on piston engines. What gets cleaned when injectors are removed and cleaned?
What risk is being mitigated, and why, when injectors on injected piston engines are removed, cleaned and replaced?
I repeat: I'm not interested in generalities or references to legislative bullsh*t.
Give us the hard facts from experts at the coal face.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 98
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Creamie, your joking...right?
Unfortunately it appears you have not been present when someone has
Removed injectors for cleaning, as I can tell you, it is quite necessary,
Continental are 300hrs or periodically,
GAMI say 100-200 hrs for cleaning.
And please cut it out with the old " doing it for $$, or creating work bulls#€T,
I'm sick to death of it.
Next time I remove some injectors I promise, I will take some pictures and
Send to you.
Avgas...cleaning medium.. Not so much..
Kero...yes more so.
Firstly, schedule 5 is not used in isolation.
Schedule 5 is a list of things to look at, not how to maintain
Your aircraft.
Guide-
http://www.casa.gov.au/wcmswr/_asset...-operators.pdf
Some choice quotes..
"However, some operators of privately operated aeroplanes favour CASA Schedule 5 over the manufacturer’s schedule, because it appears at first glance to be simpler (and cheaper) than the manufacturer’s schedule or an SOM. However, you should bear in mind that Schedule 5 is just a list of inspection items, a ‘shopping list’ of tasks to be completed either every 100 hours, or 12 months (whichever comes first), without any specific instructions on how any of the inspection items listed in the schedule should be carried out."
Remember also that under CAR 42V (1), because all maintenance is required to be carried out in accordance
with the applicable approved data, you must still consult the manufacturer’s maintenance manuals for the airframe, engine and propeller, as well as applicable literature such as service bulletins, for instructions on how to carry out inspections and corrective maintenance.
And this one,
"If you do not follow the manufacturer’s maintenance schedule, you should know why, and be able to explain your reasoning to an auditor or accident investigator."
Here is the schedule 5 section on ignition systems.
IGNITION SYSTEM
(1) Remove the spark plugs, clean and inspect them, check the spark plug electrode gap, test the spark plugs and renew them if required.
(2) Inspect the spark plug high tension leads and ceramics.
(3) Inspect the magneto housing.
(4) Inspect the breaker compartment and cam follower.
(5) Inspect the breaker points for serviceability and check the breaker points gap, magneto engine timing and synchronisation.
(6) Inspect the switch and earth leads.
(7) Refit and torque the spark plugs.
(8) Refit the spark plug high tension leads.
Do you see anything explicitly mentioning magneto 500hr inspections?
This paragraph is at the start of the schedule 5 text.
(You say there is nothing saying in schedule 5 you must do components?)
"6.7 Except where otherwise approved or directed by CASA the procedures and limits prepared by the aeroplane manufacturer are to be used when performing an inspection required by this schedule." (Schedule 5)!
I don't think you will find too many LAME's out there that will sign out a magneto that is past it's 500hr inspection limit, I certainly wouldn't, and for bendix, yes I'm afraid in will do the 4yearly also.
But Dukes fuel pumps?
Vac pumps?
Yeah, your right, let's let them go so they fail right when you need them most.
Even though you as a registered operator are responsible that all maintenance is
Bla Bla Bla... You already know.
Let me ask you this, say you have a 182 with a McCauley, under AD/Prop/1, would you operate
It with no consideration to calendar, because it's hours only. Or would you take my advice to
Do it in accordance with the manufacturers timeframe, or do you require some pic's of corroded or failed hubs, the former means a lot more parts in the bin, the latter means.....
You keep referring to human factors without saying it, it is obviously a part of everything
We do, it should not be used as a reason, to not do something, however unnecessary you think
It is.
Quote:
"An experienced maintainer will know how and when to do more of the necessary maintenance and less of the unnecessary maintenance. Schedule 5 will give you more flexibility to do that"
First part, Not worded how I would put it, but I sort of agree,
But saying schedule 5 gives you more "flexibility" is a furphy..
I believe from a CASA insp.
""However, CAR 42V requires persons undertaking maintenance (including inspections) to do so in accordance with applicable maintenance data. CAR 2A(2)(c) defines such data to include instructions issued by manufacturers of aircraft, components and materials.""
Same old argument.
Unfortunately it appears you have not been present when someone has
Removed injectors for cleaning, as I can tell you, it is quite necessary,
Continental are 300hrs or periodically,
GAMI say 100-200 hrs for cleaning.
And please cut it out with the old " doing it for $$, or creating work bulls#€T,
I'm sick to death of it.
Next time I remove some injectors I promise, I will take some pictures and
Send to you.
Avgas...cleaning medium.. Not so much..
Kero...yes more so.
Firstly, schedule 5 is not used in isolation.
Schedule 5 is a list of things to look at, not how to maintain
Your aircraft.
Guide-
http://www.casa.gov.au/wcmswr/_asset...-operators.pdf
Some choice quotes..
"However, some operators of privately operated aeroplanes favour CASA Schedule 5 over the manufacturer’s schedule, because it appears at first glance to be simpler (and cheaper) than the manufacturer’s schedule or an SOM. However, you should bear in mind that Schedule 5 is just a list of inspection items, a ‘shopping list’ of tasks to be completed either every 100 hours, or 12 months (whichever comes first), without any specific instructions on how any of the inspection items listed in the schedule should be carried out."
Remember also that under CAR 42V (1), because all maintenance is required to be carried out in accordance
with the applicable approved data, you must still consult the manufacturer’s maintenance manuals for the airframe, engine and propeller, as well as applicable literature such as service bulletins, for instructions on how to carry out inspections and corrective maintenance.
And this one,
"If you do not follow the manufacturer’s maintenance schedule, you should know why, and be able to explain your reasoning to an auditor or accident investigator."
Here is the schedule 5 section on ignition systems.
IGNITION SYSTEM
(1) Remove the spark plugs, clean and inspect them, check the spark plug electrode gap, test the spark plugs and renew them if required.
(2) Inspect the spark plug high tension leads and ceramics.
(3) Inspect the magneto housing.
(4) Inspect the breaker compartment and cam follower.
(5) Inspect the breaker points for serviceability and check the breaker points gap, magneto engine timing and synchronisation.
(6) Inspect the switch and earth leads.
(7) Refit and torque the spark plugs.
(8) Refit the spark plug high tension leads.
Do you see anything explicitly mentioning magneto 500hr inspections?
This paragraph is at the start of the schedule 5 text.
(You say there is nothing saying in schedule 5 you must do components?)
"6.7 Except where otherwise approved or directed by CASA the procedures and limits prepared by the aeroplane manufacturer are to be used when performing an inspection required by this schedule." (Schedule 5)!
I don't think you will find too many LAME's out there that will sign out a magneto that is past it's 500hr inspection limit, I certainly wouldn't, and for bendix, yes I'm afraid in will do the 4yearly also.
But Dukes fuel pumps?
Vac pumps?
Yeah, your right, let's let them go so they fail right when you need them most.
Even though you as a registered operator are responsible that all maintenance is
Bla Bla Bla... You already know.
Let me ask you this, say you have a 182 with a McCauley, under AD/Prop/1, would you operate
It with no consideration to calendar, because it's hours only. Or would you take my advice to
Do it in accordance with the manufacturers timeframe, or do you require some pic's of corroded or failed hubs, the former means a lot more parts in the bin, the latter means.....
You keep referring to human factors without saying it, it is obviously a part of everything
We do, it should not be used as a reason, to not do something, however unnecessary you think
It is.
Quote:
"An experienced maintainer will know how and when to do more of the necessary maintenance and less of the unnecessary maintenance. Schedule 5 will give you more flexibility to do that"
First part, Not worded how I would put it, but I sort of agree,
But saying schedule 5 gives you more "flexibility" is a furphy..
I believe from a CASA insp.
""However, CAR 42V requires persons undertaking maintenance (including inspections) to do so in accordance with applicable maintenance data. CAR 2A(2)(c) defines such data to include instructions issued by manufacturers of aircraft, components and materials.""
Same old argument.
Last edited by Perspective; 4th Oct 2014 at 12:17.
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: australia
Posts: 1,044
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Creamy.
Our cleaner is worth around $15000. Do you have your car serviced. Is it injected. Dose it say when you fill your car up at the service station that our fuel has cleaners in our fuel.
Have a look around the base of your injectors are they clean or dirty. Next go do some research and attuatly see how they work. Then come back and ask.
Next vac pumps and mags. Do you do the o/h periods on them and the scheduled service on them. What about your electix fuel pump or what about your trim jacks or u/c motor or gearbox. None of the above are in the sched 5 work sheets.
But it's a con isn't just to take your $$$$.
Funny thing is your prepared to tell me and try and belittle me about lop and engine operation but you don't know the a simple basic engine components and how they work. You can read all you like in a book but nothing beats hand on experience.
Btw I know how an injector works. 👍
Our cleaner is worth around $15000. Do you have your car serviced. Is it injected. Dose it say when you fill your car up at the service station that our fuel has cleaners in our fuel.
Have a look around the base of your injectors are they clean or dirty. Next go do some research and attuatly see how they work. Then come back and ask.
Next vac pumps and mags. Do you do the o/h periods on them and the scheduled service on them. What about your electix fuel pump or what about your trim jacks or u/c motor or gearbox. None of the above are in the sched 5 work sheets.
But it's a con isn't just to take your $$$$.
Funny thing is your prepared to tell me and try and belittle me about lop and engine operation but you don't know the a simple basic engine components and how they work. You can read all you like in a book but nothing beats hand on experience.
Btw I know how an injector works. 👍
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: australia
Posts: 1,044
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Eddie.
To answer your question.
Unless the aircraft is controlled by a maintence controller the the person (lame) that signs of each cat is and the lame co-ordinator will be deemed the responsible as we'll as the owner.
Also where in the reqs dose it state a wavier is legal. If the sb is recommend the casa has give a direction that it is now recommend and may be viewed as that. If an Ad states a Sb then it must be done if it's applicable to the aircraft in question.
If the aircraft is under the controll of a maintence controller then they take the reponasabillity for the paper work and the lame takes resopability for the work carried out.
To answer your question.
Unless the aircraft is controlled by a maintence controller the the person (lame) that signs of each cat is and the lame co-ordinator will be deemed the responsible as we'll as the owner.
Also where in the reqs dose it state a wavier is legal. If the sb is recommend the casa has give a direction that it is now recommend and may be viewed as that. If an Ad states a Sb then it must be done if it's applicable to the aircraft in question.
If the aircraft is under the controll of a maintence controller then they take the reponasabillity for the paper work and the lame takes resopability for the work carried out.