Positioning and test flights when out of annual, plus other predicaments
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: LKBU
Posts: 435
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Positioning and test flights when out of annual, plus other predicaments
Hello everyone. It looks like my aircraft purchasing process has stalled because of the airplane being in the UK and me being on the continent, seller's agent being out of the office all the time, and neither the agent nor the seller being really eager to finalise the sale properly. At present, the aircraft has undergone a pre-purchase inspection, which revealed a leak from the fuel tank (of the wet wing type). As a result, the wing had to be taken off, sealed, cured, reinstalled... In the meantime, the annual has run out. I insist that for me to accept an aircraft after an intervention involving disassembly of the airframe, the aircraft should be test flown, and Genghis the Engineer has kindly offered his help in doing it. Furthermore, I would like the new annual to be done by the same engineer who did the pre-purchse inspection (in fact, he even agreed to credit his inspection fee towards the cost of the annual), and the aircraft should ideally be flown to his home airfield.
In fact, what I first proposed to seller's agent is that either they allow me to invite the engineer over to where it is parked now, have him do an annual at my cost, then - with a fresh annual - do a test, and then I would accept the aircraft, or alternatively, I would grant them conditional acceptance, revocable upon results of the test flight only. Only later did I realise that a special dispensation might do the trick.
So, what do you think:
- am I being fair in insisting on a test flight before acceptance?
- what kind of dispensation is necessary in the UK for a test/positioning flight without an annual (but for the purpose of conducting one)?
- anything else?
In fact, what I first proposed to seller's agent is that either they allow me to invite the engineer over to where it is parked now, have him do an annual at my cost, then - with a fresh annual - do a test, and then I would accept the aircraft, or alternatively, I would grant them conditional acceptance, revocable upon results of the test flight only. Only later did I realise that a special dispensation might do the trick.
So, what do you think:
- am I being fair in insisting on a test flight before acceptance?
- what kind of dispensation is necessary in the UK for a test/positioning flight without an annual (but for the purpose of conducting one)?
- anything else?
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Cilboldentune, Britannia
Posts: 555
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You don't mention whether the aircraft is an EASA or Annex ii type. If I recall the EASA type will need permission (and money) from the CAA, if Annex ii, a licensed engineer may be able to issue A conditions for a one off flight. I would certainly want a test flight in either case. The CAA test flight schedule is a good starting point for the test flight.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: LKBU
Posts: 435
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's an EASA type, Grumman Tiger. Could anyone point in the right direction for the procedures to get this permission? How long does it take to get one and how much does it cost?
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Aberdeen
Posts: 1,234
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My aircraft (Annex II) tyoe was grounded a couple of years ago by a CAA MPD. I applied for a ferry permit from the CAA to move it to my maintenance base.
From memory it was quite quick and sensibly priced (less than a week and I cannot remmber the cost - so obviously less than £100!).
At that time it was handled by the "A&A" department (applications and approvals I think) and the chap to talk to was a Mike McNenemy. The contact email from the CAA site is [email protected]
From memory it was quite quick and sensibly priced (less than a week and I cannot remmber the cost - so obviously less than £100!).
At that time it was handled by the "A&A" department (applications and approvals I think) and the chap to talk to was a Mike McNenemy. The contact email from the CAA site is [email protected]
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Sth Bucks UK
Age: 60
Posts: 927
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have no practical help to offer but I can say that you sound like a very sensible man (or woman!).
I often do pre-purchase inspections on cars but they must be done at my premises at potential purchaser's cost. Sellers that refuse to comply have instantly justified my charges!
I often do pre-purchase inspections on cars but they must be done at my premises at potential purchaser's cost. Sellers that refuse to comply have instantly justified my charges!
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Cilboldentune, Britannia
Posts: 555
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Anton:
Thinking about this again I would get the people that fixed the leak to issue the ARC; this would save money and time. The AA5 wing removal and replacement is a bit like 'Mechano', as the flap and ailerons controls are rods and not wires, so they should go back together without any need for adjustment. Once the ARC is issued you could get Genghis to give it the once over.
Thinking about this again I would get the people that fixed the leak to issue the ARC; this would save money and time. The AA5 wing removal and replacement is a bit like 'Mechano', as the flap and ailerons controls are rods and not wires, so they should go back together without any need for adjustment. Once the ARC is issued you could get Genghis to give it the once over.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: LKBU
Posts: 435
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
jxk, this is indeed a possibility, except that I want to place it under CAMO, and the guys who fixed the wing don't have the necessary approval, while the outfit that did the pre-purchase is a CAMO; furthermore, the former would charge me £600 more than the latter to issue an ARC.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Cilboldentune, Britannia
Posts: 555
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Anton,
The people who did the tank repair must/should have at least have Part F. You state that they do not have approval to issue the ARC, so it should be perfectly legitimate for preferred CAMO with part G to do an inspection and issue the ARC.
The people who did the tank repair must/should have at least have Part F. You state that they do not have approval to issue the ARC, so it should be perfectly legitimate for preferred CAMO with part G to do an inspection and issue the ARC.
