Question about minimum equipment (UK)
SilsoeSid:
Kind of contradictory, no?
"BELIEVE THOSE INSTRUMENTS! Uhh, but not that one. All the rest though."
Believe your instruments.
Never trust a fuel gauge.
Never trust a fuel gauge.
"BELIEVE THOSE INSTRUMENTS! Uhh, but not that one. All the rest though."
Chief Bottle Washer
Originally Posted by thecontroller
Fuel guage is inop...
Is it legal to fly it? ANO says nothing, POH says nothing, EU-OPS I cant find online
Does anyone know the answer?
Is it legal to fly it? ANO says nothing, POH says nothing, EU-OPS I cant find online
Does anyone know the answer?
Originally Posted by thecontroller
Errr, yes, I understand all that, but IS IT LEGAL UNDER JAA/EASA?
I like to think that most Rotorheads would be helpful and understand the OP question, rather than sink into a mire of misunderstanding and gratuitous insults 
Purveyor of Egg Liqueur to Lucifer
That's understood SP, however it appears clear that there is no definitive answer here. Even the 747 isn't much help.
I think what is clear though, is that just because something may be legal and written in black and white, it may not be the most sensible thing to do.
Round here there are 40 mph speed limits on straight dual carriageways, you can then simply turn off it onto a single carriageway country lane and you can legally do 60mph. Just because you can, doesn't mean you should!
Besides, if post number 2 was a simple 'No!', discussion wouldn't take place and we wouldn't be learning anything.
I think what is clear though, is that just because something may be legal and written in black and white, it may not be the most sensible thing to do.
Round here there are 40 mph speed limits on straight dual carriageways, you can then simply turn off it onto a single carriageway country lane and you can legally do 60mph. Just because you can, doesn't mean you should!
Besides, if post number 2 was a simple 'No!', discussion wouldn't take place and we wouldn't be learning anything.
Master and/or MELS are an approved document under commercial AOC ops only. Under PVT ops there is no such thing. Fuel gauge U/S or even nav light blown, aircraft is U/S.
The aircraft shall comply with Type Cert and/or NAA requirements.
As previously posted nobody can find the answer because there isn't one.
You take the option of PVT you are in an unregulated environment over which there is very little control. Hence no MMEL.
If you are of the opinion that you should have or be allowed to have an MEL who would make the decision and control it?
No mention of Part 91!
Read carefully http://http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...equipment_list
The aircraft shall comply with Type Cert and/or NAA requirements.
As previously posted nobody can find the answer because there isn't one.
You take the option of PVT you are in an unregulated environment over which there is very little control. Hence no MMEL.
If you are of the opinion that you should have or be allowed to have an MEL who would make the decision and control it?
No one is required to have an MEL Operating under part 121, 125, 127, 129, 135, Large (12,500 lbs.), or turbine powered aircraft You may not operate with inoperative equipment without an MEL This means these operations for the most part have to have an MEL
Read carefully http://http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...equipment_list
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,957
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You may not operate with inoperative equipment without an MEL
But oh no, CASA has to concern itself with the big end of town doesn't it. Don't worry about the lack of safety implications as outlined above.
cheers tet
The original question related to a UK registered aircraft on a private flight and so all references to FARs, CASA, EU-Ops, MELs, etc. are entirely irrelevant.
Assuming that the helicopter is an EASA aircraft (as defined by CAP 747 and the Basic Regulation) and holds a Certificate of Airworthiness, for the C of A to remain valid the required equipment, as defined by the relevant EASA Certification Standard, must remain serviceable. In the case of the S300CBi, the relevant standard is CS-27 and paragraph 27.1305(d) requires a fuel quantity indicator to be provided for each fuel tank. Furthermore, CS27.1301 requires that each item of required equipment must function properly when installed.
Consequently, if the fuel gauge, being a required item of equipment, does not function properly, the Certificate of Airworthiness is not valid and Article 16(1) of the ANO 2007 prevents the aircraft from being flown.
Enough references for you, thecontroller?
Assuming that the helicopter is an EASA aircraft (as defined by CAP 747 and the Basic Regulation) and holds a Certificate of Airworthiness, for the C of A to remain valid the required equipment, as defined by the relevant EASA Certification Standard, must remain serviceable. In the case of the S300CBi, the relevant standard is CS-27 and paragraph 27.1305(d) requires a fuel quantity indicator to be provided for each fuel tank. Furthermore, CS27.1301 requires that each item of required equipment must function properly when installed.
Consequently, if the fuel gauge, being a required item of equipment, does not function properly, the Certificate of Airworthiness is not valid and Article 16(1) of the ANO 2007 prevents the aircraft from being flown.
Enough references for you, thecontroller?
Purveyor of Egg Liqueur to Lucifer
So that's that then.
I hope your customer / passenger / friend, was patient enough to hang around to see if you were going to take them flying or not!
Are you?
I hope your customer / passenger / friend, was patient enough to hang around to see if you were going to take them flying or not!
Are you?
