MEL
Guest
Posts: n/a
MEL
We are having a discussion on our private forum regarding the MEL. There appears to be some confusion as to when reference to the MEL is required. Without quoting parrot fashion from JAR, it seems that once an aircraft has started taxying under it's own power for the purpose of undertaking a flight, then the Captain 'may' reference the MEL to help make a go/no go decision, whereas if he was still at the gate or attached to the tug he 'must' reference the MEL. Any comments ??.
------------------
Horry Snr.
------------------
Horry Snr.
Guest
Posts: n/a
I quote from the rule book - JAR-MMEL/MEL.001 (d) "
" Limit of MEL Applicability. The MEL is applicable up to the commencement of flight."
" Commencement of flight. The point when an aircraft begins to move under its own power for the purpose of preparing for take off."
Also: from ACJ MMEL/MEL.001(d)
" If a failure occurs during taxy phase before the start of the take off roll, any decision to continue the flight shall be subject to pilot judgement and good airmanship. The commander may refer to the MEL before any decision to continue the flight is taken."
It is interesting to note that the ACJ uses the word "may" and not "must".
For those who are unfamiliar with the JAR/ACJ system, a JAR is the rule and the ACJ is a way of offering guidance on the use of the rule.
There in lies the confusion.
------------------
Horry Snr.
" Limit of MEL Applicability. The MEL is applicable up to the commencement of flight."
" Commencement of flight. The point when an aircraft begins to move under its own power for the purpose of preparing for take off."
Also: from ACJ MMEL/MEL.001(d)
" If a failure occurs during taxy phase before the start of the take off roll, any decision to continue the flight shall be subject to pilot judgement and good airmanship. The commander may refer to the MEL before any decision to continue the flight is taken."
It is interesting to note that the ACJ uses the word "may" and not "must".
For those who are unfamiliar with the JAR/ACJ system, a JAR is the rule and the ACJ is a way of offering guidance on the use of the rule.
There in lies the confusion.
------------------
Horry Snr.
Guest
Posts: n/a
A simpler way to look at that would be:
If you're sitting at the gate, you must cunsult the MEL for your problem, as it's a problem before the flight starts. Whereas, while you're taxiing out, any problem you have now will be considered by maintenance as an "inbound" snag at the next base (unless you don't go). But you'd be velly velly silly not to look at the MEL anyway.
If you're sitting at the gate, you must cunsult the MEL for your problem, as it's a problem before the flight starts. Whereas, while you're taxiing out, any problem you have now will be considered by maintenance as an "inbound" snag at the next base (unless you don't go). But you'd be velly velly silly not to look at the MEL anyway.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Not with standing all of the above, some of my previous employers have inserted into their DDG preamble a requirement that after QRH actions have been carried out, MEL must be consulted prior to take off.
Now the confusion and fun really starts. Especially if your at an outstation with no engineer coverage.
------------------
Goddamit! Burnt another one
Now the confusion and fun really starts. Especially if your at an outstation with no engineer coverage.
------------------
Goddamit! Burnt another one
