New rules for MEL
Thread Starter
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 120
Likes: 1
From: EU
New rules for MEL
In our company, the MEL has been applicable until applying T/O power. But that will change now due to new JAR rules.
From now on, the MEL is not appliable any more, after the flight COMMENCES. That means, once you have started pushback, you can disregard the restrictions in the MEL.
Is that safe ?
Comments please......
From now on, the MEL is not appliable any more, after the flight COMMENCES. That means, once you have started pushback, you can disregard the restrictions in the MEL.
Is that safe ?
Comments please......
Joined: Dec 1998
Posts: 3,038
Likes: 52
From: .
Sounds like a load of rubbish to me.
OK, after pushback and taxying out lets say an eng bleed valve fails, MEL says you have to lock it out, are you saying leave it in the failed position. doesn't sound right to me.
OK, after pushback and taxying out lets say an eng bleed valve fails, MEL says you have to lock it out, are you saying leave it in the failed position. doesn't sound right to me.
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
From: England
As I always understood it - once the aircraft moved under its own power then it was free of restrictions enforced in the MEL. That has been our company policy since I joined - of course common sense prevails though with certain failures. Do you really need both engines for take-off??? 
Fleet Manager
Joined: Apr 2001
Aviation Qualifications: ATPL
Posts: 7,448
Likes: 310
From: various places .....
Missing the point of MELs, chaps ...
(a) the basic requirement is that the aircraft, AS DESPATCHED, meets the Design Standards relevant to the Type Certificate
(b) taken literally, this would mean that operations would routinely cease when things break
(c) clearly, many failures can be addressed by the imposition of additional restrictions to achieve the intent of the Design Standard requirements relevant to the busted bit. This is where the MMEL comes into the picture - a schedule of such busted bits and related restrictions to permit intentional operation with the bit still busted. If you can't meet the MMEL (as rescheduled to the local MEL) requirements, you get the busted bit fixed
(d) if the bit busts in flight, then it is appropriate to consider the MEL as that gives a lot of guidance to crews in matters which might not be obvious to them .. ie fly the aircraft, fix the immediate problems, and then consider the MEL restrictions in the light of guidance material
As to whether the fence is push back or line up is secondary and a matter for State regulatory and operator processes.
(a) the basic requirement is that the aircraft, AS DESPATCHED, meets the Design Standards relevant to the Type Certificate
(b) taken literally, this would mean that operations would routinely cease when things break
(c) clearly, many failures can be addressed by the imposition of additional restrictions to achieve the intent of the Design Standard requirements relevant to the busted bit. This is where the MMEL comes into the picture - a schedule of such busted bits and related restrictions to permit intentional operation with the bit still busted. If you can't meet the MMEL (as rescheduled to the local MEL) requirements, you get the busted bit fixed
(d) if the bit busts in flight, then it is appropriate to consider the MEL as that gives a lot of guidance to crews in matters which might not be obvious to them .. ie fly the aircraft, fix the immediate problems, and then consider the MEL restrictions in the light of guidance material
As to whether the fence is push back or line up is secondary and a matter for State regulatory and operator processes.
Last edited by john_tullamarine; 6th September 2005 at 10:03.
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 399
Likes: 0
From: West
FAA authorization is:
"B. MEL Effectivity
The provisions and limitations of the MEL are applicable for “Dispatch” of an aircraft. For MEL purposes, “Dispatch” is defined as the advancement of throttles for the purpose of taking off (takeoff event). If the takeoff is aborted for any reason, the MEL provisions and limitations become applicable once again.
If a component or function becomes inoperative following the takeoff, the MEL does not apply."
"B. MEL Effectivity
The provisions and limitations of the MEL are applicable for “Dispatch” of an aircraft. For MEL purposes, “Dispatch” is defined as the advancement of throttles for the purpose of taking off (takeoff event). If the takeoff is aborted for any reason, the MEL provisions and limitations become applicable once again.
If a component or function becomes inoperative following the takeoff, the MEL does not apply."
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
From: in the middle of nowhere
And does anyone have the clean JAR definition of MEL appliance during taxi out or so ?
I would like just to clarify this point because it is slill slighty messy where is the border of PIC responsibility.
I would like just to clarify this point because it is slill slighty messy where is the border of PIC responsibility.
Joined: Jul 1999
Posts: 134
Likes: 0
From: Big Sky Country
In AA, MEL items are identified as being crew placardable (y/n). If a defect occurs after engine start that is crew placardable then the flight may continue without maintenance intervention. Otherwise it's back to the gate!!
Joined: Oct 1999
Posts: 160
Likes: 0
From: Two hundred baro
Operational Applicability: ANO and JAR-OPS 1/3
CAA MMEL POLICY ITEM: GEN-1
22. "Dispatch": The point at which an aircraft first moves under its own power for the purpose of commencing a flight.
NOTE: The definition above is in accordance with that given in Article 129(2)(a) of the ANO.
The MEL applies to all defects that occur up to the point of dispatch, and comes into
effect again when the aircraft next comes to rest at the end of its flight. In the case of a helicopter which comes to rest without stopping rotors, it is deemed to have ended its flight and the provisions of the MEL then apply until it is next dispatched.
Once you have started taxiing, the MEL no longer applies. Common sense, however, should.
CAA MMEL POLICY ITEM: GEN-1
22. "Dispatch": The point at which an aircraft first moves under its own power for the purpose of commencing a flight.
NOTE: The definition above is in accordance with that given in Article 129(2)(a) of the ANO.
The MEL applies to all defects that occur up to the point of dispatch, and comes into
effect again when the aircraft next comes to rest at the end of its flight. In the case of a helicopter which comes to rest without stopping rotors, it is deemed to have ended its flight and the provisions of the MEL then apply until it is next dispatched.
Once you have started taxiing, the MEL no longer applies. Common sense, however, should.
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 4,581
Likes: 0
From: flyover country USA
Can we then say that failure of an item requiring/resulting in a limitation restriction (i.e. runway length) can therefore be ignored as well?
Once you have started taxiing, the MEL no longer applies. Common sense, however, should.
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 662
Likes: 5
From: If this is Tuesday, it must be?
I think the point of the JAA rule is purely administrative - if an acceptable defect occurs after leaving the gate you don't have to taxyback and get engineering to sign the tech log as per the MEL procedures. Before or after and regardless of signatures it's still the Captain's decision whether to accept the aircraft for flight with any particular defect. Of course if he doesn't he's in trouble with management
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 2,281
Likes: 0
From: ? ? ?
Once you have started taxiing, the MEL no longer applies
the point at which an aircraft first moves under its own power for the purpose of commencing a flight
the MEL are applicable until applying T/O power
Ciao
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 467
Likes: 0
From: Europe
I would agree with CAT1,
APPLICABILITY AND USE OF THE MEL
Before Flight the MEL is intended to give guidance to the Flight Crew and Engineering of items that affect
dispatch and airworthiness of the aircraft.
The Aircraft is Considered to have been dispatched when it first moves under its own power.
After Dispatch the MEL may be referred to for information and guidance. Any action that is required should be taken in accordance with the procedures in this manual.
e.x.: Performance items that may have an adverse effect on the sector shall be reviewed before take-off
However the commander can refuse to depart even if MEL allows him to do so in accordance with JAR-OPS 1.085(d):
The commander shall:
([11])Decide whether or not to accept an aeroplane with unserviceabilities allowed by the CDL or MEL; and
APPLICABILITY AND USE OF THE MEL
Before Flight the MEL is intended to give guidance to the Flight Crew and Engineering of items that affect
dispatch and airworthiness of the aircraft.
The Aircraft is Considered to have been dispatched when it first moves under its own power.
After Dispatch the MEL may be referred to for information and guidance. Any action that is required should be taken in accordance with the procedures in this manual.
e.x.: Performance items that may have an adverse effect on the sector shall be reviewed before take-off
However the commander can refuse to depart even if MEL allows him to do so in accordance with JAR-OPS 1.085(d):
The commander shall:
([11])Decide whether or not to accept an aeroplane with unserviceabilities allowed by the CDL or MEL; and
Last edited by popay; 8th October 2005 at 21:48.
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 3
From: Arizona USA
<<<<FAA authorization is:
"B. MEL Effectivity
The provisions and limitations of the MEL are applicable for “Dispatch” of an aircraft. For MEL purposes, “Dispatch” is defined as the advancement of throttles for the purpose of taking off (takeoff event). If the takeoff is aborted for any reason, the MEL provisions and limitations become applicable once again.
If a component or function becomes inoperative following the takeoff, the MEL does not apply.">>>>
As regards a flight dispatched under FAA regulations, absolutely correct.
Applies to CDL as well.
Further, normally the MEL item is placarded in the aircraft by ground maintenance prior to taxi, but if the u/s item requiring application of the MEL, and the aircraft has already taxied for departure, it need not return for any further action (placarding), but the crew nonetheless must apply said MEL procedures.
FAA....making for a much smoother and cost-effective operation, while retaining safety of flight..
"B. MEL Effectivity
The provisions and limitations of the MEL are applicable for “Dispatch” of an aircraft. For MEL purposes, “Dispatch” is defined as the advancement of throttles for the purpose of taking off (takeoff event). If the takeoff is aborted for any reason, the MEL provisions and limitations become applicable once again.
If a component or function becomes inoperative following the takeoff, the MEL does not apply.">>>>
As regards a flight dispatched under FAA regulations, absolutely correct.
Applies to CDL as well.
Further, normally the MEL item is placarded in the aircraft by ground maintenance prior to taxi, but if the u/s item requiring application of the MEL, and the aircraft has already taxied for departure, it need not return for any further action (placarding), but the crew nonetheless must apply said MEL procedures.
FAA....making for a much smoother and cost-effective operation, while retaining safety of flight..
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 291
Likes: 0
From: Heathrow
In my company the MEL is the document on the gate and during pushback. The QRH comes into effect after the aircraft has moved under its own power. To answer some of the above questions:
If something like a bleed valve fails - we check the QRH, it says "if on the ground, do not take off, if in the air press....etc"
The MEL says "one may be locked out etc..", so in this case, even though the MEL has ceased to be the main reference document, the safety of the flight is assured.
If an FMC fails for instance, then there is not much difference between take off and taxiing out, you are still presented with the same problems after rotate.
If you as the commander are not happy - come back to the gate. No matter what happens and which document you consult, if you are not happy, return or land at your discretion.
It works very well for us and hasn't presented any safety issues.
I have gone back to the gate after consulting the MEL after taxy and decided to stay and get it fixed, even though both documents say it is OK to continue. I have also continued with an item that was "no dispatch" in the MEL, but allowable in the QRH.
If something like a bleed valve fails - we check the QRH, it says "if on the ground, do not take off, if in the air press....etc"
The MEL says "one may be locked out etc..", so in this case, even though the MEL has ceased to be the main reference document, the safety of the flight is assured.
If an FMC fails for instance, then there is not much difference between take off and taxiing out, you are still presented with the same problems after rotate.
If you as the commander are not happy - come back to the gate. No matter what happens and which document you consult, if you are not happy, return or land at your discretion.
It works very well for us and hasn't presented any safety issues.
I have gone back to the gate after consulting the MEL after taxy and decided to stay and get it fixed, even though both documents say it is OK to continue. I have also continued with an item that was "no dispatch" in the MEL, but allowable in the QRH.
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 2,627
Likes: 2
From: UTC +8
No_Speed_Restriction:
...How far do you insert a Q-tip into your ear? Have you ever touched brain? 
Can we then say that failure of an item requiring/resulting in a limitation restriction (i.e. runway length) can therefore be ignored as well?
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 1,432
Likes: 0
From: Dre's mum's house
The clue is in the old catch all....
If you have a problem which restricts your MTOW it would be prudent to ignore the MEL and taxi back in.
If the aircraft will be AOG at Much Snoring in the Middle of Nowhere when it lands with a fault, and there is no tech support available, it be may preferable - commercially - to RTB.
And so on......that is why the Commander gets paid so little
Notwithstanding anything contained in any of the company manuals, the Commander may deviate from these procedures when he believes it is necessary for the safety of the flight etc
If the aircraft will be AOG at Much Snoring in the Middle of Nowhere when it lands with a fault, and there is no tech support available, it be may preferable - commercially - to RTB.
And so on......that is why the Commander gets paid so little
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 388
Likes: 2
From: Floating around the planet
I`ve already done a topic about this under another nick at
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthr...+closing+doors
What the JAR 145 says is that you stop using the mel after closing doors.
At my actual company, we proceed with the ECAM Ations or QRH ,then go to the FCOM 3 and the MEl in this order.
But we are strongly encouraged to use the mel until a second before TO POWER is aplied.
For you have an idea,in the 320 if you have an ADR#2 failure,you are just requested to turn it off. Normally a pilot could easily think thre is no problem since we have 3 ADR`s but if you go to the MEL you will see that we can`t take off with FLAPS 1+F.
Not to speak the dispatch restrictions you can have at your destination to the way back.
To me this is the most stupid regulation ever written
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthr...+closing+doors
What the JAR 145 says is that you stop using the mel after closing doors.
At my actual company, we proceed with the ECAM Ations or QRH ,then go to the FCOM 3 and the MEl in this order.
But we are strongly encouraged to use the mel until a second before TO POWER is aplied.
For you have an idea,in the 320 if you have an ADR#2 failure,you are just requested to turn it off. Normally a pilot could easily think thre is no problem since we have 3 ADR`s but if you go to the MEL you will see that we can`t take off with FLAPS 1+F.
Not to speak the dispatch restrictions you can have at your destination to the way back.
To me this is the most stupid regulation ever written
Last edited by A-3TWENTY; 16th October 2005 at 06:01.
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 105
Likes: 0
From: US
Source Document
NONE:
Can you give the source document for this statement? Thanks,
"FAA authorization is:
'B. MEL Effectivity
The provisions and limitations of the MEL are applicable for “Dispatch” of an aircraft. For MEL purposes, “Dispatch” is defined as the advancement of throttles for the purpose of taking off (takeoff event). If the takeoff is aborted for any reason, the MEL provisions and limitations become applicable once again.
If a component or function becomes inoperative following the takeoff, the MEL does not apply.' "
LL
Can you give the source document for this statement? Thanks,
"FAA authorization is:
'B. MEL Effectivity
The provisions and limitations of the MEL are applicable for “Dispatch” of an aircraft. For MEL purposes, “Dispatch” is defined as the advancement of throttles for the purpose of taking off (takeoff event). If the takeoff is aborted for any reason, the MEL provisions and limitations become applicable once again.
If a component or function becomes inoperative following the takeoff, the MEL does not apply.' "
LL
