A340/330 Mel
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Choroni, sometimes
Posts: 1,974
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
) MEL is approved by legal authorities.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Over The Hills And Far Away
Posts: 676
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Agent 1 u/s,
both Cargo Compartments must be empty.
both Cargo Compartments must be empty.
When comparing MELs from different companies, be aware that a MEL is a tailored document. There can be differences from company to company.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Choroni, sometimes
Posts: 1,974
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Choroni, sometimes
Posts: 1,974
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
hetfield
Just for the record CASA don’t approve anything, they accept it. A very big difference in the legal world and all the consequences that go along with it if something should go wrong.
As far as I’m aware and Spannersatcx can verify this, the Hong Kong CAD approves all our “CX’s” manuals which in most part are a direct copy of the originals from Airbus with only minor variations because of local regulations.
No we can't. In my country (not France) MEL is approved by legal authorities.
As far as I’m aware and Spannersatcx can verify this, the Hong Kong CAD approves all our “CX’s” manuals which in most part are a direct copy of the originals from Airbus with only minor variations because of local regulations.
Join Date: Dec 1998
Location: .
Posts: 2,997
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quite right, normally the aircraft manufacturer will compile an M(aster)MEL, this will be ratified by the National Authority, the CAA, HKCAD, CASA. The NAA then issues a MMEL list for a/c types.
The MMEL can be added to by the operator (with authority and ratification by the NAA) but can not be reduced in content, or the NAA.
Essentially what you should see is an MEL produced by Boeing or Airbus added to by the NAA or operator so in essence every airlines MEL should look the same except for certain peculiarities to that airline.
In HKG CX wanted to reduce the time limit for D category items, 120 day time limit to 60 days, which it did with authority and approval from the NAA. We wouldn't of been able to increase it from 120 days though as this would be a reduction of the MMEL and not an addition.
We have also where MEL's are confusing/grey! areas changed the 'notes' etc to be more explanatory.
At the end of the day if you're not happy or are confused about the MEL then you don't have to take the a/c, of course I will pass you a mobile to call the powers that be as it's now not a Tech delay but an operational one
Having read, used and interpreted MEL's for a number of years now, I always read it twice, looking for the and/or's/but's and maybe's, first to understand it secondly how to get around it.
It's suprising what difference one little word makes.
The MMEL can be added to by the operator (with authority and ratification by the NAA) but can not be reduced in content, or the NAA.
Essentially what you should see is an MEL produced by Boeing or Airbus added to by the NAA or operator so in essence every airlines MEL should look the same except for certain peculiarities to that airline.
In HKG CX wanted to reduce the time limit for D category items, 120 day time limit to 60 days, which it did with authority and approval from the NAA. We wouldn't of been able to increase it from 120 days though as this would be a reduction of the MMEL and not an addition.
We have also where MEL's are confusing/grey! areas changed the 'notes' etc to be more explanatory.
At the end of the day if you're not happy or are confused about the MEL then you don't have to take the a/c, of course I will pass you a mobile to call the powers that be as it's now not a Tech delay but an operational one
Having read, used and interpreted MEL's for a number of years now, I always read it twice, looking for the and/or's/but's and maybe's, first to understand it secondly how to get around it.
It's suprising what difference one little word makes.
