PPRuNe Forums

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)
-   Tech Log (https://www.pprune.org/tech-log-15/)
-   -   737-700 M. E. L. (https://www.pprune.org/tech-log/152245-737-700-m-e-l.html)

lead zeppelin 15th November 2004 17:48

737-700 M. E. L.
 
Does anyone know if the autopilot is on the B737-700 MEL?

speech 15th November 2004 18:11

2 installed, 0 required except for ER OPS provided:
1) Approach minimums do not require their use,
2) Enroute operations do not require autopilot use, and
3) Number of flight segments and segment duration is acceptable to the flight crew.
Operators should make every effort to repair the autopilots early in the repair interval, as provided by this relief statement, in consideration of such factors as weather, traffic density, and the effects of other inoperative systems.

Mr @ Spotty M 15th November 2004 18:12

I would think that no aircraft , would have the Auto Pilot in the MEL.
You do not need an Auto Pilot to fly an aircraft. You would need it seviceable for auto land, that goes without saying.
If you do need it, then the next thing will be a coffee maker as well.
I may be wrong?

The Greaser 15th November 2004 18:13

Plus wont be able RVSM if both are broke.

IFixPlanes 15th November 2004 19:53

@speech

additional Info:
If both auto pilots are inoperative, the repair interval is "B"
Category B. Items in this category shall be repaired within three (3) consecutive calendar days (72
hours), excluding the day the malfunction was recorded in the aircraft maintenance record/logbook


Ingo

lead zeppelin 15th November 2004 20:01

Many thanks, Gentlemen - you have been most helpful!

:)

Maxiumus 15th November 2004 21:29

Mr @ Spotty M
If it was not in the MEL, then you couldn't go without. If you can go without, it would have to be in the MEL.

lead zeppelin 15th November 2004 22:36

I am not unable to not understand what you aren't not trying to not say.

Flight Detent 16th November 2004 00:40

I don't think at this stage that I agree!

H721 16th November 2004 01:45

If it was not in the MEL, then you couldn't go without. If you can go without, it would have to be in the MEL.

not necessarily true, if something not in MEL, it is at the pilot's discretion to take or not.

RaTa 16th November 2004 05:03

I can't comment on 737s, however the local CAA may have an input into what goes into an MEL. For instance a 767 in OZ is required to have 2 out of 3 autopilots serviceable for dispatch.

avoman 16th November 2004 09:13

The local regulatory authorirty will indeed have an influence on the contents of the Minimum Equipment List. This is a operators document that must be agreed and approved by their regulator. It may be more but not less restrictive than the Master Minimum Equipment List ie Boeing's.
Most are content to stick pretty close to the MMEL.

TURIN 16th November 2004 09:17

H721

not necessarily true, if something not in MEL, it is at the pilot's discretion to take or not.
How does that work then?

EG

Item A u/s.

Item A not in MEL.

Hands up the number of Licensed Engineers who would sign that off? And with what Reference? 05-01?

Who do you fly for H721? I'm not having a go, I just wondered if your country's regulations were different to mine that's all. :ok:

avoman 16th November 2004 09:46

H721 may be thinking of non-airworthiness items which find their way into the defect list. If not rectified they can be transferred to the 'level 2' or 'B' deferred defects. These items are not mentioned in the MEL. For example, that little piece of carpet behind the captain's seat. Might be frayed, it is not in the MEL, but it will not stop you flying.

Wizofoz 16th November 2004 11:16

H721,

I don't agree. If there is a defect and it is not listed in the MEL, the aircraft cannot be dispatched. If it IS in the MEL, it is still at the pilots discretion to NOT accept the aircraft.

Maxiumus 16th November 2004 11:22

Wizofoz, quite correct I think. I would never dispatch at discretion on a non-MEL item.

HOMER SIMPSONS LOVECHILD 16th November 2004 11:53

Spotty M, get real,everybody knows that a u/s bevmaker is a stopper!(Even it was in the MEL which it aint.)

:hmm:

giovane 16th November 2004 12:08

If memory serves, the BAe ATP has two autopilots fitted and at least one HAD to be serviceable to allow any dispatch. Is this still the case ?

lead zeppelin 16th November 2004 14:43

My original question concerns Canada, (Westjet, actually).

But, I do appreciate all the input - very informative.......thanks, all.

H721 16th November 2004 15:43

Wizofoz, Maxiumus & TURIN

I don't have a MEL next to me now but how about,

scenario 1,
jumbo feighter the potable tank can't be filled, can't we load bottlesss of water instead? might be no hot coffee for a coffee-loving pilot.

scenario 2,
a passenger door slide cannot be disarm from the exterior handle (but ok from interior handle). full passenger loading expected. can't we tell the next station not to open from outside?

case 2 maybe more debatable but I should say in both cases the pilot has the right not to take it.

professionals are being paid premium for solving problems acceptable to most people. we have to navigate through the niche part of engineering & operations world.

I'm not saying we can dispatch something in the MEL saying 1 installed, 1 required. just something not listed in the MEL then our chance to think/ask go or not.

Who do you fly for H721? I'm not having a go, I just wondered if your country's regulations were different to mine that's all

TURIN, from your profile you are from uk. for your interest my section L a & c licence examinations are both conducted by uk surveyors.


All times are GMT. The time now is 07:33.


Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.