Piper Seminole Static Wicks

[trafficinsight]

Yeah, but I'm still not clear. If the POH makes no mention of static wicks, how is it that if they are missing, the airplane is no longer airworthy? "I'm am not understand!" <------In your best Apu voice.

When the airplane leaves the factory with everything that installed in it and on it working it "meets original type design" (from that definition of airworthy)

When the static wick breaks off, the airplane is no longer as it was when it left the factory so it no longer "meets original type design."

If the POH or another approved source says that the static wicks are optional then you have a basis for altering the aircraft, you can have them removed.

If there is no such data then no dice. The airplane must meet its original type design or be properly altered, you can't prove that the airplane was properly altered if you have nothing to back it up.

 

[mshunter]

If there is no such data then no dice. The airplane must meet its original type design or be properly altered, you can't prove that the airplane was properly altered if you have nothing to back it up.

Nor can you prove that static wicks are a part of the origonal type design if they are not noted in the equipment list as even being installed, correct?

 

[trafficinsight]

Nor can you prove that static wicks are a part of the origonal type design if they are not noted in the equipment list as even being installed, correct?

If they were not installed by the factory but added later under a manufacturer's kit or STC then you would refer to that data to determine whether or not they are required. The equipment list is supposed to be updated with that kind of stuff but more often than not, they aren't.

It's not always easy to determine whether or not something is required, I'll grant you that. My point is, if you don't have some kind of data specifically saying it's optional, or required but you can have x number missing, or something like that, it's required. This is why it's so important to keep the paperwork in good order.

 

[mshunter]

If they were not installed by the factory but added later under a manufacturer's kit or STC then you would refer to that data to determine whether or not they are required. The equipment list is supposed to be updated with that kind of stuff but more often than not, they aren't.

It's not always easy to determine whether or not something is required, I'll grant you that. My point is, if you don't have some kind of data specifically saying it's optional, or required but you can have x number missing, or something like that, it's required. This is why it's so important to keep the paperwork in good order.

Now I understand. You were ommiting a very important piece of data about an STC/manufacturer's kit. And most of the time, from what I've seen, the STC won't update the equipment list in the book, it usually adds a few pages that are hidden somwhere. Sometimes, it may even be on a 337, and that won't be in a POH/AFM. That to, will be burried in the maint. records somwhere.

 

[CoffeeIcePapers]

Now I understand. You were ommiting a very important piece of data about an STC/manufacturer's kit. And most of the time, from what I've seen, the STC won't update the equipment list in the book, it usually adds a few pages that are hidden somwhere. Sometimes, it may even be on a 337, and that won't be in a POH/AFM. That to, will be burried in the maint. records somwhere.

Like I said above, does the equipment list require the left wing?

 

[trafficinsight]

Now I understand. You were ommiting a very important piece of data about an STC/manufacturer's kit. And most of the time, from what I've seen, the STC won't update the equipment list in the book, it usually adds a few pages that are hidden somwhere. Sometimes, it may even be on a 337, and that won't be in a POH/AFM. That to, will be burried in the maint. records somwhere.

True, I was assuming that the Seminole came with static wicks from the factory.

 

[mshunter]

Like I said above, does the equipment list require the left wing?

Seriously dude. Are you being facetious or something. The equipment list describes everything attached to the airframe. So, if your not considering that the wing is part of the airframe, I think you need some remedial.

 

[dlcmdrx]

Does the POH say the left wing is required?

No, but the type certificate does.

 

[CoffeeIcePapers]

Seriously dude. Are you being facetious or something. The equipment list describes everything attached to the airframe. So, if your not considering that the wing is part of the airframe, I think you need some remedial.

Are the static wicks not attached to the airframe? I am being facetious to make a point. Your assertion that if it is not in the POH equipment list then it is not required is wrong.

No, but the type certificate does.

Therein lies the problem. It depends on what certification the aircraft was certified under.

91.213

d) Except for operations conducted in accordance with paragraph (a) or (c) of this section, a person may takeoff an aircraft in operations conducted under this part with inoperative instruments and equipment without an approved Minimum Equipment List provided --

(1) The flight operation is conducted in a --

(i) Rotorcraft, nonturbine-powered airplane, glider, or lighter-than-air aircraft for which a master Minimum Equipment List has not been developed; or

(ii) Small rotorcraft, nonturbine-powered small airplane, glider, or lighter-than-air aircraft for which a Master Minimum Equipment List has been developed; and

(2) The inoperative instruments and equipment are not --

(i) Part of the VFR-day type certification instruments and equipment prescribed in the applicable airworthiness regulations under which the aircraft was type certificated;

(ii) Indicated as required on the aircraft's equipment list, or on the Kinds of Operations Equipment List for the kind of flight operation being conducted;

(iii) Required by §91.205 or any other rule of this part for the specific kind of flight operation being conducted; or

(iv) Required to be operational by an airworthiness directive; and

To quote the great tgrayson:

What it means is that whatever was required for an airplane to be certified for VFR Day flight at the time the aircraft was certified is part of the required equipment. There is no easy answer to your question. Some of the requirements will be listed on the Type Certificate Data Sheet (TCDS), but more importantly, that document will tell you what set of regulations the aircraft was certified under, such as CAR 3 or Part 23. To know for sure, you'd need to know how those regulations read when the aircraft was certified.

 

[mshunter]

Are the static wicks not attached to the airframe? I am being facetious to make a point. Your assertion that if it is not in the POH equipment list then it is not required is wrong.



Therein lies the problem. It depends on what certification the aircraft was certified under.

91.213



To quote the great tgrayson:

So you went through all that just to prove a point that you are better than everyone else. Show me a list of what the airplane was certified with. Any airplane, I don't care. And get down from your horse before you come back.


P.S. Thanks for proving my point about being facetious.

 

[CoffeeIcePapers]

So you went through all that just to prove a point that you are better than everyone else. Show me a list of what the airplane was certified with. Any airplane, I don't care. And get down from your horse before you come back.


P.S. Thanks for proving my point about being facetious.

Calm down, I am not on a high horse, just saying that this:

Well there you have it. If it's not in the POH under the equipment list, then it's not required as far as I'm concerned.

is not correct.

The TCDS for the PA-44-180 says it was certificated under Part 23.

http://www.airweb.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgMakeModel.nsf/0/f07de52f6061c8cc8625720a0054ef4f/$FILE/A19SO.pdf

Part 23.867

[Electrical bonding and protection against lightning and static electricity.]

(a) The airplane must be protected against catastrophic effects from lightning.
(b) For metallic components, compliance with paragraph (a) of this section may be shown by--
(1) Bonding the components properly to the airframe; or
(2) Designing the components so that a strike will not endanger the airplane.
(c) For non-metallic components, compliance with paragraph (a) of this section may be shown by--
(1) Designing the components to minimize the effect of a strike; or
(2) Incorporating acceptable means of diverting the resulting electrical current so as not to endanger the airplane.

 

[mshunter]

And you couldn't have just said that insted of drawing it out with your series of questions to prove your superior intelect? Are static wicks part of that regulation?

 

[CoffeeIcePapers]

And you couldn't have just said that insted of drawing it out with your series of questions to prove your superior intelect? Are static wicks part of that regulation?

No, I thought it was just save time disproving your point, but that backfired. I think its pretty clear that static wicks are part of the requirement from 23.867, but you can make your own assessment.