91.205 question...who can placard...

[killbilly]

As a CFI candidate, I feel like I should know the answer to this one. I asked a couple of other CFIs I know and got two different answers, but both were unsure about it, which made me feel a little better.

I went to go fly last night - PA-28R/200, 1976 model. There is a red strobing beacon installed on the vertical stabilizer, which I determined was INOP during preflight.

The beacon wasn't part of the type certificate, and it's not required by 91.205 given that the plane has the appropriate position and anti-collision lights.

My issue is thus: if I understand the regs correctly, if it's attached to the airplane, it has to be deactivated and placarded by appropriate maintenance personnel. I don't think I meet that requirement. The light is activated by the split-rocker switch on the panel and it did not appear to have a separate breaker, but even if it did, I'm not sure that I'm authorized to placard it as INOP and then go fly.

So I noted it in the squawk book, notified the club maintenance guy and switched to another airplane.

Could I have placarded that thing and flown it legally?

 

[trafficinsight]

Hi there!

Here are some things to look at.

43.3
43 appendix A
91.209

 

[killbilly]

Hi there!

Here are some things to look at.

43.3
43 appendix A
91.209

Thanks for the guidance - this was good information to research. The closest thing I found to a 'yes' was that troubleshooting landing light circuits is Preventive Maintenance (which I could do) but nothing about the beacon.

Based on everything you listed, my conclusion is still "no" - I am not authorized to troubleshoot, deactivate or placard the beacon. Am I correct here?

 

[killbilly]

@Roger Roger - thoughts?

 

[trafficinsight]

Hi there!

Here are some things to look at.

43.3
43 appendix A
91.209

Thanks for the guidance - this was good information to research. The closest thing I found to a 'yes' was that troubleshooting landing light circuits is Preventive Maintenance (which I could do) but nothing about the beacon.

Based on everything you listed, my conclusion is still "no" - I am not authorized to troubleshoot, deactivate or placard the beacon. Am I correct here?

43 appendix A allows you to repair decorative coatings of the interior, I always figured replacing or adding a placard counted for that.

I neglected to add:

91.213d (2) and (3)


(3) outlines that, in your case, you must deactivate and placard the inoperative equipment. It then says that if deactivation requires maintenance that must be recorded in the logbook.

My interpretation was always that turning the switch off constituted deactivation and no maintenance is required so no log entry is required, the placard can be installed by you.

This is fine for a landing light... But the bad news is that 91.209 says that an anti collision light, if installed, must be operating, and 213d(2) says "required by 91.205 or any other rule under this part"

So while it applies to the landing light, I think you're out of luck on the beacon.

 

[killbilly]

43 appendix A allows you to repair decorative coatings of the interior, I always figured replacing or adding a placard counted for that.

I neglected to add:

91.213d (2) and (3)


(3) outlines that, in your case, you must deactivate and placard the inoperative equipment. It then says that if deactivation requires maintenance that must be recorded in the logbook.

My interpretation was always that turning the switch off constituted deactivation and no maintenance is required so no log entry is required, the placard can be installed by you.

I get what you're saying there, but I believe that isn't what 'deactivate' means. "Disabling" might be a better word to use in THIS case because a light either works or it doesn't. But let's say you've got a failing AI...it's not required for day VFR and (if it's not on the type certificate) it would need to be completely deactivated by a mech and then placarded. "Deactivate" means (I think) "render this inoperative or partially inoperative device COMPLETELY inoperative."

This is fine for a landing light... But the bad news is that 91.209 says that an anti collision light, if installed, must be operating, and 213d(2) says "required by 91.205 or any other rule under this part"

So while it applies to the landing light, I think you're out of luck on the beacon.

I concur.

 

[trafficinsight]

43 appendix A allows you to repair decorative coatings of the interior, I always figured replacing or adding a placard counted for that.

I neglected to add:

91.213d (2) and (3)


(3) outlines that, in your case, you must deactivate and placard the inoperative equipment. It then says that if deactivation requires maintenance that must be recorded in the logbook.

My interpretation was always that turning the switch off constituted deactivation and no maintenance is required so no log entry is required, the placard can be installed by you.

I get what you're saying there, but I believe that isn't what 'deactivate' means. "Disabling" might be a better word to use in THIS case because a light either works or it doesn't. But let's say you've got a failing AI...it's not required for day VFR and (if it's not on the type certificate) it would need to be completely deactivated by a mech and then placarded. "Deactivate" means (I think) "render this inoperative or partially inoperative device COMPLETELY inoperative."

This is fine for a landing light... But the bad news is that 91.209 says that an anti collision light, if installed, must be operating, and 213d(2) says "required by 91.205 or any other rule under this part"

So while it applies to the landing light, I think you're out of luck on the beacon.

I concur.

I remember reading it in advisory circular somewhere, but I'll admit it's been a while.

 

[Roger Roger]

As a CFI candidate, I feel like I should know the answer to this one. I asked a couple of other CFIs I know and got two different answers, but both were unsure about it, which made me feel a little better.

I went to go fly last night - PA-28R/200, 1976 model. There is a red strobing beacon installed on the vertical stabilizer, which I determined was INOP during preflight.

The beacon wasn't part of the type certificate, and it's not required by 91.205 given that the plane has the appropriate position and anti-collision lights.

My issue is thus: if I understand the regs correctly, if it's attached to the airplane, it has to be deactivated and placarded by appropriate maintenance personnel. I don't think I meet that requirement. The light is activated by the split-rocker switch on the panel and it did not appear to have a separate breaker, but even if it did, I'm not sure that I'm authorized to placard it as INOP and then go fly.

So I noted it in the squawk book, notified the club maintenance guy and switched to another airplane.

Could I have placarded that thing and flown it legally?

@Roger Roger - thoughts?

43 appendix A allows you to repair decorative coatings of the interior, I always figured replacing or adding a placard counted for that.

I neglected to add:

91.213d (2) and (3)


(3) outlines that, in your case, you must deactivate and placard the inoperative equipment. It then says that if deactivation requires maintenance that must be recorded in the logbook.

My interpretation was always that turning the switch off constituted deactivation and no maintenance is required so no log entry is required, the placard can be installed by you.

This is fine for a landing light... But the bad news is that 91.209 says that an anti collision light, if installed, must be operating, and 213d(2) says "required by 91.205 or any other rule under this part"

So while it applies to the landing light, I think you're out of luck on the beacon.

I get what you're saying there, but I believe that isn't what 'deactivate' means. "Disabling" might be a better word to use in THIS case because a light either works or it doesn't. But let's say you've got a failing AI...it's not required for day VFR and (if it's not on the type certificate) it would need to be completely deactivated by a mech and then placarded. "Deactivate" means (I think) "render this inoperative or partially inoperative device COMPLETELY inoperative."



I concur.

Ok, so a couple disclaimers before I give my opinion.
1, I’ve never really dealt with this much as a non A&P rated pilot, as the place I trained at had a policy that all the placarding etc was handled by mx
2, most of my time since training has been in 135 where either you have an MEL that lays out how to deal with this or you have to ground the airplane to fix or remove the equipment.

My gut instinct is yes, you could. Unfortunately, I don’t have an AC or anything to back it up. What might be educational though is to look at how the FAA handles MELs for aircraft that have them. In every MEL I’ve seen the flight crew can placard the inoperable equipment. @trafficinsight ’s point about markings etc being preventive maintenance is a good one and not something I’d thought about. Also in the MELs I’m familiar with something like a light is considered to be deactivated if it is switched off.

The landing light troubleshooting issue is a red herring imho, my understanding for that was always that it was specifically in there so it was legal for a pilot to unhook and hook up landing light wiring for aircraft (like your PA28) with the landing light mounted to the cowl (or reconnect it if the mechanic forgot to).

I also think the 91.209 issue is a red herring, for 2 reasons. 1, in general, with reference to required instruments and equipment, the FAA treats inoperable equipment as if it were not installed (see: transponders, RVSM, etc). So I don’t think that merely having one of two installed anti collision light systems inoperable puts you in violation. 2, you still have the wingtip strobes which should meet the requirements of the rule to have an anti collision light system illuminated (except on the ramp when you’re blinding everyone next to you of course).

If you have any pull with your club it would not be a bad idea to see if you can’t get a written policy instituted so that everyone in the club is on the same page when this type of thing comes up.

And finally I feel compelled to point out that this is part 91, and honestly unless you’re taking a checkride or doing something to blatantly draw the attention of the federales no one except you is going to care, and in both of those cases what the rule and it’s interpretations say means less than the individual inspector’s pet interpretation. Which makes it both simpler and more difficult in a way.

 

[killbilly]

My gut instinct is yes, you could. Unfortunately, I don’t have an AC or anything to back it up. What might be educational though is to look at how the FAA handles MELs for aircraft that have them. In every MEL I’ve seen the flight crew can placard the inoperable equipment. @trafficinsight ’s point about markings etc being preventive maintenance is a good one and not something I’d thought about. Also in the MELs I’m familiar with something like a light is considered to be deactivated if it is switched off.

Good points. I've never flown under anything but 91 and never with a MEL - doesn't a MEL require specific training to use it? That may be where the placarding ability comes into play?

As it happens, I'm attending a group CFI-candidate class tomorrow so I may bring up the idea with the instructor. I'm especially interested in how I might teach this. I get the flowcharts and requirements concepts, but I want to teach a student to make good decisions. My ADM thought process went, "I could probably do this, but I want to ensure I'm flying a legally airworthy aircraft, and since I have another airplane I can use parked right next to this one, it doesn't make sense for me to operate in what I currently perceive to be a gray area."

As noted above, the plane had strobes and all the requisite position lights, so the beacon is technically gravy. But it's a highly-visible lump of gravy, and I *like* highly visible in the SFRA.

 

[Roger Roger]

Good points. I've never flown under anything but 91 and never with a MEL - doesn't a MEL require specific training to use it? That may be where the placarding ability comes into play?

As it happens, I'm attending a group CFI-candidate class tomorrow so I may bring up the idea with the instructor. I'm especially interested in how I might teach this. I get the flowcharts and requirements concepts, but I want to teach a student to make good decisions. My ADM thought process went, "I could probably do this, but I want to ensure I'm flying a legally airworthy aircraft, and since I have another airplane I can use parked right next to this one, it doesn't make sense for me to operate in what I currently perceive to be a gray area."

As noted above, the plane had strobes and all the requisite position lights, so the beacon is technically gravy. But it's a highly-visible lump of gravy, and I *like* highly visible in the SFRA.

Also AC91-67 addresses the concept of deactivating a system by turning it off, and talks a lot about placarding...but unfortunately does not explicitly say WHO can placard.

Edit: under the definition of “placard” AC91-67 says that a mechanic or operator may placard inoperable equipment. But then go to the definition of “operator” and it refers to an entity using a part 91 MEL....

 

[drunkenbeagle]

Edit: under the definition of “placard” AC91-67 says that a mechanic or operator may placard inoperable equipment. But then go to the definition of “operator” and it refers to an entity using a part 91 MEL....

And of course, you could have placard'd it under the direction of an A&P, which in reality is how most of the wrenches actually get turned in a lot of places I've been around.

This was a really good question for a bunch of reasons though.

 

[killbilly]

Edit: under the definition of “placard” AC91-67 says that a mechanic or operator may placard inoperable equipment. But then go to the definition of “operator” and it refers to an entity using a part 91 MEL....

And of course, you could have placard'd it under the direction of an A&P, which in reality is how most of the wrenches actually get turned in a lot of places I've been around.

This was a really good question for a bunch of reasons though.

Thanks. Yeah if an A/P had been around I would have done that - but it was 7:30pm on a very cold night and I pretty much had the field to myself.

The Tobago parks in the same hangar as the Arrow so I just shifted to that airplane. Easy peasy.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[MidlifeFlyer]

Unfortunately, you won't find a clear unambiguous answer on this from the FAA. The only thing clear is, if it fits into the definition of preventive maintenance in Part 43, Appendix A, the pilot may do it. Beyond that, all you will get is unsupported opinions. with a number in the FAA expressing the view that Appendix A is a limit on what an owner/operator may do. The concern is the limited (required) maintenance and systems knowledge of the owner/operator. Is that failed instrument limited to that item you can turn off or cover or is it symptomatic of a wider problem?

 

[jmc4]

Just curious, get any scoop from the CFI?

Good points. I've never flown under anything but 91 and never with a MEL - doesn't a MEL require specific training to use it? That may be where the placarding ability comes into play?

As it happens, I'm attending a group CFI-candidate class tomorrow so I may bring up the idea with the instructor. I'm especially interested in how I might teach this. I get the flowcharts and requirements concepts, but I want to teach a student to make good decisions. My ADM thought process went, "I could probably do this, but I want to ensure I'm flying a legally airworthy aircraft, and since I have another airplane I can use parked right next to this one, it doesn't make sense for me to operate in what I currently perceive to be a gray area."

As noted above, the plane had strobes and all the requisite position lights, so the beacon is technically gravy. But it's a highly-visible lump of gravy, and I *like* highly visible in the SFRA.

 

[killbilly]

Just curious, get any scoop from the CFI?

One of the club CFIs got back to me and said he was of the opinion that I could have placarded it myself as an owner/operator (it's a club airplane, and I have an equity stake as an owner) however, the legality of that action would likely be subjective to the whims of the FSDO, as @MidlifeFlyer points out above. It's not spelled out in preventive maintenance, nor do we have a MEL, so the guidance in the FARs is vague.

I didn't have a chance to ask that question in CFI class, though, but I will, very soon.

 

[killbilly]

One additional note to this thread. I sent a query to a guy I know who is both an A/P and an owner/operator of a PA-28R exactly like the one in my club. Here's what he had to say:

"It is a grey[sic] area. The FAA inspectors I've worked with haven't really cared who placarded it as long as it was, in fact, placarded inop. 'Off' is sufficient for deactivation as long as you can physically prevent the switch from being moved to the 'on' position, or, if it has its own circuit breaker, the CB gets pulled."

He then went on to mention - and this part I think is key...I asked him further about the placarding allowing night VFR operations since the rest of the anticollision system was functional:

"No. Per 91.205(c)(3) - In the event of failure of any light of the anticollision light system, operations with the aircraft may be continued to a stop where repairs or replacement can be made. That means if a light fails in flight you can continue to a stop to have it repaired. Otherwise, all lights must be functional prior to launch."

So. Gray area on *who* can placard (and assuming someone makes a maintenance log entry for it. But it still ain't airworthy.

 

[Roger Roger]

One additional note to this thread. I sent a query to a guy I know who is both an A/P and an owner/operator of a PA-28R exactly like the one in my club. Here's what he had to say:

"It is a grey[sic] area. The FAA inspectors I've worked with haven't really cared who placarded it as long as it was, in fact, placarded inop. 'Off' is sufficient for deactivation as long as you can physically prevent the switch from being moved to the 'on' position, or, if it has its own circuit breaker, the CB gets pulled."

He then went on to mention - and this part I think is key...I asked him further about the placarding allowing night VFR operations since the rest of the anticollision system was functional:

"No. Per 91.205(c)(3) - In the event of failure of any light of the anticollision light system, operations with the aircraft may be continued to a stop where repairs or replacement can be made. That means if a light fails in flight you can continue to a stop to have it repaired. Otherwise, all lights must be functional prior to launch."

So. Gray area on *who* can placard (and assuming someone makes a maintenance log entry for it. But it still ain't airworthy.

I disagree with his interpretation of 91.205 in this instance. It is inconsistent with all other FAA practices regarding inoperable equipment to have a failure of a single part of a redundant system (beacon on an aircraft also equipped with strobe lights) be a grounding item.

 

[killbilly]

I disagree with his interpretation of 91.205 in this instance. It is inconsistent with all other FAA practices regarding inoperable equipment to have a failure of a single part of a redundant system (beacon on an aircraft also equipped with strobe lights) be a grounding item.

I get what you're saying. The wording in the reg says, "can continue until repairs are made." The implicit part of that is that if you don't have the repairs made, you cannot continue to fly. Thus, if you find it before you fly, you're grounded until it's repaired.

That's the flow of the logic, anyway. You're saying this is inconsistent?

 

[trafficinsight]

@Autothrust Blue

How do I feel about gray areas?

 

[Roger Roger]

I get what you're saying. The wording in the reg says, "can continue until repairs are made." The implicit part of that is that if you don't have the repairs made, you cannot continue to fly. Thus, if you find it before you fly, you're grounded until it's repaired.

That's the flow of the logic, anyway. You're saying this is inconsistent?

The rule requires ONE working anti collision light system. In any other scenario I can think of, if the FAA requires one of something and there aren’t other factors (KOEL, MEL, etc) complicating the issue, failure of redundant equipment is not a grounding item. For example, you have two transponders and one fails and is legally deferred and placarded. Are you going to still notify ATC one hour prior to entering 91.215 airspace? No, of course you’re not. Same thing with anti collision lights. You still have one working set? Good, roll with it.
One thing to be wary of is that a wingtip strobe system does not necessarily meet all requirements of an anti collision light system. The only way I know of for a pilot to check would be to consult the KOEL if the aircraft has one (which, since you didn’t mention it anywhere in the discussion, I’m going to assume your aircraft doesn’t) It would usually tell you that EITHER the strobes OR the beacon must be operable for night flight.

Edit: I think I see where the miscommunication is coming from. I’m operating under the premise of the tail beacon and the wingtip strobes each separately meeting the requirements of an anti collision light system but you’re on the belief that the three lights together constitute a single system. I’m not actually sure who is right there.