Going over the 100 hour inspection...
- Thread starter GaTechKid
- Start date
Chris_Ford
Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
100-hour limitation may be exceeded by not more than 10 hours while en route to reach a place where the inspection can be done. The excess time used to reach a place where the inspection can be
done must be included in computing the next 100 hours of time in service.
[/ QUOTE ]
You're fine, technically you were "in transit" back to the aiport where the maintenance was required. No big deal, happens alot
100-hour limitation may be exceeded by not more than 10 hours while en route to reach a place where the inspection can be done. The excess time used to reach a place where the inspection can be
done must be included in computing the next 100 hours of time in service.
[/ QUOTE ]
You're fine, technically you were "in transit" back to the aiport where the maintenance was required. No big deal, happens alot
Ralgha
Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
100-hour limitation may be exceeded by not more than 10 hours while en route to reach a place where the inspection can be done. The excess time used to reach a place where the inspection can be
done must be included in computing the next 100 hours of time in service.
[/ QUOTE ]
You're fine, technically you were "in transit" back to the aiport where the maintenance was required. No big deal, happens alot
[/ QUOTE ]
As long as there's no ADs due at that 100 hours. If there are, then you're screwed.
[ QUOTE ]
100-hour limitation may be exceeded by not more than 10 hours while en route to reach a place where the inspection can be done. The excess time used to reach a place where the inspection can be
done must be included in computing the next 100 hours of time in service.
[/ QUOTE ]
You're fine, technically you were "in transit" back to the aiport where the maintenance was required. No big deal, happens alot
[/ QUOTE ]
As long as there's no ADs due at that 100 hours. If there are, then you're screwed.
MidlifeFlyer
Well-Known Member
Depends. Did you reasonably expect the lesson to last less than the 1 hour? If so, you're okay (unless there is an AD at the same time).
I'm sorry I can't find the reference, but I recall that the purpose of the 10 extra hours is to let you continue to fly if something unplanned for (like a deviation) takes place that causes you to exceed the time period. It's not a license to take off with 0.1 remaining on the tach.
So, if you have the 1 hour left and have a pretty good idea that the lesson will take 1.2, you probably have a violation.
I'm sorry I can't find the reference, but I recall that the purpose of the 10 extra hours is to let you continue to fly if something unplanned for (like a deviation) takes place that causes you to exceed the time period. It's not a license to take off with 0.1 remaining on the tach.
So, if you have the 1 hour left and have a pretty good idea that the lesson will take 1.2, you probably have a violation.
BoilerPilot2007
Well-Known Member
You can't to touch and go's after the 100 hour mark. Once your wheels touch down at the home airport and you're past the 100 hour mark, you need to be a full stop.
MidlifeFlyer
Well-Known Member
I found my reference. There isn't any. Truth is, there doesn't seem to be a lot of easily-found published official stuff on the 10-hour overflight part of the rule.
The question was raised in Doc's FAR Forum a few year's ago. For those who don't know, Doc has been around a long time and is one of the true gurus of aviation lore.
According to Doc, the purpose of permitting a covered flight to exceed the 100 hour limitation "while enroute to reach a place where the inspection can be done" is to cover situations where you =inadvertently= go beyond the limit. It is not meant to give you a buffer to =intentionally= exceed the limit by starting a covered flight that you reasonably know will exceed the limitation.
For example, the airplane requires a 100 hour inspection in 4 hours. Your cross country planning indicates that the flight will take 3 hours. While in the air "while enroute", a weather change requires a deviation that adds 2 hours to the flight. The regulation allows you to continue to the location where the inspection will be done.
But, if your cross country planning indicates that the flight will take 3 hours and the 100-hour is due in 1 hour, you are not permitted to leave.
Based on the high quality of Doc's answers, I accept his analysis in the absence of anything to the contrary. On top of that, if you think about the reason for the rule, it makes sense. The rule is there to protect paying passengers and trainees. Even the "penalty" for going over fits - there's no sensible reason for it except to remove at least one incentive for going over and claiming it was an accident..
The question was raised in Doc's FAR Forum a few year's ago. For those who don't know, Doc has been around a long time and is one of the true gurus of aviation lore.
According to Doc, the purpose of permitting a covered flight to exceed the 100 hour limitation "while enroute to reach a place where the inspection can be done" is to cover situations where you =inadvertently= go beyond the limit. It is not meant to give you a buffer to =intentionally= exceed the limit by starting a covered flight that you reasonably know will exceed the limitation.
For example, the airplane requires a 100 hour inspection in 4 hours. Your cross country planning indicates that the flight will take 3 hours. While in the air "while enroute", a weather change requires a deviation that adds 2 hours to the flight. The regulation allows you to continue to the location where the inspection will be done.
But, if your cross country planning indicates that the flight will take 3 hours and the 100-hour is due in 1 hour, you are not permitted to leave.
Based on the high quality of Doc's answers, I accept his analysis in the absence of anything to the contrary. On top of that, if you think about the reason for the rule, it makes sense. The rule is there to protect paying passengers and trainees. Even the "penalty" for going over fits - there's no sensible reason for it except to remove at least one incentive for going over and claiming it was an accident..
moxiepilot
Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
As long as there's no ADs due at that 100 hours. If there are, then you're screwed.
[/ QUOTE ]
this is where you have to be VERY careful. Yeah, you can go over the 100 hrs as discussed, but if there is an AD at that inspection, then you have violated the regs. As you preflight you will have reviewed the logbooks (but that usually only happens when you go on a checkride, right?
) And in those logbooks you have the list of AD's to comply with. That's where they hold you responsibe as PIC.
As long as there's no ADs due at that 100 hours. If there are, then you're screwed.
[/ QUOTE ]
this is where you have to be VERY careful. Yeah, you can go over the 100 hrs as discussed, but if there is an AD at that inspection, then you have violated the regs. As you preflight you will have reviewed the logbooks (but that usually only happens when you go on a checkride, right?
The intent of the 10-hour overfly is not so you can log extra time because you are "in transit" back from a local sortie. As Midlife mentioned, if you had 1 hour left til' the 100 hour and had a pretty good idea that you wouldn't be back in an hour then you are wrong. I'm sure the FAA would frown on the fact that if you went over the inspection and you're response was "technically I was in transit to a location that maintenance could be done".....especially, if it is the same location you took off from. And it is a big deal and shouldn't happen a lot.
Chris_Ford
Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
And it is a big deal and shouldn't happen a lot.
[/ QUOTE ]
I'm going to have to disagree there. As long as the proper precautions are taken (Yeah, don't take off with .1 until event) what's wrong with going over the 100-hour, as long as no ADs are due? It's not like it gives you extra room to do the 100-hour, as the next one still has to be done 100 hours after the last one.
I agree, don't leave with .5 until 100-hour on a 3 hour X-C, but a local flight where you go .3 over? Big deal.
And it is a big deal and shouldn't happen a lot.
[/ QUOTE ]
I'm going to have to disagree there. As long as the proper precautions are taken (Yeah, don't take off with .1 until event) what's wrong with going over the 100-hour, as long as no ADs are due? It's not like it gives you extra room to do the 100-hour, as the next one still has to be done 100 hours after the last one.
I agree, don't leave with .5 until 100-hour on a 3 hour X-C, but a local flight where you go .3 over? Big deal.
There's a difference between heading out and getting diverted out the way for weather only to find you've passed the 100 hour inspection; rather than taking off with 1 hour left and you haven't had a flight shorter than an hour in the last 2 years--knowing you wouldn't be back in an hour. How many folks that are in flight training do you think, actually know what/when the AD's are due--I would venture to say not many. We don't have a list of AD's in the logbook that goes with the airplane so unless the PIC looks at our maintenance logbooks each time, they won't know ....and when is the time PICs at a flight school generally look at the maintenance logbooks?---for their checkrides. If you teach with the mentality that it's okay to overfly 100 hours, then you will set your students up for a "potential" violation sometime in their future....as they will, more than likely, fly different aircraft down the line which could have AD's they aren't aware of.
Chris_Ford
Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
If you teach with the mentality that it's okay to overfly 100 hours, then you will set your students up for a "potential" violation sometime in their future....as they will, more than likely, fly different aircraft down the line which could have AD's they aren't aware of.
[/ QUOTE ]
I agree, good point. Perhaps it's my own complacency since I'm used to flying planes with very few applicable ADs (especially recurring ones). Well explained, I give you an A+
If you teach with the mentality that it's okay to overfly 100 hours, then you will set your students up for a "potential" violation sometime in their future....as they will, more than likely, fly different aircraft down the line which could have AD's they aren't aware of.
[/ QUOTE ]
I agree, good point. Perhaps it's my own complacency since I'm used to flying planes with very few applicable ADs (especially recurring ones). Well explained, I give you an A+
I fly and work mostly on the mighty 172, so I'm familiar with those AD's and that's where the necessity lies in not flying past the 100 hour. I'd hate to see anyone get jammed up for .3 on the tach cause they wanted a lil' extra time. Just lookin' out for my fellow pilots out there.
Another thing to keep in mind. Insurance is not going to cover a plane out of 100hr. Go over .1hrs, and have an accident, and not only worry about the FAA (who can, and likely will go after you, the 10hrs is for transport back if you are stuck in podunk, not to allow you to go past the 100 each time) but the almighty insurance company, who is going to say, you were not legal, and you are now going to have to cover all cost of said accident, since you were not covered at all by their insurance. Then wait for the business/fbo to go after you, because you flew it uninsured, and start looking for a new place to fly most likely.
Simple way to avoid the 100hr over issue. Just don't do it. Get the plane to the shop _before_ the 100hr of tach time has gone, per the regs. Most inspections will likely be done in the 98-99hr of tach time then.
Simple way to avoid the 100hr over issue. Just don't do it. Get the plane to the shop _before_ the 100hr of tach time has gone, per the regs. Most inspections will likely be done in the 98-99hr of tach time then.