Piper Seminole Static Wicks

W

waco1990

Well-Known Member
Does anybody know what the requirements for static wicks are on the PA-44? I have heard some people say that you can fly with one missing as long as there is at least one per movable surface and other people saying they must all be attached. I have called Piper to verify but there not sure either.
Steven
 
waco1990 said:
Does anybody know what the requirements for static wicks are on the PA-44? I have heard some people say that you can fly with one missing as long as there is at least one per movable surface and other people saying they must all be attached. I have called Piper to verify but there not sure either.
Steven
Click to expand...


Whats the POH say?
 
I was going to say, I've never seen it in the poh of the seminole either! I would check to see what mx has to say about it. They may have some kind of publication that states what's required.

If it was me, I would only be concerned about static wicks if I knew I was going to be solid IMC.. if it's VFR, I don't see anywhere it's required.
 
When you guys say POH you are obviously refering to the one inside the plane right?? the one that has the equipment list right??

because the book doesnt right??

Can you also call it airplane flight manual??
 
trafficinsight said:
It's the other way around. If it's not in the equipment list designated optional it is required.
Click to expand...

I know it's that way if there's an MEL, but I thought that 91.213 regulated anything not under the POH kinds of equipment operating list. I might pop open the FARs tonight...
 
shdw said:
What's a poh?
Click to expand...

Excellent! :laff: :laff: :laff:

trafficinsight said:
It's the other way around. If it's not in the equipment list designated optional it is required.
Click to expand...

Don't be so sure about that.

As I recall,the FSDO Inspector who did my CFI checkride told me about being ramp checked and being told his aircraft was not airworthy because of missing static wicks. He tossed the POH to the other Inspector and said "Show me where it says they're required equipment on this airplane" The other inspector didn't like it, but couldn't make his case, and finally backed off entirely when he found out he was ramp checking another Fed.
 
Mike H said:
Excellent! :laff: :laff: :laff:



Don't be so sure about that.

As I recall,the FSDO Inspector who did my CFI checkride told me about being ramp checked and being told his aircraft was not airworthy because of missing static wicks. He tossed the POH to the other Inspector and said "Show me where it says they're required equipment on this airplane" The other inspector didn't like it, but couldn't make his case, and finally backed off entirely when he found out he was ramp checking another Fed.
Click to expand...

The reasoning goes like this:

The definition of airworthy is "meets original type design or is in a properly altered condition."

If a static wick which was installed on the airplane at manufacture is broken, the airplane no longer meets its original type design.

If the POH says the static wicks are optional, then you don't need to have them, but you must have the broken one removed. The airplane is now in a "properly altered condition" based on data that is approved (the POH equipment list). Maintenance was performed, so you'll need a log entry as well.

If the POH says nothing about static wicks either way, then you've got no choice, there's no way to "properly alter" the airplane.

In the end it's just easier to have the static wick replaced ;)
 
Mike H said:
Excellent! :laff: :laff: :laff:



Don't be so sure about that.

As I recall,the FSDO Inspector who did my CFI checkride told me about being ramp checked and being told his aircraft was not airworthy because of missing static wicks. He tossed the POH to the other Inspector and said "Show me where it says they're required equipment on this airplane" The other inspector didn't like it, but couldn't make his case, and finally backed off entirely when he found out he was ramp checking another Fed.
Click to expand...


Does the POH say the left wing is required?
 
OH sweet jesus here we go again. Who cares its a friggin static wick. just get it replaced if its giving you that much heartburn.
 
trafficinsight said:
It's the other way around. If it's not in the equipment list designated optional it is required.
Click to expand...


So if an item is striaght up missing from the equipment list IN the airplane, it's required? "Ju has sum esplaning to do!" This goes against all logic of determining airworthiness. Is there some super secret manual that I have been left in the dark about all this time?
 
I wouldn't cancel a flight for it, but if the plane goes IFR regularly I'd expect MX to replace it at the next 100 hour.
 
mshunter said:
So if an item is striaght up missing from the equipment list IN the airplane, it's required? "Ju has sum esplaning to do!" This goes against all logic of determining airworthiness. Is there some super secret manual that I have been left in the dark about all this time?
Click to expand...


I already esplained up thataway ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top