The place for technical discussions about GA and flying.
Forum rules: Technical discussions about GA only, please.
By Chasnaisflyer
#1515369
I am interested to know how owners of private use aeroplanes are going forward with maintenance after LAMP which is now finished.
Simply put. I think there are three options: a bespoke maintenance plan: use of the new MIP and continuing with CAMO using some other formal plan of maintenance.
I reckon few will go for the first option; most going for the second.
I was intending to keep with my CAMO, but since he is in France regulated by the DGAC, I fall foul of a curved ball from the CAA which says that my machine will therefore come under DGAC inspection regulstions: said regulations being triple gold plated when compared with CAA.
Thus, the part M lite, for me could work out to be a part M ultra heavy.
My preference is to use a version of MIP but it is proving hard to get my favourite maintainer to go along with this for reasons best known to himself.
To get some idea as to what is going on out there. It would be helpful to know the route others are taking.
Thanks.
RT.
By Chasnaisflyer
#1517555
Thanks for these comments which highlight the problem. What I was looking for was information as to which of the options other users have decided to use.
Thanks in anticipation.
User avatar
By T67M
#1517574
We're sticking with our existing CAMO, but we do let a flying club use our plane (not solo) so we have slightly fewer choices. The CAMO has drawn up one maintenance plan that is used for all of the aircraft they maintain (obviously with type-specific extensions where required) and refuse to use any other plan in order to keep their overheads under control.
By Bob Upanddown
#1517948
Most maintainers I keep in touch with are unwilling to consider the MIP for two reasons.
First, as was hinted by T67M, the expected reduction in income as a result.
Second, what happens at ARC renewal and who is really going to be resposnible for the airworthiness, the owner who has self-declared the maintenance programme or the person signing the ARC? How many owners really have the knowledge to self-declare a maintenance programme? Some of us who studied to pass CAA engineers exams a long, long time ago have a view on that.

For these reasons, I can see most maintainers offering maintenance in line with what the manufacturer says (because that's less risky) plus a few things the CAA want.
GAFlyer4Fun liked this
By aerofurb
#1517993
A couple of quick points (not much time to waffle on tonight)...

Presently, SDMP applies to ELA1 in private use only.

Aircraft in RTF 'commercial ops' use can remain on LAMP (or move to their own MP) until Part-ML comes along (note: Part-ML has been coming since 2008 but is 'expected' in 2017...).

The SDMP MIP is a minimum level of maintenance - welcome to what amounts as an Annual every 100 hours. Upside is no 6 month/50 hour check for private use aircraft but some tasks might be called up anyway such as oil changes etc.

Our CAA Surveyor has confirmed that SDMP does not have to be put in place until 30 Sep 17, it is not mandatory at the next ARC prior to 30 Sep 17.

The aircraft owner is responsible for the SDMP for their aircraft and they will sign as such.

CAA SDMP Info

I agree - if you have to leave LAMP, stick with the manufacturer's MP!
Last edited by aerofurb on Sun Feb 12, 2017 8:06 pm, edited 1 time in total.
By Taff pilot
#1518728
Thank you for starting a very interesting topic , I have just done my first pilot owner 50hr check after much searching and advice seeking to the legal in's and outs which took me over a year (see my other posts ) to be honest this was brought about by the fact our current maintenance provider charged us over £400 for the work and I ended up signing for it on the log books ???

i.e Date , 6 monthly check carried out I.A.W. CAA/LAMP /A/ 2007 ISSI pilot owner
(by the way what does ISSI or is it /SS/ mean ??

and if as you say SDMP does not have to come in till September does that mean I can still fill in the log book as above ?? and after sept do i replace LAMP with SDMP ??

I also see the EASA MIP https://www.easa.europa.eu/system/files ... M%20Part-M).pdf
Has a form to fill in when maintenance is carried out and what needs to be done (a lot of which is not relevant to our aircraft ) what is your advice on this ??

anyway so with this new SDMP for our private use (no training or commercial) Is all i have to do is to follow the manufacturers time limits / maintenance checks as layed out in the latest edition of their maintenance manual?

I for one intend to do my own 50hr and use the maintenance for the annual and AD's etc

thanks in advance
By cotterpot
#1518783
Didn't think there was an 'annual' now?

Our engineer didn't put a date on the form when we had our 'last' annual a couple of weeks ago. He said it was just 50/100 from now on.
By aerofurb
#1519589
I think the most important thing is for aircraft owners to work with their maintenance organisation - not necessarily take too much advice from third parties.

There is a lot of misinformation out there and the rules, as ever, are open to interpretation.

Remember - whatever Maintenance Programme you choose, it cannot be less than EASA's Minimum Inspection Programme.

I think you'll find, MIP is 100 hours or 12 months whichever occurs first.

The LAMP reference is 'Issue 1'...

If your maintainer charged £400 'for the work' - were you paying someone to work on your aircraft. Was this for labour (aircraft maintenance and paperwork) or parts or both? I presume you asked them to work on your aircraft? Why didn't they sign for the check? What was agreed before starting the check? Why shouldn't they charge for their input if that's what you requested - do you work for nothing?

After LAMP goes you can do any task that is allowed to be carried out by the owner/pilot (detailed in Part-M) - as you can now, in fact.

The MIP template details what Maintenance Programme you're going to use - manufacturer's, your own or MIP and signed by the owner accepting the responsibility for carrying it out.

As I said at the beginning - you need to keep your Maintenance organisation on side so speak to them. Contrary to popular belief, some engineers are really nice, honourable people.... :wink:
wigglyamp, cockney steve, T67M and 1 others liked this
By cockney steve
#1519673
^^^^^^^^^^^^ What he says! take good note!


Franchise car dealers are charging ~ £100 per hour.
Take an interest, learn to understand what needs doing and why. That way, you are unlikely to be fleeced, conned or bull5h1tted , are more likely to be respected by your maintainer. if there's a cheaper option, you're more likely to be offered it.

do whatever you can, yourself unless you earn over £100 an hour nett, in which case, it's cheaper to hive it all off to someone else. :wink:
Taff pilot liked this
By Bob Upanddown
#1519686
I have just collected my wife's car from the main dealer after the annual service.
While it was there, they plugged it into all sorts of computer diagnostics (which part of the £100 per hour is used to pay for I suspect) and re-set the service warning thingy and changed the pollen filter. Good to go for another year or 20,000 miles.

You can't compare aircraft to cars of today. 40 odd years ago, I could fix everything on the car because it was Morris Minor but then I was working on it quite often because the oil needed changing regularly, and so on. At least it didn't have a pollen filter. I doubt it would cover 2000 miles between services.

I think the people in EASA are all sat in their offices and then driving home in their VW's that need one service a year (and choke us all with particulates) and they think they can apply the same maintenance requirements to a 50 year old aircraft.

Piper knew what was needed when they built the aircraft in 1960's or 1970's. Why not just follow that and let the engineers do the stuff they know. The MIP ought to stand for the Minium I can get away with Programme. If you are happy with minimum maintenance once a year and then take you wife and kids flying, make sure you have a rabbits foot with you.
cockney steve liked this
By Chasnaisflyer
#1524054
Thanks for all comments on this subject.
In fact my aim was to stick with my CAMO and stick with the Cessna maintenance program. However my CAMO is in France. We have worked very well with LAMP over the last 5 years or so. Ironically, the introduction of part M lite makes things far more expensive for me. Why? Because the CAA now say that for my French CAMO to write out the ARC, the maintenance regime must be the same as for French aircraft and overseen by the DGAC. The DGAC regard a large number of service bulletins as mandatory, when the CAA, and even EASA in most cases do not. This means having to comply and pay for a large number of things which me and my CAMO engineer know full well are not necessary for safe operation of my machine, including for example workshop checks on all the avionics, annually, just to name but one.
This is quite a concern to my maintenance organisation too, because they have several "G" clients on their books.
I am one of those guys that 100% believes in safe operation of my aeroplane, but I loathe losing flying hours and flying experience at the expense of paying for bureaucracy. Unless I can find a workable affordable solution to this problem, I think my 54 years of flying and 24 years of aircraft ownership is coming to an end.