The place for technical discussions about GA and flying.
Forum rules: Technical discussions about GA only, please.
By Fellsteruk
#1841696
Sorry if asked before I could find answer? I’m curious to learn more about the regular checks needed and what is done “checked/replaced” on each of the intervals.

Where is the best place to learn about this for a SEP?

Thanks
User avatar
By Rob P
#1841697
CAP411 isn't a bad start.

Rob P
User avatar
By GrahamB
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1841889
Fellsteruk wrote:Sorry if asked before I could find answer? I’m curious to learn more about the regular checks needed and what is done “checked/replaced” on each of the intervals.

Where is the best place to learn about this for a SEP?

Thanks

Part 21 (i.e. former 'EASA') types operated for non-commercial transport purposes are required to be maintained to an Approved Maintenance Programme. This is constructed from a combination of the manufacturer's/type certificate holder's recommended maintenance programme and the (formerly) EASA Minimum Inspection Programme, plus any additional requirements made necessary by any subsequent changes to the aircraft such as STC's, individual component manufacturer service instructions, and Airworthiness Directives. In any case the AMP musn't be less restrictive than the (formerly) EASA MIP.

Basically you work with your maintenance company and CAMO/CAO to agree an AMP, which is then used as the basis for the work they do and how frequently, and which also specifies what tasks a pilot-owner can carry out.

Essentially, most private SEPs are now maintained to a 50 hour/100 hour cycle, but there will probably be things which are mandated annually, or at longer flight time intervals - e.g. magnetos requiring a 500 hour service.

A good place to start is here.

@Rob P CAP411 is completely obsolete now.
User avatar
By Rob P
#1841907
Indeed and thanks for the update. But I was very careful to say that this was a starting point for the OP to understand the sort of tasks involved at the time intervals. I was not expecting him to print it out and use it as a work log.

Rob P
User avatar
By Paul_Sengupta
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1841915
GrahamB wrote:@Rob P CAP411 is completely obsolete now.


Not really. With the self declared maintenance thing these days, it's a good start to declare LAMS as the schedule. It's a start at returning maintenance to something sensible, before EASA got its claws in, though the vast amount of time maintenance organisations have had to spend on new rules and procedures, driving all the prices up, will never be recovered.
User avatar
By GrahamB
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1841928
I agree it gives an indication of the tasks, but to perpetuate the belief that scheduled inspection or maintenance is carried out on a 50/150/annual basis is misleading. Even the 50 hour is not strictly needed under Part ML unless you or your aircraft manufacturer’s programme require it to be included. (Some owners may not do a 50 hour but will change oil at 25 hours, for example).

To be really pedantic, LAMS is doubly obsolete, as it was superceded by LAMP as defined by CAP767, which itself was then replaced by the alleviated EASA Part M requirements and the SDMP, now replaced by full Part ML and the AMP!
User avatar
By GrahamB
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1841954
Paul_Sengupta wrote:Remember there's also the LAA, and the LAA maintenance can also use LAMS as its basis.

Which is why I restricted my response to Part 21 aircraft, as I have little clue about other maintenance regimes.
User avatar
By Rob P
#1841957
I think for the purposes of this question the finer points of Part 21 or not can be set aside. It would be fair to assume the required basic mechanics of Part 21 piston engined singles and non-Part 21 piston engined singles will be close enough. The legislation niceties aren't greatly concerning here.

Rob P
Paul_Sengupta liked this
User avatar
By Flying_john
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1841970
I have maintained our Aircraft for 15yrs+ both as a CofA type under supervision and more recently as a permit type overseen by an LAA inspector.

I started with a LAMS and even now use a LAMS in a slightly modified form is what is in used now.

But in essence the actual "spannering" work has remained the same, its just the paperwork that has altered. As was pointed out by my LAE many years ago, there are not different types of airworthiness, it is either airworthy or not. So I carry on doing the work to the same standard as always.
Rob P, Rob L, AlanC liked this
User avatar
By Rob P
#1841988
Flying_john wrote: As was pointed out by my LAE many years ago, there are not different types of airworthiness, it is either airworthy or not.


:thumleft:

Rob P
User avatar
By foxmoth
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1842903
Where is the best place to learn about this for a SEP?


Others have mentioned the LAA, if you buy a permit aircraft and do your own maintenance you will soon learn what is involved - saves a fortune as well! :)