Narrative:

A renter pilot was forced to land off field when she ran the right fuel tank out of gas. We were notified the next morning around by the renter of the incident. The company president and chief of maintenance flew to flagler airport with tools. We were taken to the aircraft by the local sheriff. Preliminary inspection revealed some damage to nose wheel bracing. There were no injuries to pilot or passenger, no property damage and damage to aircraft was minimal--although did require structural repairs to nose wheel bracing. We had the renter pilot contact the rocky mountain FSDO and report the incident. At that time we discussed the condition of the aircraft with the first officer. We were advised that this was to be reported as an incident, not an accident. We discussed obtaining a ferry permit with the first officer and were advised that a maintenance officer could issue a ferry permit, however this could not be granted verbally. At that time we discussed the possibility of making the appropriate repairs in the field, to be supervised by an a&P, ia mechanic and were told that as long as he endorsed the aircraft log that it is returned to service after the necessary repairs had been made, we could legally fly it home. I left the responsibility for the repairs with our mechanic. He made the repairs and log book endorsements and flew the aircraft to our home base in boulder, co, that evening. 5/wed/89 a first officer advised us that he and a maintenance inspector wanted to see the aircraft repairs, and that the aircraft may not have been legal to fly west/O a ferry permit. We felt the appropriate repairs had been made, and that the aircraft paperwork properly amended. The aircraft was safely returned to its home base. Our concern was to protect the aircraft and return it to our home base as soon as possible. If the FAA had advised us that the only legal way of returning the aircraft after the type of field repairs we made was by ferry permit, we would have obtained that permit prior to flying the aircraft. That was not the case, and we acted on the information we were given. The aircraft involved is not owned by this company, however is leased to us for rental and flight training.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ACFT INVOLVED IN OFF ARPT LNDG WAS REPAIRED IN THE FIELD, LOG BOOKS ENDORSED AND FLOWN TO HOME BASE, AS PER CONVERSATION WITH FSDO OFFICER. AFTER FLY, COMPANY PRESIDENT INFORMED MAY NOT HAVE BEEN LEGAL TO FLY WITHOUT FERRY PERMIT.

Narrative: A RENTER PLT WAS FORCED TO LAND OFF FIELD WHEN SHE RAN THE RIGHT FUEL TANK OUT OF GAS. WE WERE NOTIFIED THE NEXT MORNING AROUND BY THE RENTER OF THE INCIDENT. THE COMPANY PRESIDENT AND CHIEF OF MAINT FLEW TO FLAGLER ARPT WITH TOOLS. WE WERE TAKEN TO THE ACFT BY THE LCL SHERIFF. PRELIMINARY INSPECTION REVEALED SOME DAMAGE TO NOSE WHEEL BRACING. THERE WERE NO INJURIES TO PLT OR PAX, NO PROPERTY DAMAGE AND DAMAGE TO ACFT WAS MINIMAL--ALTHOUGH DID REQUIRE STRUCTURAL REPAIRS TO NOSE WHEEL BRACING. WE HAD THE RENTER PLT CONTACT THE ROCKY MOUNTAIN FSDO AND RPT THE INCIDENT. AT THAT TIME WE DISCUSSED THE CONDITION OF THE ACFT WITH THE F/O. WE WERE ADVISED THAT THIS WAS TO BE RPTED AS AN INCIDENT, NOT AN ACCIDENT. WE DISCUSSED OBTAINING A FERRY PERMIT WITH THE F/O AND WERE ADVISED THAT A MAINT OFFICER COULD ISSUE A FERRY PERMIT, HOWEVER THIS COULD NOT BE GRANTED VERBALLY. AT THAT TIME WE DISCUSSED THE POSSIBILITY OF MAKING THE APPROPRIATE REPAIRS IN THE FIELD, TO BE SUPERVISED BY AN A&P, IA MECH AND WERE TOLD THAT AS LONG AS HE ENDORSED THE ACFT LOG THAT IT IS RETURNED TO SVC AFTER THE NECESSARY REPAIRS HAD BEEN MADE, WE COULD LEGALLY FLY IT HOME. I LEFT THE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE REPAIRS WITH OUR MECH. HE MADE THE REPAIRS AND LOG BOOK ENDORSEMENTS AND FLEW THE ACFT TO OUR HOME BASE IN BOULDER, CO, THAT EVENING. 5/WED/89 A F/O ADVISED US THAT HE AND A MAINT INSPECTOR WANTED TO SEE THE ACFT REPAIRS, AND THAT THE ACFT MAY NOT HAVE BEEN LEGAL TO FLY W/O A FERRY PERMIT. WE FELT THE APPROPRIATE REPAIRS HAD BEEN MADE, AND THAT THE ACFT PAPERWORK PROPERLY AMENDED. THE ACFT WAS SAFELY RETURNED TO ITS HOME BASE. OUR CONCERN WAS TO PROTECT THE ACFT AND RETURN IT TO OUR HOME BASE ASAP. IF THE FAA HAD ADVISED US THAT THE ONLY LEGAL WAY OF RETURNING THE ACFT AFTER THE TYPE OF FIELD REPAIRS WE MADE WAS BY FERRY PERMIT, WE WOULD HAVE OBTAINED THAT PERMIT PRIOR TO FLYING THE ACFT. THAT WAS NOT THE CASE, AND WE ACTED ON THE INFO WE WERE GIVEN. THE ACFT INVOLVED IS NOT OWNED BY THIS COMPANY, HOWEVER IS LEASED TO US FOR RENTAL AND FLT TRNING.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of August 2007 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.