Narrative:

I am submitting this report because there appears to be a good deal of ambiguity in the fars regarding operation without an alternator or lights; or at least widespread misunderstanding of the legality of flying in this situation even among people far more experienced than I; to the point where I am; even now; unsure whether I had my I's dotted and T's crossed on this.I had flown an early-70s cessna 172 from my home airport (class east) to an airport in class D airspace; about 1 hour away. I spent the afternoon in town; and upon returning to the plane for the trip home; discovered that I had forgotten to turn off the master switch upon exiting the cockpit earlier. The starter would not engage; but the FBO had equipment to jump-start the plane and we got it going. The ammeter showed strong charge and everything looked good at this point.after exiting the class D; I requested a frequency for flight following. Radar contact was established. About 5 minutes later; during a routine scan of the instrument panel; I observed the ammeter showing discharge. After cycling the alternator switch a few times; I concluded that it was not coming back. At this point; I considered what to do: it was still day but it was late in the day; there were scattered thunderstorms approaching my destination (home airport); and I believed the battery to be not fully charged. I was uncomfortable with the risk of proceeding in this situation; and notified center of the alternator issue and my intent to return to the departure airport. Upon handoff back to tower; I informed them of the reason for my return and was immediately cleared for landing. I landed and shut things down without incident.I then used my cell to call the on-call person in charge of taking care of maintenance (also a CFI) from the place I rented from. He asked a few questions; including pointing out I hadn't checked the alternator circuit breaker -- and indeed it was tripped. By this time; however; I was uncomfortable with the risk of a night flight: questionable electrical system; and thunderstorms even closer to the destination; so I spent an unplanned night near the remote airport. The CFI had suggested this; in fact; after I explained my reluctance to fly back at night in these circumstances: spend the night there; start it up in the morning; use my radios to get out of the class D and then shut off the electrical system for the rest of the flight back (which would be entirely in class east and G airspace) - and meanwhile hope the alternator comes back to life in flight; which he thought to be reasonably likely. I consulted my memory of the applicable fars - noting the alternator not being on the 'tomato flames' acronym that many pilots are taught for day VFR required equipment. I knew radios to be optional once I was out of the class D; and I also believed lights to optional for day VFR (again; not part of tomato flames or similar).the next morning; I again needed the FBO's assistance to start the plane. I found no charge on the ammeter even after resetting the circuit breaker. I proceeded to fly back to the home airport; shutting down the electrical system after exiting the class D airspace - the plan the CFI had suggested and supported. I turned it on every so often to check AWOS; and again near the destination airport because I wanted the safety of communicating on CTAF; even if it wasn't legally required. I made the decision to only use 10 degrees of flaps; since I was unsure they'd go back up if they went down. I landed at the home airport without incident; with working radios. I had filed a VFR flight plan; and was also confident of my ability to navigate in day VFR; being both familiar with the area visually and having multiple forms of battery-operated electronic and paper navigation backup in the cockpit; as well as a handheld air band radio; all of which I knew to be charged and operational.sometime after this incident; I got the notion that I wanted to understand the applicable fars on this more fully for myself.I considered the legality of flying without lights in day VFR; and believe I was ok under far 91.205 due to the plane being older than 1996. 91.209(b) is vaguer; however the 'interest of safety' exception seems to be applicable; since I judged the safety of CTAF at the destination to be more important than strobes in the usually-deserted airspace en route.91.213(d) gets more confusing - I wondered; should I have placarded the alternator inoperative? I hadn't even thought of 91.213 in this context at the time -- the scenarios I was usually pitched for 91.213 involved instruments and such.I reviewed the situation with several other pilots and got conflicting advice - all of them were cfis; or held commercial or ATP certificates. One mentioned the poh list of required equipment; which this particular plane did not have in its poh -- but which I also hadn't thought of. Newer skyhawk pohs do seem to have a list of required equipment; which lists the alternator; and this is perhaps obliquely referenced by 91.213(d)(2)(i). Another mentioned the tcds; which I had never even heard of. Different cfis disagreed about the legality of flying with the strobes or beacon off during day VFR; about the legality of flying with the alternator as it is; about how to disconnect or placard the alternator inoperative (and even whether that was necessary). Most agreed; however; that I acted in a safe manner even if they didn't agree on the technical legalities; often saying 'it's what I would have done'.during the training for my private pilot's license; which occurred at a part 141 organization with a well-deserved reputation for being 'by the book'; I heard a story of them flying back a 172 of similar vintage to their home from about 6 hours away with a broken alternator; turning power on only to make radio calls when landing to refuel.during the course of my training; I was required to have a working knowledge of 91.205 and 91.213. I was never; however; required to use the equipment list in a poh or even shown it. I had never even realized it was there. Although that school had a fleet of 172s of various vintages; perhaps the fact that my checkride occurred in the oldest -- one which didn't have this in its poh -- exacerbated things. Moreover; the story of flying that plane home (with the apparent approval of the chief flight instructor at the school); as well as the suggestion from the CFI I called; led me to believe this was a safe and normal action in this circumstance.further discussion yielded additional points that I have often seen ignored in the rental GA fleet: that inoperative landing lights or nav lights should be placarded inoperative (these are typically; at best; recorded in a squawk log until they are fixed; I am among the more meticulous about preflight; and often notice them in my preflight inspection. It seems people routinely fly in day VFR without checking these things or placarding them inoperative.)I strive hard to be diligent for safety and legal compliance; and was surprised at how easily I found myself in a situation where I may have inadvertently violated fars. I am a person that has canceled a flight I expected to have a night component due to discovering an intermittent nav light during preflight in daylight hours -- and still I missed this.contributing to this incident:there are several items on the post-flight checklist that are usually not applicable (tying the plane down; inserting a gust lock; etc) and as I skipped through those parts of my checklist; my eye skipped right past the 'master switch off'. I would normally have heard the gyros still running upon exiting the plane; but didn't this time due to a jet with a noisy APU running right next to me on the ramp. I also operated by an appeal to authority; thinking that the CFI I called; and the example story I heard during training; represented a more accurate picture than I; a low-hour private pilot; had.this sense was exacerbated because I had known; both through my own observations and comments from other pilots; this particular CFI to be very careful about safety and by the book about regs - both traits I strive to maintain in myself. I did have the presence of mind to do a cursory validation of the CFI's suggestion (tomato flames and such); but likely in large part because of his advice; did not bother looking up the relevant fars at the time.corrective actions:it is clear that widespread confusion exists on the question of flying without an alternator or with inoperative lights; particularly in older planes. There is disagreement about the need to placard burned-out lightbulbs for a few days; and they frequently aren't. If even many cfis disagree; it seems an opportunity for the FAA to clarify things. 91.213(d)(2)(i) and (ii) in particular seem to be cause for confusion (for instance; how can someone on the ramp by a plane with a questionable alternator evaluate the 'applicable airworthiness regulations under which the aircraft was type certified?') the use of equipment lists in part 91 operations seems to be generally forgotten; bypassed during training; and not covered using memory devices taught to student pilots. The complexity of the regulations makes it hard to apply when presented with a need to make a decision in the field; and is likely a contributing factor in incidents like these.checklists that have a number of items that are normally skipped pose a risk to skipping more important items. I will be designing my own checklist with these often-unnecessary items in their own section so as to minimize the chance of this happening in the future for me.discussion of human factors (such as impulsivity; macho; anti-authority; resignation; etc.) often highlight anti-authority attitudes; but do not highlight the risk of the opposite: appeal to authority. Perhaps that risk is less; as hopefully pilots with more ratings or hours legitimately know more than less-experienced pilots. However; when we get advice; or see someone set an example that we mimic for perhaps years; we can short-circuit the evaluation process and make poor decisions as a result. Had I known my flight without an alternator to be illegal; or even suspected it likely to be; I would never have made it. Would I have questioned it more deeply if the CFI hadn't given it his blessing? I'm almost certain I would have; but there's of course no way to tell. What is certain is that the explicit blessing from that CFI; as well as the example from the flight school; served to allay my concern about the legality and I then focused my thought-process mainly on safety. I would have ignored the CFI's advice if I considered the flight unsafe for me; but I can't say everyone would have - and few routinely fly with as many portable backup systems as I do; and that particular CFI could not have known how familiar I was with the area visually.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: C172 pilot reported being unsure of his compliance with FARs regarding operation without electrical power.

Narrative: I am submitting this report because there appears to be a good deal of ambiguity in the FARs regarding operation without an alternator or lights; or at least widespread misunderstanding of the legality of flying in this situation even among people far more experienced than I; to the point where I am; even now; unsure whether I had my I's dotted and T's crossed on this.I had flown an early-70s Cessna 172 from my home airport (class E) to an airport in class D airspace; about 1 hour away. I spent the afternoon in town; and upon returning to the plane for the trip home; discovered that I had forgotten to turn off the master switch upon exiting the cockpit earlier. The starter would not engage; but the FBO had equipment to jump-start the plane and we got it going. The ammeter showed strong charge and everything looked good at this point.After exiting the class D; I requested a frequency for flight following. Radar contact was established. About 5 minutes later; during a routine scan of the instrument panel; I observed the ammeter showing discharge. After cycling the alternator switch a few times; I concluded that it was not coming back. At this point; I considered what to do: it was still day but it was late in the day; there were scattered thunderstorms approaching my destination (home airport); and I believed the battery to be not fully charged. I was uncomfortable with the risk of proceeding in this situation; and notified center of the alternator issue and my intent to return to the departure airport. Upon handoff back to tower; I informed them of the reason for my return and was immediately cleared for landing. I landed and shut things down without incident.I then used my cell to call the on-call person in charge of taking care of maintenance (also a CFI) from the place I rented from. He asked a few questions; including pointing out I hadn't checked the alternator circuit breaker -- and indeed it was tripped. By this time; however; I was uncomfortable with the risk of a night flight: questionable electrical system; and thunderstorms even closer to the destination; so I spent an unplanned night near the remote airport. The CFI had suggested this; in fact; after I explained my reluctance to fly back at night in these circumstances: spend the night there; start it up in the morning; use my radios to get out of the class D and then shut off the electrical system for the rest of the flight back (which would be entirely in class E and G airspace) - and meanwhile hope the alternator comes back to life in flight; which he thought to be reasonably likely. I consulted my memory of the applicable FARs - noting the alternator not being on the 'TOMATO FLAMES' acronym that many pilots are taught for day VFR required equipment. I knew radios to be optional once I was out of the class D; and I also believed lights to optional for day VFR (again; not part of TOMATO FLAMES or similar).The next morning; I again needed the FBO's assistance to start the plane. I found no charge on the ammeter even after resetting the circuit breaker. I proceeded to fly back to the home airport; shutting down the electrical system after exiting the class D airspace - the plan the CFI had suggested and supported. I turned it on every so often to check AWOS; and again near the destination airport because I wanted the safety of communicating on CTAF; even if it wasn't legally required. I made the decision to only use 10 degrees of flaps; since I was unsure they'd go back up if they went down. I landed at the home airport without incident; with working radios. I had filed a VFR flight plan; and was also confident of my ability to navigate in day VFR; being both familiar with the area visually and having multiple forms of battery-operated electronic and paper navigation backup in the cockpit; as well as a handheld air band radio; all of which I knew to be charged and operational.Sometime after this incident; I got the notion that I wanted to understand the applicable FARs on this more fully for myself.I considered the legality of flying without lights in day VFR; and believe I was OK under FAR 91.205 due to the plane being older than 1996. 91.209(b) is vaguer; however the 'interest of safety' exception seems to be applicable; since I judged the safety of CTAF at the destination to be more important than strobes in the usually-deserted airspace en route.91.213(d) gets more confusing - I wondered; should I have placarded the alternator INOP? I hadn't even thought of 91.213 in this context at the time -- the scenarios I was usually pitched for 91.213 involved instruments and such.I reviewed the situation with several other pilots and got conflicting advice - all of them were CFIs; or held commercial or ATP certificates. One mentioned the POH list of required equipment; which this particular plane did not have in its POH -- but which I also hadn't thought of. Newer Skyhawk POHs do seem to have a list of required equipment; which lists the alternator; and this is perhaps obliquely referenced by 91.213(d)(2)(i). Another mentioned the TCDS; which I had never even heard of. Different CFIs disagreed about the legality of flying with the strobes or beacon off during day VFR; about the legality of flying with the alternator as it is; about how to disconnect or placard the alternator INOP (and even whether that was necessary). Most agreed; however; that I acted in a safe manner even if they didn't agree on the technical legalities; often saying 'it's what I would have done'.During the training for my private pilot's license; which occurred at a part 141 organization with a well-deserved reputation for being 'by the book'; I heard a story of them flying back a 172 of similar vintage to their home from about 6 hours away with a broken alternator; turning power on only to make radio calls when landing to refuel.During the course of my training; I was required to have a working knowledge of 91.205 and 91.213. I was never; however; required to use the equipment list in a POH or even shown it. I had never even realized it was there. Although that school had a fleet of 172s of various vintages; perhaps the fact that my checkride occurred in the oldest -- one which didn't have this in its POH -- exacerbated things. Moreover; the story of flying that plane home (with the apparent approval of the chief flight instructor at the school); as well as the suggestion from the CFI I called; led me to believe this was a safe and normal action in this circumstance.Further discussion yielded additional points that I have often seen ignored in the rental GA fleet: that inoperative landing lights or nav lights should be placarded INOP (these are typically; at best; recorded in a squawk log until they are fixed; I am among the more meticulous about preflight; and often notice them in my preflight inspection. It seems people routinely fly in day VFR without checking these things or placarding them INOP.)I strive hard to be diligent for safety and legal compliance; and was surprised at how easily I found myself in a situation where I may have inadvertently violated FARs. I am a person that has canceled a flight I expected to have a night component due to discovering an intermittent nav light during preflight in daylight hours -- and still I missed this.Contributing to this incident:There are several items on the post-flight checklist that are usually not applicable (tying the plane down; inserting a gust lock; etc) and as I skipped through those parts of my checklist; my eye skipped right past the 'master switch off'. I would normally have heard the gyros still running upon exiting the plane; but didn't this time due to a jet with a noisy APU running right next to me on the ramp. I also operated by an appeal to authority; thinking that the CFI I called; and the example story I heard during training; represented a more accurate picture than I; a low-hour private pilot; had.This sense was exacerbated because I had known; both through my own observations and comments from other pilots; this particular CFI to be very careful about safety and by the book about regs - both traits I strive to maintain in myself. I did have the presence of mind to do a cursory validation of the CFI's suggestion (TOMATO FLAMES and such); but likely in large part because of his advice; did not bother looking up the relevant FARs at the time.Corrective actions:It is clear that widespread confusion exists on the question of flying without an alternator or with inoperative lights; particularly in older planes. There is disagreement about the need to placard burned-out lightbulbs for a few days; and they frequently aren't. If even many CFIs disagree; it seems an opportunity for the FAA to clarify things. 91.213(d)(2)(i) and (ii) in particular seem to be cause for confusion (for instance; how can someone on the ramp by a plane with a questionable alternator evaluate the 'applicable airworthiness regulations under which the aircraft was type certified?') The use of equipment lists in part 91 operations seems to be generally forgotten; bypassed during training; and not covered using memory devices taught to student pilots. The complexity of the regulations makes it hard to apply when presented with a need to make a decision in the field; and is likely a contributing factor in incidents like these.Checklists that have a number of items that are normally skipped pose a risk to skipping more important items. I will be designing my own checklist with these often-unnecessary items in their own section so as to minimize the chance of this happening in the future for me.Discussion of human factors (such as impulsivity; macho; anti-authority; resignation; etc.) often highlight anti-authority attitudes; but do not highlight the risk of the opposite: appeal to authority. Perhaps that risk is less; as hopefully pilots with more ratings or hours legitimately know more than less-experienced pilots. However; when we get advice; or see someone set an example that we mimic for perhaps years; we can short-circuit the evaluation process and make poor decisions as a result. Had I known my flight without an alternator to be illegal; or even suspected it likely to be; I would never have made it. Would I have questioned it more deeply if the CFI hadn't given it his blessing? I'm almost certain I would have; but there's of course no way to tell. What is certain is that the explicit blessing from that CFI; as well as the example from the flight school; served to allay my concern about the legality and I then focused my thought-process mainly on safety. I would have ignored the CFI's advice if I considered the flight unsafe for me; but I can't say everyone would have - and few routinely fly with as many portable backup systems as I do; and that particular CFI could not have known how familiar I was with the area visually.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site 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.