Narrative:

On oct/xx/94, I was assigned to deadhead in a rented cessna 310 to fly VFR to kingman, az, from fresno, ca, to pick up 2 air carrier crewmembers. This operation was not for compensation or hire and was conducted under far part 91. Anticipated departure time was ZM00 hours. I arrived at the fixed base operator (FBO), from whom the aircraft had been rented, at XX15 hours to do a preflight and confirm WX for my route of flight. I was met by the FBO owner who advised that the left generator had frozen up on the previous flight and that he would not be able to obtain a replacement until the following monday. When I explained to the FBO owner that persons were awaiting my arrival in kingman and inquired as to the availability of another multi-engine rental aircraft, the owner conferred with his mechanic and instructed that the left generator be removed if the right generator was svcable. The mechanic did as the owner had instructed, removing the generator, securing the wiring, and confirming the svcability and capability of the remaining right generator. That generator had an optional 50 amp output as opposed to the standard 25 amp output. I inquired of the mechanic as to whether the aircraft had a MEL or some other legal authority/authorized for the aircraft to be operated with only 1 generator. There was no MEL. We then consulted the pilot's operating handbook to ascertain whether there were any prohibitions and could find none. I assumed that the aircraft was in a condition for safe flight for the route and given the forecast WX. Moreover, I assumed that if the aircraft was not airworthy, the FBO would not permit it to be rented out and flown. I did not ask to see the aircraft logs as logs are not normally made available to rental customers. The flts to kingman and return were without incident. I utilized appropriate avionics and electrical equipment, monitored the amp gauge and found that everything was within limits. 2 days later, as this aircraft was being flown by another pilot, it was involved in a gear-up landing incident. Subsequent investigation revealed that the aircraft had been out of annual inspection, certain airworthiness directives had not been complied with and that the aircraft was required to have had 2 operable generators. Lessons to be learned: never assume that an aircraft is airworthy just because the FBO allows it to be rented and flown or because the FBO mechanic says that it is okay. As a renter pilot, demand to see and review the aircraft logs, and never assume that just because the pilot's operating handbook doesn't prohibit something, it can be done. Supplemental information from acn 284919: the majority of the flight was without incident and the aircraft was operated within normal parameters. On the return leg and upon approach to fresno, and as I attempted to lower the landing gear, the aircraft experienced in-flight electrical problems. I asked the tower to turn up runway lights and I was cleared to land on runway 11R. While on final approach, and at approximately 500 ft (AGL), the aircraft experienced a complete electrical failure. I attempted a go around but the engines were surging. I then attempted to confirm that the gear was down with a flashlight but was unable to see. I had the runway made and decided to land with or without the gear down. The flight culminated in a gear-up landing incident, in which the aircraft sustained minor damage. Subsequent investigation revealed that the aircraft had been out of annual inspection, certain airworthiness directives had not been complied with and that the aircraft's left generator had been removed. The removal of the left generator could not have been detected through a normal preflight inspection, as that would have entailed the removal of the entire cowling.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ACFT MAINT HISTORY REVEALED ON A C-310.

Narrative: ON OCT/XX/94, I WAS ASSIGNED TO DEADHEAD IN A RENTED CESSNA 310 TO FLY VFR TO KINGMAN, AZ, FROM FRESNO, CA, TO PICK UP 2 ACR CREWMEMBERS. THIS OP WAS NOT FOR COMPENSATION OR HIRE AND WAS CONDUCTED UNDER FAR PART 91. ANTICIPATED DEP TIME WAS ZM00 HRS. I ARRIVED AT THE FIXED BASE OPERATOR (FBO), FROM WHOM THE ACFT HAD BEEN RENTED, AT XX15 HRS TO DO A PREFLT AND CONFIRM WX FOR MY RTE OF FLT. I WAS MET BY THE FBO OWNER WHO ADVISED THAT THE L GENERATOR HAD FROZEN UP ON THE PREVIOUS FLT AND THAT HE WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO OBTAIN A REPLACEMENT UNTIL THE FOLLOWING MONDAY. WHEN I EXPLAINED TO THE FBO OWNER THAT PERSONS WERE AWAITING MY ARR IN KINGMAN AND INQUIRED AS TO THE AVAILABILITY OF ANOTHER MULTI-ENG RENTAL ACFT, THE OWNER CONFERRED WITH HIS MECH AND INSTRUCTED THAT THE L GENERATOR BE REMOVED IF THE R GENERATOR WAS SVCABLE. THE MECH DID AS THE OWNER HAD INSTRUCTED, REMOVING THE GENERATOR, SECURING THE WIRING, AND CONFIRMING THE SVCABILITY AND CAPABILITY OF THE REMAINING R GENERATOR. THAT GENERATOR HAD AN OPTIONAL 50 AMP OUTPUT AS OPPOSED TO THE STANDARD 25 AMP OUTPUT. I INQUIRED OF THE MECH AS TO WHETHER THE ACFT HAD A MEL OR SOME OTHER LEGAL AUTH FOR THE ACFT TO BE OPERATED WITH ONLY 1 GENERATOR. THERE WAS NO MEL. WE THEN CONSULTED THE PLT'S OPERATING HANDBOOK TO ASCERTAIN WHETHER THERE WERE ANY PROHIBITIONS AND COULD FIND NONE. I ASSUMED THAT THE ACFT WAS IN A CONDITION FOR SAFE FLT FOR THE RTE AND GIVEN THE FORECAST WX. MOREOVER, I ASSUMED THAT IF THE ACFT WAS NOT AIRWORTHY, THE FBO WOULD NOT PERMIT IT TO BE RENTED OUT AND FLOWN. I DID NOT ASK TO SEE THE ACFT LOGS AS LOGS ARE NOT NORMALLY MADE AVAILABLE TO RENTAL CUSTOMERS. THE FLTS TO KINGMAN AND RETURN WERE WITHOUT INCIDENT. I UTILIZED APPROPRIATE AVIONICS AND ELECTRICAL EQUIP, MONITORED THE AMP GAUGE AND FOUND THAT EVERYTHING WAS WITHIN LIMITS. 2 DAYS LATER, AS THIS ACFT WAS BEING FLOWN BY ANOTHER PLT, IT WAS INVOLVED IN A GEAR-UP LNDG INCIDENT. SUBSEQUENT INVESTIGATION REVEALED THAT THE ACFT HAD BEEN OUT OF ANNUAL INSPECTION, CERTAIN AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES HAD NOT BEEN COMPLIED WITH AND THAT THE ACFT WAS REQUIRED TO HAVE HAD 2 OPERABLE GENERATORS. LESSONS TO BE LEARNED: NEVER ASSUME THAT AN ACFT IS AIRWORTHY JUST BECAUSE THE FBO ALLOWS IT TO BE RENTED AND FLOWN OR BECAUSE THE FBO MECH SAYS THAT IT IS OKAY. AS A RENTER PLT, DEMAND TO SEE AND REVIEW THE ACFT LOGS, AND NEVER ASSUME THAT JUST BECAUSE THE PLT'S OPERATING HANDBOOK DOESN'T PROHIBIT SOMETHING, IT CAN BE DONE. SUPPLEMENTAL INFO FROM ACN 284919: THE MAJORITY OF THE FLT WAS WITHOUT INCIDENT AND THE ACFT WAS OPERATED WITHIN NORMAL PARAMETERS. ON THE RETURN LEG AND UPON APCH TO FRESNO, AND AS I ATTEMPTED TO LOWER THE LNDG GEAR, THE ACFT EXPERIENCED INFLT ELECTRICAL PROBS. I ASKED THE TWR TO TURN UP RWY LIGHTS AND I WAS CLRED TO LAND ON RWY 11R. WHILE ON FINAL APCH, AND AT APPROX 500 FT (AGL), THE ACFT EXPERIENCED A COMPLETE ELECTRICAL FAILURE. I ATTEMPTED A GAR BUT THE ENGS WERE SURGING. I THEN ATTEMPTED TO CONFIRM THAT THE GEAR WAS DOWN WITH A FLASHLIGHT BUT WAS UNABLE TO SEE. I HAD THE RWY MADE AND DECIDED TO LAND WITH OR WITHOUT THE GEAR DOWN. THE FLT CULMINATED IN A GEAR-UP LNDG INCIDENT, IN WHICH THE ACFT SUSTAINED MINOR DAMAGE. SUBSEQUENT INVESTIGATION REVEALED THAT THE ACFT HAD BEEN OUT OF ANNUAL INSPECTION, CERTAIN AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES HAD NOT BEEN COMPLIED WITH AND THAT THE ACFT'S L GENERATOR HAD BEEN REMOVED. THE REMOVAL OF THE L GENERATOR COULD NOT HAVE BEEN DETECTED THROUGH A NORMAL PREFLT INSPECTION, AS THAT WOULD HAVE ENTAILED THE REMOVAL OF THE ENTIRE COWLING.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 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.