37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Attributes | |
ACN | 596476 |
Time | |
Date | 200310 |
Day | Thu |
Local Time Of Day | 0601 To 1200 |
Place | |
Locale Reference | airport : zzz.airport |
State Reference | US |
Altitude | agl single value : 0 |
Environment | |
Light | Daylight |
Aircraft 1 | |
Operator | general aviation : personal |
Make Model Name | PA-32 Cherokee Six/Lance/Saratoga |
Operating Under FAR Part | Part 91 |
Flight Phase | ground : maintenance |
Person 1 | |
Affiliation | other |
Qualification | technician : inspection authority technician : powerplant technician : airframe |
Experience | maintenance lead technician : 2 |
ASRS Report | 596476 |
Person 2 | |
Function | other personnel other |
Events | |
Anomaly | aircraft equipment problem : critical maintenance problem : improper maintenance non adherence : published procedure |
Independent Detector | other other : person 3 |
Consequence | faa : investigated other Other |
Factors | |
Maintenance | contributing factor : work cards contributing factor : manuals performance deficiency : logbook entry performance deficiency : inspection performance deficiency : repair performance deficiency : non compliance with legal requirements |
Supplementary | |
Problem Areas | Maintenance Human Performance Chart Or Publication Aircraft |
Primary Problem | Maintenance Human Performance |
Narrative:
After I had returned the aircraft to service, the owner and a prospective buyer took it to another mechanic who was employed by the prospective buyer for a pre-buy inspection. The mechanic found numerous discrepancies, grounded the aircraft and called the FSDO. FSDO sent an inspector out to do a spot check, and determined that the aircraft was not airworthy. I failed to comply with airworthiness directive #81-11-02r1, 96-09-10, and possibly 95-26-13. Other discrepancies ranging from a magneto blast tube missing, to unapproved fasteners, to a torn trim servo boot and several others inbtwn were found. I can't speak to the validity of the discrepancies without seeing them or the logbooks, but the airworthiness directive compliance is truly my mistake. I should not have relied on previous log entries to make determinations about existing conditions. I also should not have allowed an owner to perform work on his airplane. I sill have not been given the opportunity to review the logs, or talk to the mechanic who found these things.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: A PIPER PA28 WAS RELEASED FOR SVC AFTER AN ANNUAL INSPECTION WITH INCOMPLETE WORK AND AN AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVE NOT ACCOMPLISHED.
Narrative: AFTER I HAD RETURNED THE ACFT TO SVC, THE OWNER AND A PROSPECTIVE BUYER TOOK IT TO ANOTHER MECH WHO WAS EMPLOYED BY THE PROSPECTIVE BUYER FOR A PRE-BUY INSPECTION. THE MECH FOUND NUMEROUS DISCREPANCIES, GNDED THE ACFT AND CALLED THE FSDO. FSDO SENT AN INSPECTOR OUT TO DO A SPOT CHK, AND DETERMINED THAT THE ACFT WAS NOT AIRWORTHY. I FAILED TO COMPLY WITH AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVE #81-11-02R1, 96-09-10, AND POSSIBLY 95-26-13. OTHER DISCREPANCIES RANGING FROM A MAGNETO BLAST TUBE MISSING, TO UNAPPROVED FASTENERS, TO A TORN TRIM SERVO BOOT AND SEVERAL OTHERS INBTWN WERE FOUND. I CAN'T SPEAK TO THE VALIDITY OF THE DISCREPANCIES WITHOUT SEEING THEM OR THE LOGBOOKS, BUT THE AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVE COMPLIANCE IS TRULY MY MISTAKE. I SHOULD NOT HAVE RELIED ON PREVIOUS LOG ENTRIES TO MAKE DETERMINATIONS ABOUT EXISTING CONDITIONS. I ALSO SHOULD NOT HAVE ALLOWED AN OWNER TO PERFORM WORK ON HIS AIRPLANE. I SILL HAVE NOT BEEN GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW THE LOGS, OR TALK TO THE MECH WHO FOUND THESE THINGS.
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.