Narrative:

On oct/sun/03, one of our company aircraft was brought in for routine maintenance (100 hour annual). The aircraft logs and paperwork were in order, and the aircraft was well taken care of. The only discrepancy or 'squawk' was a tailwheel shimmy. This is not unusual, as the helicopter series has this inherent trait. A new tire and tube and some adjustments on the tailwheel solved this discrepancy. The aircraft was returned to service with satisfactory results. So, time goes by and I hear through the 'grapevine' that the type certificate data sheet was (for some reason) no longer valid, and consequently was no longer a 'valid' aircraft. So, I called the FAA and couldn't get a straight answer as to whether or not the tco (type certificate data sheet) had been pulled for this series aircraft. Anyway, I finally asked the FAA to send me a sample of the tco on this series aircraft by facsimile, and they did. I have a tco sheet that they sent. Anyway, I asked them that if the tco is still on record, and that, since this information is the basis for compliance, are we 'good to go' on this issue? They said 'yes, as far as we know.' (note: I had spoken to a couple of 'feds' before I had gotten to someone who could give me only a tentative sounding answer.) the other item here is that the aircraft did not appear to have a 'geared' engine in it, and looking through the paperwork, there was data for a firewall modification for this engine confign and propeller combination that seemed to be in order, but I may have missed the exact engine that the tco called for in this airframe. I think it's ok, as there was lots of paperwork documenting many modifications over the yrs, and this has been flying for many yrs with no incident, and many previous annual signoffs.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A TECHNICIAN WITH AIRWORTHINESS INSPECTION AUTH QUESTIONS THE FAA ON THE VALIDITY OF THE HELI H-700 HELI TYPE CERTIFICATE DATA SHEET.

Narrative: ON OCT/SUN/03, ONE OF OUR COMPANY ACFT WAS BROUGHT IN FOR ROUTINE MAINT (100 HR ANNUAL). THE ACFT LOGS AND PAPERWORK WERE IN ORDER, AND THE ACFT WAS WELL TAKEN CARE OF. THE ONLY DISCREPANCY OR 'SQUAWK' WAS A TAILWHEEL SHIMMY. THIS IS NOT UNUSUAL, AS THE HELI SERIES HAS THIS INHERENT TRAIT. A NEW TIRE AND TUBE AND SOME ADJUSTMENTS ON THE TAILWHEEL SOLVED THIS DISCREPANCY. THE ACFT WAS RETURNED TO SVC WITH SATISFACTORY RESULTS. SO, TIME GOES BY AND I HEAR THROUGH THE 'GRAPEVINE' THAT THE TYPE CERTIFICATE DATA SHEET WAS (FOR SOME REASON) NO LONGER VALID, AND CONSEQUENTLY WAS NO LONGER A 'VALID' ACFT. SO, I CALLED THE FAA AND COULDN'T GET A STRAIGHT ANSWER AS TO WHETHER OR NOT THE TCO (TYPE CERTIFICATE DATA SHEET) HAD BEEN PULLED FOR THIS SERIES ACFT. ANYWAY, I FINALLY ASKED THE FAA TO SEND ME A SAMPLE OF THE TCO ON THIS SERIES ACFT BY FAX, AND THEY DID. I HAVE A TCO SHEET THAT THEY SENT. ANYWAY, I ASKED THEM THAT IF THE TCO IS STILL ON RECORD, AND THAT, SINCE THIS INFO IS THE BASIS FOR COMPLIANCE, ARE WE 'GOOD TO GO' ON THIS ISSUE? THEY SAID 'YES, AS FAR AS WE KNOW.' (NOTE: I HAD SPOKEN TO A COUPLE OF 'FEDS' BEFORE I HAD GOTTEN TO SOMEONE WHO COULD GIVE ME ONLY A TENTATIVE SOUNDING ANSWER.) THE OTHER ITEM HERE IS THAT THE ACFT DID NOT APPEAR TO HAVE A 'GEARED' ENG IN IT, AND LOOKING THROUGH THE PAPERWORK, THERE WAS DATA FOR A FIREWALL MODIFICATION FOR THIS ENG CONFIGN AND PROP COMBINATION THAT SEEMED TO BE IN ORDER, BUT I MAY HAVE MISSED THE EXACT ENG THAT THE TCO CALLED FOR IN THIS AIRFRAME. I THINK IT'S OK, AS THERE WAS LOTS OF PAPERWORK DOCUMENTING MANY MODIFICATIONS OVER THE YRS, AND THIS HAS BEEN FLYING FOR MANY YRS WITH NO INCIDENT, AND MANY PREVIOUS ANNUAL SIGNOFFS.

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.