'Bill Obrien's article was stripped - 2nd try
"I" versus "We"
Bill O'Brien
Along with the pilot shortage and the mechanic shortage, there is also a
parts shortage that plagues the general aviation industry. Because supply
and demand are out of balance the cost of new and used parts seem to
increase every day. Let's examine the reasons why this is so.
First, we have an old fleet. The average general aviation (GA) single engine
airplane is approximately 32 years old. The average age of GA multi-engine
reciprocating aircraft is close to 27 years old. The average age for the
turbine powered multi-engine propeller driven aircraft average out around 19
years of age. So because of long term wear and tear the demand for
replacement parts and large sub-assemblies is much greater today than it was
even 10 years ago.
The second reason is our general aviation fleet has been well maintained
over the years. So well maintained in fact, the average GA aircraft with a
mid-time engine and decent avionics has appreciated to two or three times
its original purchase price and is still climbing. Yet even in that land of
many zeros the older aircraft are still substantially lower in price than
the cost of a brand new aircraft with similar performance numbers and
equipment. So the value of older aircraft in good shape are proven
investments that over time have beaten the DOW JONES average. So we have an
economic imperative on the part of the owners to keep maintaining older
aircraft in flying condition which increases the demand for replacement
parts.
The third reason is the increasing production costs to make a part. Today
aircraft manufacturers are not making makes and models of aircraft in the
same quantity they made them back in the Seventies. So the production runs
for parts are not as frequent and not as many parts are produced. In
addition, it is not cost effective for a manufacturer to make a lot of parts
even if the unit price for each part is out of this world because taxes on
maintaining a large inventory of parts would eat all of the profits. This
low parts production keeps the supply of replacement parts low.
The fourth reason is that some manufacturers would prefer that their older
makes and model aircraft-made a million years ago-would quietly disappear
from the aircraft registry. This retroactive birth control on the part of
the manufacturers may seem not to make any sense until you look at aircraft
market dynamics of creating demand and reducing costs. First, each older
aircraft that is no longer in service creates a demand for a new, more
expensive aircraft to take its place. Second, despite some tort claim relief
granted to GA manufacturers in the early Nineties, the fewer older aircraft
there are in service, the manufacturers of those aircraft enjoy reduced
overall liability claims and ever decreasing continuing airworthiness
responsibilities.
So how are we going to maintain these older aircraft with an ever dwindling
parts supply when Part 21, section 21.303 Replacement and modification of
parts, requires us to use the Parts Manufactured Approval (PMA) parts on a
type certificated product? Well, the same rule grants four exemptions to the
PMA requirement.
1. You can use parts produced under a type or production certificate
such as a Piper, Cessna, or Mooney produced part;
2. A owner or operator produced part to maintain or alter their own
product;
3. Parts produced under a Technical Standard Order (TSO) such as
radios, life vests and rafts, and GPS; or,
4. A standard aviation part such as fasteners, washers, or safety wire.
Before I segue into the subject of "owner produced parts" as called out in
section 21.303, which is the purpose of this article. I would like to create
a small uproar with this statement: "FAA Airframe and Powerplant rated
mechanics can maintain, repair, and modify parts, but they cannot make a
brand new part and call it a repair." Before you accuse me of losing
dendrites by the minute, check out section 65.81 General privileges and
limitations. The section talks about maintenance, preventive maintenance,
and alterations, but not the manufacturing of parts. Nor is it an implied
privilege in Part 65, because Part 21 section 21.303 says "no person" may
make a replacement part for a type certificated (TC) product unless that
person has a PMA, etc.
While I write this I can remember 25 pounds ago and when I had hair, I
worked in the real world and I specialized in making engine baffles for
Lycoming engines. Before someone accuses me of bureaucratic ventriloquism
which is roughly translated as "talking out of both sides of my mouth." My
weak defense is, I made the parts because I thought I could." It never
dawned on me that I could not legally make a part. Some of you may be
astounded that I make this confession freely. It's no big thing because I
know the statue of limitations has run out years ago and a jury of my peers
would never look me in the eye and convict me.
So here is our problem that we must solve. Since mechanics cannot legally
make parts for aircraft and aircraft need replacement parts, how are we
going to keep the fleet flying? If we cannot find PMA, TSO, standard, or
production holder replacement parts, we are left to make the part under the
owner-produced option under section 21.303(b)(2). However, we must remember
that the part is for the owner/operator's aircraft only and is not
manufactured for sale to other TC aircraft.
To get through confusing regulatory policy with our pride intact, let's try
the question and answer routine. (Note: This policy is taken from FAA 's
AGC-200 policy memorandum to AFS-300 on the definition of "Owner-Produced
Parts" dated August 5, 1993)
Question 1: Does the owner have to manufacture the part him or herself in
order to meet the intent of the rule?
Answer 1: No, the owner does not have to make the part him or herself.
However to be considered a producer of the part he/she must have
participated in controlling the design, manufacturer, or quality of the part
such as:
1. provide the manufacturer with the design or performance data from
which to make the part, or
2. provide the manufacturer with the materials to make the part, or
3. provide the manufacturer with fabrication processes or assembly
methods to make the part, or
4. provide the quality control procedures to make the part, or
5. personally supervised the manufacturer of the part.
Question 2: Can the owner contract out for the manufacture of the part and
still have a part that is considered "owner-produced?"
Answer 2: Yes, as long as the owner participated in one of the five
functions listed in Answer 1.
Question 3: Can the owner contract out the manufacture of the part to a
non-certificated person and still have a part that is considered
"owner-produced?"
Answer 3: Yes, as long as the owner participated in one of the five
functions listed in Answer 1.
Question 4: If a mechanic manufactured parts for an owner, is he/she
considered in violation of section 21.303(b)(2)?
Answer 4: The answer would be no, if it was found that the owner
participated in controlling the design, manufacture, or quality of the part.
The mechanic would be considered the producer and would not be in violation
of section 21.303(a). On the other hand, if the owner did not play a part in
controlling the design, manufacture, or quality of the part, the mechanic
runs a good chance of being in violation of section 21.303 (b)(2).
Question 5: What kind of advice can you give on how a mechanic can avoid
even the appearance of violating section 21.303(b)(2)?
Answer 5: First, a mechanic should never make a logbook or maintenance entry
saying that he/she made a part under his certificate number. This foopah
will send up a flare and get you undue attention from your local FAA
inspector, which you could do without. However, the mechanic can say on the
work order that he helped manufacture an owner-produced part under section
21.303 (b)(2).
Second, the owner or operator should be encouraged to make a log book entry
that is similar to section 43.9 maintenance entry that states: The part is
identified as an owner produced part under section 21.303 (b)(2). The part
was manufactured in accordance with approved data. The owner/operator's
participation in the manufacturer of the part is identified, such as quality
control. The owner must declare that the part is airworthy and sign and date
the entry.
Question 6: Is there anything else a mechanic must do?
Answer 6: The mechanic must ensure that the owner-produced part meets form,
fit, and function, and, within reasonable limits, ensure that the part does
meet its approved type design (e.g. like looking at the approved data used
to make the part). Then the mechanic installs the part on the aircraft,
makes an operational check if applicable, and signs off the required section
43.9 maintenance entry.
Question 7: What is the owner responsible for and what is the mechanic
responsible for concerning owner-produced parts?
Answer 7: The owner is responsible for the part meeting type design and
being in a condition for safe operation. The mechanic is responsible for the
installation of the owner-produced part being correct and airworthy and for
a maintenance record of the installation of the part made.
Question 8: How does the owner or operator get the approved data to make a
part if the manufacturer and other sources are no longer in business?
Answer 8: For aircraft that the manufacturer is no longer supporting the
continuing airworthiness of, the owner or operator can petition the FAA
Aircraft Certification Directorate under the Freedom of Information Act for
the data on how the part was made. Or the owner or operator can reverse
engineer the part and have the data approved under a FAA field approval or,
if it is a really complicated part, have the data approved by a FAA engineer
or FAA Designated Engineering Representative.
Question 9: What happens to the owner-produced part on the aircraft if the
original owner sells the aircraft?
Answer 9: Unless the part is no longer airworthy, the original
owner-produced part stays on the aircraft.
I hope that I spread some light on the murky subject of owner-produced
parts, so the next time instead of saying to the owner of an broke aircraft:
"Sure, 'I' can make that part," you will now say "Sure, 'WE' can make that
part."
_____
Bill O'Brien is an Airworthiness Aviation Safety Inspector in FAA's Flight
Standards Service. This article also appeared in the Aircraft Maintenance
Technology magazine.
_____
From:
fairchildclub@yahoogroups.com [mailto:
fairchildclub@yahoogroups.com]
On Behalf Of Cy Galley
Sent: Sunday, October 07, 2012 3:20 AM
To:
fairchildclub@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [fairchildclub] Re: Parts Manufacturing Approval
Getting the approval costs. Doing an Owner Produced Part needs no approval
other than the A&P sign off. Each owner request is to build him or her one.
Pacific Oil Cooler does this.
I have attached Bill Obrien's article on the process.
Cy Galley - Chair, AirVenture Emergency Aircraft Repair
A service project of EAA Chapter 75 since 1963
www.eaa75.com
From:
fairchildclub@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:
fairchildclub@yahoogroups.com
]
On Behalf Of Tom_Downey
Sent: Saturday, October 06, 2012 8:58 PM
To:
fairchildclub@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [fairchildclub] Re: Parts Manufacturing Approval
How would that help other owners to get the replacement parts they need?
If I must tool up to build mine, why not the the approval to build for
others?
--- In
fairchildclub@yahoogroups.com
, "Cy Galley" wrote:
[mailto:
fairchildclub@yahoogroups.com
]
> Subject: [fairchildclub] Parts Manufacturing Approval
>
>
>
>
>
> Is it worth my time and troubles to gain Parts Manufacturing Authority to
> build gear leg assemblies for the F-24?
>
> Is there enough people needing them to make it worth while?
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]'