Like any gov't agency at field office level, they come in all
varieties of competence and attitude.
Part 91 does require separate airframe/engine/prop logbooks for all
aircraft. I thought the entries therein are minimal, though, but often
missed by builders -- W&B, your own airworthiness inspection as
manufacturer for approving flight test, transponder/encoder
certification, and even ELT test/battery due date if they got fussy.
But they wanted _all_ construction minutia transferred to the ship's
maintenance logs?
They were dead wrong too on any interim inspection by a DAR or
anybody, and a Repairman's Certificate is not required to do
maintenance, just the annual.
I suppose one could study the FAR's and homebuilding Advisory
Circulars several times over, to prepare for these people. But after
30 years with the federal gubment, I've never heard any of the
governed come up with a tactful enough way of correcting your errors.
You still get irked. Only gubment can know its Regs.
Regards,
Fred F., A063
MJKTuck@cs.com wrote:
> ...
> I followed the advice in a little book which tells you how to certify a
> homebuilt (in the US) and that said a simple log of what you did - with
> dates is sufficient - together with meeting the FAA regs, etc.
> ...
> [FAA] wanted to know who my DAR was for inspections during the build etc -
> which kind of made me gulp. They also took one look at my PFA builders
> log I had been using and said words to the effect 'what the heck is this?'
> They made me write all the entries out again in a 'proper FAA logbook'
> along with insisting on separate engine logbook and propeller logbook
> (which my little book said was not required for homebuilts.
> ...
> The only question she had was who was going to do the maintenance on it
> and I said I was. No you can't, you're not authorized.... - not
> without a repairmans certificate.
|