FAA 121 Database Aircraft Mods Scope Limits
04-21-2011, 06:36 AM
#1
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Nov 2008
Position: MD-88 F/O
Posts: 1,004
FAA 121 Database Aircraft Mods Scope Limits
Does anyone know of a database that the FAA has that allows you to look up 121 aircraft that would depict any modifications that have been applied to them? Inquiring minds and all.....
04-21-2011, 07:32 AM
#2
Can't abide NAI
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
Posts: 11,989
Yes, you can order the complete aircraft file from the FAA, which includes all the registration and maintenance information. This will include Certification documentation as well as any major modifications, repairs, or supplemental type certificates.
I think I know where you are going. You are wondering if Republic's jets are Certified in excess of the weight limits of Delta's PWA scope section 1B40e. The answer is yes, and no.
The FAA allows operators and manufacturers to operate under "Marketing" Certificates which are more conservative (less than) the actual Certified limits of the jet. These can pretty much just be faxed in to the FAA by the manufacturer at the request of the operator / customer. Regional airlines do this to easily run around the very poor scope language Delta (and others) have written into their contracts.
The operator can change back to the real Certified limits with just a log entry (which is not captured by the FAA's database). This could happen every leg, if the operator was so inclined.
Delta actually operates your MD88 under one of these "marketing" Certificates, which is why your over weight landing is no where near the big deal that an overweight landing is on a 737.
I ordered the records on the Republic fleet and reviewed thousands of pages looking for a clear cut violation. It was not there. Better documentation could be found by photographing placards on the flight deck, since these show the currently Certified limits (and should be changed with the logbook entry).
Spoke with the E170 Program Manager about how to capture this information. He laughed at our union for writing such stupid scope language. My efforts ended in a dead end without the ability to actually review the aircraft's logbooks. I asked ALPA to request this information from management. ALPA felt we do not have the right to monitor compliance by digging through a third party's records. (ALPA is probably right).
Hence the reason I support "inclusive" scope language. Our current scope defines what we do not fly and is (as the above example illustrates) unenforceable as written.
I think I know where you are going. You are wondering if Republic's jets are Certified in excess of the weight limits of Delta's PWA scope section 1B40e. The answer is yes, and no.
The FAA allows operators and manufacturers to operate under "Marketing" Certificates which are more conservative (less than) the actual Certified limits of the jet. These can pretty much just be faxed in to the FAA by the manufacturer at the request of the operator / customer. Regional airlines do this to easily run around the very poor scope language Delta (and others) have written into their contracts.
The operator can change back to the real Certified limits with just a log entry (which is not captured by the FAA's database). This could happen every leg, if the operator was so inclined.
Delta actually operates your MD88 under one of these "marketing" Certificates, which is why your over weight landing is no where near the big deal that an overweight landing is on a 737.
I ordered the records on the Republic fleet and reviewed thousands of pages looking for a clear cut violation. It was not there. Better documentation could be found by photographing placards on the flight deck, since these show the currently Certified limits (and should be changed with the logbook entry).
Spoke with the E170 Program Manager about how to capture this information. He laughed at our union for writing such stupid scope language. My efforts ended in a dead end without the ability to actually review the aircraft's logbooks. I asked ALPA to request this information from management. ALPA felt we do not have the right to monitor compliance by digging through a third party's records. (ALPA is probably right).
Hence the reason I support "inclusive" scope language. Our current scope defines what we do not fly and is (as the above example illustrates) unenforceable as written.
04-21-2011, 01:46 PM
#3
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2008
Position: blueJet
Posts: 4,511
Originally Posted by Bucking Bar
I ordered the records on the Republic fleet and reviewed thousands of pages looking for a clear cut violation. It was not there.
If regional guys like me ever manage to make a real career out of this mess, it will be due in part to the hard work and tenacity of guys such as yourself.
04-21-2011, 07:14 PM
#5
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: Light Chop
Posts: 23,286
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
AUS_ATC
Hangar Talk
0
03-08-2006 06:56 PM
