Maintenance 101
- Thread starter hmesser
- Start date
Then when you can''t find what you are looking for at the TC site, go to the FAA for information. Often TC will use the same info after they "familiarize" themselves with it. A good example is STCs and TSOs. Having the applicable data in hand can often answer lots of questions particularily on CAR 705 a/c
Then when you can''t find what you are looking for at the TC site, go to the FAA for information. Often TC will use the same info after they "familiarize" themselves with it. A good example is STCs and TSOs. Having the applicable data in hand can often answer lots of questions particularily on CAR 705 a/c
A
Airplay
Guest
Since this is a Canadian forum, I would offer the following corrections:
Don''t refer to the FARs. There is very little information there that is appropriate for a Canadian AME. Use the CARs instead.
Don''t use FAA ACs unless they are previously accepted or otherwise recognized by Transport Canada. Use AMAs when appropriate. See AMA 500/00 for a list of acceptable FAA ACs.
http://www.tc.gc.ca/aviation/REGSERV/CARAC...a/en/500_00.htm
Also use the Airworthiness Notices (AN) and Maintenance Policy Letters (MPL).
Don''t refer to the FARs. There is very little information there that is appropriate for a Canadian AME. Use the CARs instead.
Don''t use FAA ACs unless they are previously accepted or otherwise recognized by Transport Canada. Use AMAs when appropriate. See AMA 500/00 for a list of acceptable FAA ACs.
http://www.tc.gc.ca/aviation/REGSERV/CARAC...a/en/500_00.htm
Also use the Airworthiness Notices (AN) and Maintenance Policy Letters (MPL).
A
Airplay
Guest
Since this is a Canadian forum, I would offer the following corrections:
Don''t refer to the FARs. There is very little information there that is appropriate for a Canadian AME. Use the CARs instead.
Don''t use FAA ACs unless they are previously accepted or otherwise recognized by Transport Canada. Use AMAs when appropriate. See AMA 500/00 for a list of acceptable FAA ACs.
http://www.tc.gc.ca/aviation/REGSERV/CARAC...a/en/500_00.htm
Also use the Airworthiness Notices (AN) and Maintenance Policy Letters (MPL).
Don''t refer to the FARs. There is very little information there that is appropriate for a Canadian AME. Use the CARs instead.
Don''t use FAA ACs unless they are previously accepted or otherwise recognized by Transport Canada. Use AMAs when appropriate. See AMA 500/00 for a list of acceptable FAA ACs.
http://www.tc.gc.ca/aviation/REGSERV/CARAC...a/en/500_00.htm
Also use the Airworthiness Notices (AN) and Maintenance Policy Letters (MPL).
A
Airplay
Guest
The "familiarization" process applied to STCs is just a procedure that was developed under the US/Canada bilateral agreement. The FAA uses the same process which is now commonly referred to as "airworthiness review".
This review is neccessary to determine if the foreign STC meets the intent and certification basis of the corresponding TCCA Type Certificate of the associated aircraft. If it doesn't then it gets rejected and bounced back to the responsible FAA ACO for review and/or revision. Again, a reciprocal procedure is used by the FAA if a Canadian STC is being considered on an American airplane so its not a one-way street.
TSOs like ACs are not all automatically accepted. The are just one means (not the only means) of approving equipment. TCCA has the PDA and TC processes in place for appliance approval in Canada. TSOs and JTSOs are just another example of foreign approvals that must be reviewed and formally accepted by TCCA.
A new CAR/AWM chapter will soon be available (chapter 521) that will consolidate 511 and 513. It will more or less mirror FAR 21 in an effort to harmonize our approval methods (including TSOs and JTSOs) with the FAA and the JAA.
One other tid-bit, TCCA actively participates with the FAA and JAA in the devlopment of policy material such as ACs in an effort to harmonize and more easily form acceptance of the respective policy. Therefore, the idea that TCCA uses FAA or JAA guidance for free without contributing development ideas and manpower is just plain wrong. (Not pointing fingers here, I've just heard this opinion alot)
As a matter of fact, the FAA has demonstrated a desire to use the TCCA model for personnel licencing, delegation, and aircraft modification to address many of the problems they are experiencing.
This review is neccessary to determine if the foreign STC meets the intent and certification basis of the corresponding TCCA Type Certificate of the associated aircraft. If it doesn't then it gets rejected and bounced back to the responsible FAA ACO for review and/or revision. Again, a reciprocal procedure is used by the FAA if a Canadian STC is being considered on an American airplane so its not a one-way street.
TSOs like ACs are not all automatically accepted. The are just one means (not the only means) of approving equipment. TCCA has the PDA and TC processes in place for appliance approval in Canada. TSOs and JTSOs are just another example of foreign approvals that must be reviewed and formally accepted by TCCA.
A new CAR/AWM chapter will soon be available (chapter 521) that will consolidate 511 and 513. It will more or less mirror FAR 21 in an effort to harmonize our approval methods (including TSOs and JTSOs) with the FAA and the JAA.
One other tid-bit, TCCA actively participates with the FAA and JAA in the devlopment of policy material such as ACs in an effort to harmonize and more easily form acceptance of the respective policy. Therefore, the idea that TCCA uses FAA or JAA guidance for free without contributing development ideas and manpower is just plain wrong. (Not pointing fingers here, I've just heard this opinion alot)
As a matter of fact, the FAA has demonstrated a desire to use the TCCA model for personnel licencing, delegation, and aircraft modification to address many of the problems they are experiencing.
A
Airplay
Guest
The "familiarization" process applied to STCs is just a procedure that was developed under the US/Canada bilateral agreement. The FAA uses the same process which is now commonly referred to as "airworthiness review".
This review is neccessary to determine if the foreign STC meets the intent and certification basis of the corresponding TCCA Type Certificate of the associated aircraft. If it doesn't then it gets rejected and bounced back to the responsible FAA ACO for review and/or revision. Again, a reciprocal procedure is used by the FAA if a Canadian STC is being considered on an American airplane so its not a one-way street.
TSOs like ACs are not all automatically accepted. The are just one means (not the only means) of approving equipment. TCCA has the PDA and TC processes in place for appliance approval in Canada. TSOs and JTSOs are just another example of foreign approvals that must be reviewed and formally accepted by TCCA.
A new CAR/AWM chapter will soon be available (chapter 521) that will consolidate 511 and 513. It will more or less mirror FAR 21 in an effort to harmonize our approval methods (including TSOs and JTSOs) with the FAA and the JAA.
One other tid-bit, TCCA actively participates with the FAA and JAA in the devlopment of policy material such as ACs in an effort to harmonize and more easily form acceptance of the respective policy. Therefore, the idea that TCCA uses FAA or JAA guidance for free without contributing development ideas and manpower is just plain wrong. (Not pointing fingers here, I've just heard this opinion alot)
As a matter of fact, the FAA has demonstrated a desire to use the TCCA model for personnel licencing, delegation, and aircraft modification to address many of the problems they are experiencing.
This review is neccessary to determine if the foreign STC meets the intent and certification basis of the corresponding TCCA Type Certificate of the associated aircraft. If it doesn't then it gets rejected and bounced back to the responsible FAA ACO for review and/or revision. Again, a reciprocal procedure is used by the FAA if a Canadian STC is being considered on an American airplane so its not a one-way street.
TSOs like ACs are not all automatically accepted. The are just one means (not the only means) of approving equipment. TCCA has the PDA and TC processes in place for appliance approval in Canada. TSOs and JTSOs are just another example of foreign approvals that must be reviewed and formally accepted by TCCA.
A new CAR/AWM chapter will soon be available (chapter 521) that will consolidate 511 and 513. It will more or less mirror FAR 21 in an effort to harmonize our approval methods (including TSOs and JTSOs) with the FAA and the JAA.
One other tid-bit, TCCA actively participates with the FAA and JAA in the devlopment of policy material such as ACs in an effort to harmonize and more easily form acceptance of the respective policy. Therefore, the idea that TCCA uses FAA or JAA guidance for free without contributing development ideas and manpower is just plain wrong. (Not pointing fingers here, I've just heard this opinion alot)
As a matter of fact, the FAA has demonstrated a desire to use the TCCA model for personnel licencing, delegation, and aircraft modification to address many of the problems they are experiencing.
A
Airplay
Guest
🙂
A
Airplay
Guest
🙂
With regards to certification, I just had a great experience with TC today... Showed up at their office at 10am to run some paper past the certification boys and had an LSTC at 3:15!!! Gotta be a record.... I guess grovelling does work...
[edit]: enough is becoming enough with this garbage.
yours truly,
C-64
[edit]: enough is becoming enough with this garbage.
yours truly,
C-64
With regards to certification, I just had a great experience with TC today... Showed up at their office at 10am to run some paper past the certification boys and had an LSTC at 3:15!!! Gotta be a record.... I guess grovelling does work...
[edit]: enough is becoming enough with this garbage.
yours truly,
C-64
[edit]: enough is becoming enough with this garbage.
yours truly,
C-64
Similar threads
- Airplay
- Aviation Chatter
