Have you ever asked to see aircraft maint loggs?

[skyberdyber 0]

Let's start with these. These are the most recent 2 airframe logbook pages for our King Air at Skydive Atlanta. The red text was added by me but they are scans of the actual entries.
All turbine aircraft that are flown at a reasonably busy DZ should have had some sort of inspection within the last year just based on the number of hours they fly.
Otters are on an EMMA program and King Airs are Phase inspection. I believe Caravans do Phase inspections as well but am not sure.

I would never have a problem showing a jumper our records and explaining them assuming it was a reasonably convenient time. I can think of a few good times to do so. Any rainy day where you are hanging out, Safety Day, any extended weather hold...
Questions on these welcomed.
-Trey

http://www.skydiveatlanta.com
http://www.musiccityskydiving.com

[kschilk 0]

I'd thought about it but then......I thought about it. Problem is, I'd know what I was looking at and most likely, wouldn't like what I saw.

"T'was ever thus."

[AMT 0]

He takes all the precaution of drawing a line "no further entries" below the signature, but leaves empty lines in the entry area above his signature between sentences, a couple long enough for somebody else to fit additional "work" into his entries. I usually draw a solid line through extra spaces.

[Zing 2]

Whatever else USPA has been and has now become, it will never be qualified, nor authorized, to conduct inspections of aircraft and their logs, nor should it ever be.
Hypothetically speaking, the USPA inspects some dropzone's (thus could be you DZO), gives them the big thumb's up and puts its sticker of approval on the plane.
Now, imagine that airplane does a VMc demonstration on takeoff with a full load, as more than one already has, and there's dead bodies everywhere, but in the photos in the paper is the USPA seal of approval on a bent piece of bloody metal.
USPA has just become a party to the resulting lawsuits, and will be held liable for its role in "approving" a jump plane that obviously shouldn't have been flying. If the airplane was as safe as the USPA said it was, it wouldn't have crashed.
The first time there's a settlement against the USPA, its the end of the USPA.

Edited cause I can't seem to spell for shit today.

Zing Lurks

[NWFlyer 2]

OK, what about me, the average jumper, who's just curious about how safe the plane is that I'm about to get on. I just want to know how well the owner and operator(s) of the plane I'm about to get on are complying with the FAA regulations that govern the operation of said aircraft.

I'm asking these questions because I seriously do not know the answer to the question. I don't know how I find these things out ... this thread is making me wonder. You're saying that aircraft maintenance logs should be these highly protected documents; I also suspect that I probably wouldn't have a clue what I was looking at anyway.

So what can I do to check up to make sure I'm flying with someone who's operating on the up-and-up?

"There is only one basic human right, the right to do as you damn well please. And with it comes the only basic human duty, the duty to take the consequences." -P.J. O'Rourke

[2shay 0]

I can vouch and say that Martin's plane is absolutely safe, but I wonder how safe other's planes REALLY are. Some part of me wants to know and the other part is saying ignorance is bliss. I guess that is the part of me that would not want to ask about it, but at the same time I really probably should ask for sure. (it is my life and all)

don't try your bullshit with me!!!

[diablopilot 2]

Quote

OK, what about me, the average jumper, who's just curious about how safe the plane is that I'm about to get on. I just want to know how well the owner and operator(s) of the plane I'm about to get on are complying with the FAA regulations that govern the operation of said aircraft.

I'm asking these questions because I seriously do not know the answer to the question. I don't know how I find these things out ... this thread is making me wonder. You're saying that aircraft maintenance logs should be these highly protected documents; I also suspect that I probably wouldn't have a clue what I was looking at anyway.

So what can I do to check up to make sure I'm flying with someone who's operating on the up-and-up?

It's time consuming, but I've made friends with the mechanics.

----------------------------------------------
You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously.

[NWFlyer 2]

Quote

Quote

OK, what about me, the average jumper, who's just curious about how safe the plane is that I'm about to get on. I just want to know how well the owner and operator(s) of the plane I'm about to get on are complying with the FAA regulations that govern the operation of said aircraft.

I'm asking these questions because I seriously do not know the answer to the question. I don't know how I find these things out ... this thread is making me wonder. You're saying that aircraft maintenance logs should be these highly protected documents; I also suspect that I probably wouldn't have a clue what I was looking at anyway.

So what can I do to check up to make sure I'm flying with someone who's operating on the up-and-up?

It's time consuming, but I've made friends with the mechanics.

Yes, but that's only because you lack boobies.

"There is only one basic human right, the right to do as you damn well please. And with it comes the only basic human duty, the duty to take the consequences." -P.J. O'Rourke

[diablopilot 2]

Ouch. Harsh!

----------------------------------------------
You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously.

[AMT 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

OK, what about me, the average jumper, who's just curious about how safe the plane is that I'm about to get on. I just want to know how well the owner and operator(s) of the plane I'm about to get on are complying with the FAA regulations that govern the operation of said aircraft.

I'm asking these questions because I seriously do not know the answer to the question. I don't know how I find these things out ... this thread is making me wonder. You're saying that aircraft maintenance logs should be these highly protected documents; I also suspect that I probably wouldn't have a clue what I was looking at anyway.

So what can I do to check up to make sure I'm flying with someone who's operating on the up-and-up?

It's time consuming, but I've made friends with the mechanics.

Yes, but that's only because you lack boobies.

Crown royal, or johnnie walker can reduce this timeframe also.

[popsjumper 2]

Quote

So what would be a way for USPA and/or jumpers to learn about the way that the aircraft they jump from are maintained?

Now here's a good opportunity where Parachutist could help us out education-wise. A knowledgeable person could write an article explaining what to look for in logbooks and explain what it all means.

Kudos to Trey for showing those pages.

I once asked to see logbooks at the DZ (not Trey's) and was told,
"We don't have them. 'HE' does and 'he' is not giving them up." The 'he' came to the DZ to take away the plane (it had been grounded by our pilot and sat for a couple of months out on the tarmac) and he set up a screen around the plane to hide the work he was doing on it...and no, he was not certified in any way to do any sort of maintenance on aircraft that I know of. It's the one plane I know of that I won't ever get on again unless I see logbooks that show that it has been properly repaired and maintained by certified personnel.

Note: Even then, sign-off by "vertified personnel" doesn't necessarily mean that the work was actually performed by him/her. It very well could mean that a bozo did the work and his buddy/pal signed off on it.
It saddens me that some people would elect to go that route.

My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

[skyberdyber 0]

The truth is really, you have no way to really tell without becoming educated. Even the FAA inspectors that are A&P's don't always know what they are looking at unless they are familiar with THAT specific aircraft type's standard maintenance practices and inspection programs. Believe it or not, they actually never check logbooks without a specific reason to do so. For example, inspection of a charter or airline company. There simply is not time nor manpower to do it.

Like I said previously, as much as most of these aircraft are flown, any aircraft you are on should've had a major inspection of some sort within the last year or so. The typical logbook entry will have a date and will pretty plainly state the work completed. You should see, "Complied with A.D. 123-456-78", or" Performed EMMA"/ "Performed Phase 2" etc. within the last year or so. If they only show "replaced boost pump", "lubed cables", changed filters" etc. then you should be concerned and start asking more questions.
Remember, all commercial flown aircraft are subject at the minimum a 100 hour inspection and annual if not on another approved inspection program.

For that matter, those of you that are not riggers, how do you know that your reserve and it's components are in airworthy condition? Even if you looked at it would you know? It's the same. You know what to look for on the card and you trust the guy that signed it.

Hope that helps.

On another note: I find it amusing how so many of you are interested in solving an incompetent governing body by giving them more authority and power.

http://www.skydiveatlanta.com
http://www.musiccityskydiving.com

[kallend 1,618]

Quote

I can vouch and say that Martin's plane is absolutely safe

There is no such thing as an "absolutely safe" plane.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kallend 1,618]

Quote

Quote

It's the one plane I know of that I won't ever get on again unless I see logbooks that show that it has been properly repaired and maintained by certified personnel.

Note: Even then, sign-off by "vertified personnel" doesn't necessarily mean that the work was actually performed by him/her. It very well could mean that a bozo did the work and his buddy/pal signed off on it.
It saddens me that some people would elect to go that route.

It's perfectly legal to have someone with inspection authorization sign off on work performed by someone else. The IA is putting his/her certificate on the line when he/she does so. It is not at all uncommon, though.

I don't think inspecting the logs will help much, if at all. Unless you know all the ADs to which the plane is subject (and this could be dozens on an older plane) you have no idea if it is compliance or not, regardless of what you read in the logs. Even reading and understanding the logs of my own plane (which I have owned for 22 years) is a non-trivial task.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

• Quote

[2shay 0]

Gotta love this guy he has all the answers

don't try your bullshit with me!!!

[riggerrob 558]

Now, imagine that airplane does a VMc demonstration on takeoff with a full load, as more than one already has, and there's dead bodies everywhere, but in the photos in the paper is the USPA seal of approval on a bent piece of bloody metal.
USPA has just become a party to the resulting lawsuits, and will be held liable for its role in "approving" a jump plane that obviously shouldn't have been flying.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Welcome to American "shotgun"style law suits.

In Canada, a judge can order the losing party to pay court costs if he/she decides it was a frivolous lawsuit.
Similar legislation would vastly reduce the number frivolous lawsuits in the USA.

[Sletzer 3]

And that's why I'm glad I jump at Skydive Atlanta!
I won't pretend to fully understand the logs, but the effort to post them & openess to show them gives me a warm fuzzy feeling.
Thanks Trey

I will be kissing hands and shaking babies all afternoon. Thanks for all your support! *bows*

SCS #8251

[propilot 0]

Quote

OK, what about me, the average jumper, who's just curious about how safe the plane is that I'm about to get on. I just want to know how well the owner and operator(s) of the plane I'm about to get on are complying with the FAA regulations that govern the operation of said aircraft.

I'm asking these questions because I seriously do not know the answer to the question. I don't know how I find these things out ... this thread is making me wonder. You're saying that aircraft maintenance logs should be these highly protected documents; I also suspect that I probably wouldn't have a clue what I was looking at anyway.

So what can I do to check up to make sure I'm flying with someone who's operating on the up-and-up?

Its very hard to tell sometimes. I know of one dropzone that has had 2 very serious accidents in the last 2 years, but in my opinion they are one of the best run safest dropzones out there.

Wish I could give you better advice.

[dannydan 0]

I answered "...i trust my DZO"

Not that I wouldnt know what I was looking at, but I have been in jumpships that LOOK NEW and end uP haveing a problem! Then I have been in jumpships that look a lil ruff (duct tape included) and fly like they're suppose to!

About like jumping anyway or LIFE.... When my number is called to that big DZ in the heavens, then why spoil it with "sweating the small shit!"