PLT OF A DEHAVILLAND TWIN OTTER DHC6 EXPERIENCED; DURING AN IFR FLT; A VOR RECEIVER FAILURE AND EXCESSIVE PRECESSION OF THE DIRECTIONAL GYRO. IN ADDITION; RPTR DID NOT HAVE ANY ACFT RECORDS TO DETERMINE THE AIRWORTHINESS STATUS OF THE ACFT BEFORE OR DURING FLT.

Narrative

AFTER A LONG LAYOFF FROM FLYING (UNDER PART 135 AND PART 121) I HAVE RECENTLY BEEN HIRED (PART TIME) BY A COMPANY THAT OPERATES TWIN OTTERS UNDER PART 91. MY FIRST ASSIGNMENT WAS TO FERRY FROM 30 MI NE OF RDU TO 30 MI SE OF ATL. AS IT WAS NIGHT; UNFAMILIAR; AND NOBODY WAS WAITING FOR MY ARR. I TOLD MY BOSS I WOULD FILE IFR AND HE SAID FINE. THE WX WAS BEAUTIFUL AND THE FLT WAS UNEVENTFUL. HOWEVER; SEVERAL SMALL THINGS OCCURRED. THE DIRECTIONAL GYRO PRECESSED EXCESSIVELY; 1 VOR DIDN'T WORK. WHAT MY QUESTION IS: HOW DOES THE PIC MAKE A DETERMINATION ON THE AIRWORTHINESS IF YOU NEVER GET TO SEE ANY MAINT PAPERWORK. IT IS ALL LOCKED UP IN THE OWNER'S OFFICE. (THIS OWNER IS GOOD ABOUT ADEQUATE MAINT.) SHOULD NOT AN OWNER BE REQUIRED TO MAKE LOGS READILY AVAILABLE TO THE PIC FOR OPS UNDER PART 91? CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: RPTR STATED THAT SHE TRIED TO FIND OUT THE STATUS OF THE ACFT'S AIRWORTHINESS CONDITION PRIOR TO TKOF; BUT COULD NOT SINCE THE OWNER DID NOT ATTEMPT TO MAKE THE ACFT RECORDS AVAILABLE. THEREFORE; SHE WAS INFORMED THAT; AS THE PIC; SHE HAS THE RESPONSIBILITY TO ASSURE THIS; SINCE THERE IS NO VIOLATION OF AN ACFT BEING UNAIRWORTHY; IN CASE THERE IS; UNTIL THE ACFT IS OPERATED.