CESSNA 172 PVT PLT OPERATED ACFT WHEN THE ACFT RECORDS DID NOT HAVE AN A&P SIGN-OFF FOR ELECTRICAL PWR FAILURE EVEN THOUGH THE ELECTRICAL PWR CAME BACK ON LINE FOR THE FLT.

Date: 2002-08 · Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172 · Phase: takeoff

Anomalies: aircraft-equipment-problem-less-severe|deviation-discrepancy-procedural-far|deviation-discrepancy-procedural-other-unknown

Synopsis

CESSNA 172 PVT PLT OPERATED ACFT WHEN THE ACFT RECORDS DID NOT HAVE AN A&P SIGN-OFF FOR ELECTRICAL PWR FAILURE EVEN THOUGH THE ELECTRICAL PWR CAME BACK ON LINE FOR THE FLT.

Narrative

ON AUG/SAT/02; AFTER A PREFLT INSPECTION I STARTED THE ENG ON MY CESSNA 172. UPON CHKING ALL GAUGES I NOTICED THAT THE AMMETER WAS READING A -60 AMP CONDITION. THE ENG AND ELECTRICAL SYS WERE IMMEDIATELY SHUT DOWN TO TRY TO DETERMINE THE NATURE OF THE PROB WITH THE AMMETER READING. VOLTAGE ON THE VOLTMETER REMAINED CONSTANT AS THINGS WERE CHKED AND THE VOLTMETER REMAINED AT -60 VOLTS. BEING UNSUCCESSFUL AT DETERMINING THE PROB I TIRED IN VAIN TO FIND AN A&P ON THE LOT FIELD THAT COULD HELP. SUBSEQUENTLY I CALLED THE LCL FSDO TO INQUIRE WHAT WOULD BE NECESSARY TO FLY THE ACFT TO A NEARBY FIELD FOR MAINT (1C5 CLOW INTL). THEY SAID THAT I WOULD NEED A FERRY PERMIT TO MOVE THE PLANE WITH THE ELECTRICAL PWR AT THE MAIN SWITCH OFF. I COULD GET A PERMIT ON AUG/THU/02. THE MORNING OF AUG/THU/02; I WENT TO CHK ON THE PLANE AGAIN AND FOUND THAT THE AMMETER AND ALL OTHER GAUGES READING CORRECTLY. I WAS UNABLE TO MAKE THE AMMETER TROUBLE REAPPEAR. I STARTED THE ENG AND TURNED ON ALL ELECTRIC ONE AT A TIME TO SEE WHAT WOULD HAPPEN AND ALL SEEMED NORMAL. THE PLANE WAS TAXIED AROUND FOR A FEW MINS IN CASE SOME ENG VIBRATION MIGHT CAUSE A REOCCURRENCE OF THE AMMETER INDICATION. ALL LOOKED NORMAL; SO THE PLANE WAS FLOWN THE 5 MI TO 1C5 FOR THEIR MAINT SHOP TO SEE IF THEY COULD FIND OUT WHAT CAUSED THE AMMETER READING. AS THE PLANE WAS BEING WORKED ON THE LCL FSDO CALLED ME AND I INFORMED THEM WHAT HAD TRANSPIRED. THEY SAID THAT I WAS MOST LIKELY IN VIOLATION OF THE FAR'S. I HAD THOUGHT THAT SINCE ALL SYS WERE OPERATIONAL THAT THE FLT WOULD BE FINE. THEY SAID THAT BECAUSE I HAD INFORMED THEM OF A PROB THAT THE PLANE WOULD HAVE NEEDED AN AIRWORTHINESS SIGNOFF BY AN A&P BEFORE ANOTHER FLT. IN RETROSPECT; I SHOULD HAVE KEPT IN TOUCH WITH THE FSDO ON THE LANE TO BE SURE IT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE TO MOVE THE PLANE. THIS WOULD HAVE PREVENTED ANY IMPROPER ACTION ON MY PART AND INSURED THE SAFETY OF THE PLANE AND OCCUPANTS.

Source: NASA Aviation Safety Reporting System (public domain). Reports are voluntary submissions and are not verified by NASA.