Back to Squawk list
  • 27

Updating avionics databases no longer requires a logbook entry

Amendment(s) published November 29, 2012, in 77 FR 71096 § 43.3 Persons authorized to perform maintenance, preventive maintenance, rebuilding, and alterations. (k) Updates of databases in installed avionics meeting the conditions of this paragraph are not considered maintenance and may be performed by pilots provided... ( 기타...

Sort type: [Top] [Newest]

I'm confused, is this just for 121 or for all aircraft?
This change is for all operators (Part 91, Part 135 and Part 121). Previous FAR 43.3 had this statement:
(4) Records of when such database uploads have occurred, the revision number of the software, and who performed the upload must be maintained.
Are we sure that this actually applies to part 91?

(3) The holder of operating certificates must make available written procedures consistent with manufacturer's instructions to the pilot that describe how to:

(i) Perform the database update; and

(ii) Determine the status of the data upload.

If you're part 91, there is no "holder of operating certificates" for the operation, and thus. Can that part of the requirement be met under part 91?

I think the major applicability of this is that pilots can update GPSs under part 135 and 121, instead of MX.
Never mind, I'm incorrect about this. It looks like the removed the "Updating databases" from the list of preventative maintenance in Appendix A as well, so now it's not considered preventative maintenance at all.
It looks like you got it figured out, but just to clarify, FAR 43 applies to all operators (Part 91, Part 135 and Part 121). In fact, FAR 43.3 (g) is where it specifies that pilots operating an aircraft under Part 91 may perform preventative maintenance.

The line you were referring to in 43.3 (k) actually says "(2) The pilot must comply with the certificate holder's procedures or the manufacturer's instructions." So Part 91 operators would just use the manufacturer (most commonly Garmin or Avidyne)'s instructions for doing the update.
I was actually more referring to the "operating certificate holder must supply" part. There is no operating certificate under part 91.

However reading the actual NFRM, it seems that the intent is that a part 91 operator would be his/her own operating certificate holder. Wish they made that explicit in the rule though.
Yah I agree that's really poorly phrased, but (3) just says that the holder of an operating certificate must make instructions available and describes what information is needed in those instructions. The entirety of item (3) would not apply to Part 91 operators.
That's exactly my concern! 3 doesn't apply, but it is listed as a requirement that must be met.
For (3) as a Part 91 operator, you don't have an operating certificate, so you do nothing and are still in compliance with 43.3(k).
Iskra 0
Really! They don't even make logbook entries at the airlines for this....


계정을 가지고 계십니까? 사용자 정의된 기능, 비행 경보 및 더 많은 정보를 위해 지금(무료) 등록하세요!
이 웹 사이트는 쿠키를 사용합니다. 이 웹 사이트를 사용하고 탐색함으로써 귀하는 이러한 쿠기 사용을 수락하는 것입니다.
FlightAware 항공편 추적이 광고로 지원된다는 것을 알고 계셨습니까?
FlightAware.com의 광고를 허용하면 FlightAware를 무료로 유지할 수 있습니다. Flightaware에서는 훌륭한 경험을 제공할 수 있도록 관련성있고 방해되지 않는 광고를 유지하기 위해 열심히 노력하고 있습니다. FlightAware에서 간단히 광고를 허용 하거나 프리미엄 계정을 고려해 보십시오..