Many FSDO inspectors in the USA would disagree that you do not need the updated manuals.What documentation has to be updated? The airplane hasn’t changed since it was built.
I ask, because in the US, youre required to perform maintenance based on a service manual that was current at the time the plane was built. You’re certainly free (and it’s often a good idea) to use more current manuals.
Its perhaps different in France….which is why I ask.
It basically states that if you use an out of date manual to perform maintenance then it puts the burden of proof on the FAA to prove why it was unacceptable for you to use the expired manual. In essence, if the part of the manual you are using has been revised, the FAA would win in court. If it hasn’t you could win in court after the FAA FSDO inspector violates you. Not a risk I am willing to take. How would I know which parts of the manual have been revised without access to the latest revision?Yes….employees at government agencies often like to disagree with themselves. Unfortunately, their superiors have a nasty habit of occasionally making opinions, in black and white, which supersedes their disagreements.
To wit:
https://www.faa.gov/about/office_or...Other_Documents_2010_Legal_Interpretation.pdf
ETA: I’m not making the argument that old documentation is better…however, I also know that Piper, Cessna, etc, are not investing heavily in continuous improvement of maintenance instructions for 50-60 year old airplanes. These older planes do not have an open architecture with software revisions (like modern avionics), and do not change over time. A decent copy of a maintenance manual, combined with ADs and SBs, should be more than adequate to keep any of our vintage piston singles and twins airworthy and safe.
Enter your email address to join: