406 ELT possible infraction

[rigpiggy]

I was recently asked about a possible infraction...."company replaced a 406 elt without advising north bay/recoding, and flew several months like this. #1 what infraction is this? #2 would the elt still work, just the identification be incorrect?

[SAR_YQQ]

It would still work - just make it harder for JRCC to call the aircraft owner and confirm distress. SAR callouts can be avoided if the 406 owner answers the phone and confirms their aircraft is safely parked.

[Heliian]

Just to clarify, a 406 elt was removed and a new one installed without programming? Most now have a programming dongle and thus no programming of the elt is required upon replacement. If there was no dongle then programming would be required at installation.

Failure to program and test it would then fall on the ame unless they had documentation saying it was good. A new install would require a transmission test for the proper data, so you couldn't fudge that.

There is no good reason to install an uncoded elt as you're allowed to operate without one for just such occasions.

[photofly]

I was recently asked about a possible infraction...."company replaced a 406 elt without advising north bay/recoding, and flew several months like this. #1 what infraction is this?

571.02:

571.02 (1) Subject to subsection (2), a person who performs maintenance or elementary work on an aeronautical product shall use the most recent methods, techniques, practices, parts, materials, tools, equipment and test apparatuses that are

(a) specified for the aeronautical product in the most recent maintenance manual or instructions for continued airworthiness developed by the manufacturer of that aeronautical product;

(b) equivalent to those specified by the manufacturer of that aeronautical product in the most recent maintenance manual or instructions for continued airworthiness; or

(c) in accordance with recognized industry practices at the time the maintenance or elementary work is performed.

Fine of up to $25k for the AMO or OC holder, depending on who did the work.

[ahramin]

Per occurrence?

[photofly]

Then there’s the whole disobeying-the-MCM thing, since the MCM will specify manufacturers instructions must be used.

And probably a per-takeoff fine since the aircraft hadn’t been maintained in accordance with its approved maintenance schedule.

Your testicles are owned by Transport. They choose how tightly to squeeze.

[rigpiggy]

Actually it was more than just the elt, just showing a pattern of malfeasance