• If You Are Having Trouble Logging In with Your Old Username and Password, Please use this Forgot Your Password link to get re-established.
  • Hey! Be sure to login or register!

Tradition Ferry Permit issuance method GONE

Yet another reason to go experimental. The FAA really needs to provide an exit path to allow private operators to flip to experimental. We'd be out of their hair and they'd be out of ours. Win win.
 
Last edited:
I hear what a lot of you are saying, but a ferry permit is a certification under Part 21, not maintenance. As A&Ps and IAs, we work in the Part 43 world, not the Part 21 world. The person signing the ferry permit (Special airworthiness certificate under 21.197 has the responsibility to determine “safe for flight”. In the past, FAA deferred that determination to the A&P in the operating limitations. A DAR does not have that option and must make that determination themselves.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
The person signing the ferry permit (Special airworthiness certificate under 21.197 has the responsibility to determine “safe for flight”. In the past, FAA deferred that determination to the A&P in the operating limitations.
So, what did the Baltimore FSDO tell you the reason was for taking away something which had been entrusted to A&Ps for well more than half a century? What changed, which rendered the judgement of those A&Ps invalid? I take this as a personal insult to my integrity. Something which I have strived to be the best I could be for the 60 years which I have held an A&P certificate.
 
Why the change, does it take that long for a PMI to read, sign and email back a ferry permit?

Good question Steve. I would think it takes longer for them to go into DMS (the software for designer oversight) click all the boxes, then go in to PTRS ( the tracking software for all inspectors) and check those boxes the it would for them to issue it themselves. Seems all inspectors do is click boxes on the various computer systems. Kind of like doctors today, the last couple doctor appointments I’ve had, they spend about 3 time the amount of time on the computer as they do looking at the patient!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
So, what did the Baltimore FSDO tell you the reason was for taking away something which had been entrusted to A&Ps for well more than half a century? What changed, which rendered the judgement of those A&Ps invalid? I take this as a personal insult to my integrity. Something which I have strived to be the best I could be for the 60 years which I have held an A&P certificate.

They haven’t taken anything away from the A&P, they shifted what they did to designees but they didn’t allow us to do fax or email ferry permits. We have to issue an actual 8130-7 special airworthiness certificate.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
They haven’t taken anything away from the A&P, they shifted what they did to designees but they didn’t allow us to do fax or email ferry permits. We have to issue an actual 8130-7 special airworthiness certificate.
I guess that depends on which hat you are wearing, whether something is taken away or not. It seems that it is the FAA which is shirking their established responsibilities.
 
I hear what a lot of you are saying, but a ferry permit is a certification under Part 21, not maintenance. As A&Ps and IAs, we work in the Part 43 world, not the Part 21 world. The person signing the ferry permit (Special airworthiness certificate under 21.197 has the responsibility to determine “safe for flight”. In the past, FAA deferred that determination to the A&P in the operating limitations. A DAR does not have that option and must make that determination themselves.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Issuing the permit may not be actual maintenance, but if the FSDO rep has to physically inspect the aircraft, he is then performing a maintenance function. Part 43 calls out the systems to be examined in order for an A&P and/or IA to determine the airworthiness of an aircraft. Nothing in Part 21 calls out criteria for determining airworthiness of an existing type certificated aircraft.

Web
 
Issuing the permit may not be actual maintenance, but if the FSDO rep has to physically inspect the aircraft, he is then performing a maintenance function. Part 43 calls out the systems to be examined in order for an A&P and/or IA to determine the airworthiness of an aircraft. Nothing in Part 21 calls out criteria for determining airworthiness of an existing type certificated aircraft.

Web

I'm quite confused by this thread....

so you have to hire $ and transport $$ an INSPECTOR(DAR) who CAN"T reattach the wing(s), and straiten out the fuselage enough to ferry it, (and probably is has no experience, or willingness to do/with this)

to BLESS it, safe for flight??

not just me (A&P)???

so WHY??, then would you REQUEST a ferry permit???...

it used to be just a accident/incident tracking FAA paperwork exercise......

never had one time they wanted to come see it, or the pictures I offered to take for them....

( really need to dig out the box of pictures from the ferry flights I have readied and post them..)
 
Most of mine have been to deliver an aircraft to my airport when the annual inspection is past due. An owner got another shop to issue one a few weeks ago. Will have to ask the mechanic who got it how big of a hassle it was. Airplane only had 12 hours on it since last inspection so wasn't a big airworthiness concern.
DSCF3921.jpg
 

Attachments

  • DSCF3921.jpg
    DSCF3921.jpg
    78.8 KB · Views: 1,658
Issuing the permit may not be actual maintenance, but if the FSDO rep has to physically inspect the aircraft, he is then performing a maintenance function. Part 43 calls out the systems to be examined in order for an A&P and/or IA to determine the airworthiness of an aircraft. Nothing in Part 21 calls out criteria for determining airworthiness of an existing type certificated aircraft.

Web

Web,
That’s kind of the point of the ferry permit, it doesn’t have to meet the TC and by definition is not airworthy. The only requirement is a judgement call that the aircraft is “safe” for the intended flight, and only that flight. For as long as I can remember, and for literally hundreds of ferry permits I got before I was aDAR, the FAA inspector never came to look at the airplane unless it was an accident with severe injury or fatality. Just Op Limits that said most expeditious route considering fuel and weather and a sign off from an A&P saying it was safe for flight. Unlike most of the comments above, I don’t think I’ve ever requested a ferry permit for an airplane out of annual, all mine were accident damage. The reason I got the DAR was because I was asking for so many, once I had the DAR, I could issue them myself. It wasn’t until years later that I added all the other functions.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I'm quite confused by this thread....

so you have to hire $ and transport $$ an INSPECTOR(DAR) who CAN"T reattach the wing(s), and straiten out the fuselage enough to ferry it, (and probably is has no experience, or willingness to do/with this)

to BLESS it, safe for flight??

not just me (A&P)???

so WHY??, then would you REQUEST a ferry permit???...

it used to be just a accident/incident tracking FAA paperwork exercise......

never had one time they wanted to come see it, or the pictures I offered to take for them....

( really need to dig out the box of pictures from the ferry flights I have readied and post them..)

Most DARs got there after having done lots of ferry permits as an A&P. I’ve patched up more airplane that had pilots forget to put the wheels down, or hit a deer on landing, or got blown over in a wind storm and on and on. I’ll agree that most times an inspector never looked at the airplane. The conflict of interest limitation can seem a little stupid. I can do annuals on my own airplanes, but I can’t do engineering approvals or field approvals on my own airplanes.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
What a load of BS!!! I agree with Skywagon...we've had it taken away from us!! Basically what it's going to do is make outlaws out of 90% of us when it comes to this stuff. I'm damned sure not gonna hire a DAR to tell me (and charge me!!!!) that we can ferry an airplane. I'll take my chances and they can kiss it. This has gone way too far!!
John
 
Far as I'm concerned, ferry permits have been a thing of the past for a couple years now. Used to be their job was to get a permit to so you could do it legally. Now they have to micromanage everything. Less stress just annualling it or fixing it where it is than dealing with the FAA. I realize those of you in Alaska have different issues and it really sucks for you.

Sent from my E6910 using Tapatalk
 
What a load of BS!!! I agree with Skywagon...we've had it taken away from us!! Basically what it's going to do is make outlaws out of 90% of us when it comes to this stuff. I'm damned sure not gonna hire a DAR to tell me (and charge me!!!!) that we can ferry an airplane. I'll take my chances and they can kiss it. This has gone way too far!!
John
Thank you John, My sentiments exactly.

Far as I'm concerned, ferry permits have been a thing of the past for a couple years now. Used to be their job was to get a permit to so you could do it legally. Now they have to micromanage everything. Less stress just annualling it or fixing it where it is than dealing with the FAA. I realize those of you in Alaska have different issues and it really sucks for you.
It appears that in their efforts to micromanage everything under guidance from their legal department, the FAA has really stepped on their Richards this time. They are forcing us out in the field underground. While the FAA is holding their crying towel hiding in a closet, we in the field will keep the aviation fleet in the air.
 
I was about to type the same thing John. "Making outlaws out of all of us." They wonder why it is an us vs. them.
 
One can easily fly an aircraft without a license or ferry permit without getting "caught." But here in the lower 48, your insurance does not cover you.

I tell my students - "You pay thousands of dollars to an insurer - don't make the mistake of operating outside your insured limits." Who cares about an FAA enforcement action in comparison.

Recently an owner lent his Stearman to a buddy - a qualified taildragger with no Stearman experience. I talked to the FAA on a different matter that week - he said the poor guy was not at all worried about the 709 ride - he was worried about where he was going to get fifty grand to fix the thing!

Alaska is different - who can even afford insurance there?
 
Thanks for checking with Anch FSDO stewart, Post #1 is a direct copy of an Email from my local FSDO. And word was relayed to me from a fellow SC.orger in an adjacent FSDO that his FAA has also changed the practice. As I've mentioned elsewhere you have the best FAA region in the country. I'm suspecting that this issue is something the lower 48 FAA has come up with on their own as a way to cut down on their "personal workload".
 
Don't shoot the messenger, I just made a call to ask.
As a lot of us know, part of the problem is inconsistencies between FSDOs. For her to say internet chat room information is unreliable is kind of a slap in the face. Looks like everything here is accurate by mechanics that have held the certificate 60 plus years and a DAR. Hard to argue with them and the letters and memorandums posted. Glad Anchorage is still doing them, Lubbock is as well but a major PITA.
 
Anch FSDO says they're still doing ferry permits. They directed me to the FAA website, which coincidentally still has the procedure posted....

https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/field_offices/fsdo/phl/local_more/media/ferry_permit.pdf

Thanks!

hmmm things have changed... just ask for a permit, never even seen the wrecks when requesting the permit, but hopefully they would send in a roll of film with the damage, so i could bring the proper parts and tools...

never had to do a 8130-6....
I like them #4.
4.) The ways, if any, in which the aircraft does not comply with the applicable airworthiness requirements.

let's see.... on the one PA-14, fuselage bent in half in front of tail( i have a neat method for cutting next to a tube bend part way though tube, then welding a half sleeve on outer part of tube where its easier to weld, DON'T attempt to unbend a bend kink...), elevator and stabilizer toast on one side, jack screw bent.... all 4 wing spars bent upwards... one tire/wheel had came apart in tundra and caused the wreck (snap ring popped) don't remember if it got prop.. between the owner and I took about a day to get it launched, I only slept one night in that plane... i got to spend the next night alone in a toy fred meyer tent he had after he left....

i really need to dig through my picture box.... always said it was my paid vacation camping trips...
 
I think the key here is in the post of the FAA message above where it says "we are now requesting that all ferry permits go though a DAR" that a good bit short of were not issuing go find a DAR...
 
Fairbanks, Ak. FSDO has advised as of today "we still issue them". As usual they are good to deal with.

Gary
 
I think the key here is in the post of the FAA message above where it says "we are now requesting that all ferry permits go though a DAR" that a good bit short of were not issuing go find a DAR...

After 8 months dicking around with field approvals that's what they told me. These were previously approved FA's. That is there polite way of denying you, with out denying you. Apparently if they deny you a field approval on something that has been previously approved, you can go to the originally issued faa person, and you do not have to stay in your FSDO, But they wouldn't give me a written letter of denial, just told me they are "way too busy".
 
After 8 months dicking around with field approvals that's what they told me. These were previously approved FA's. That is there polite way of denying you, with out denying you. Apparently if they deny you a field approval on something that has been previously approved, you can go to the originally issued faa person, and you do not have to stay in your FSDO, But they wouldn't give me a written letter of denial, just told me they are "way too busy".
If that’s what they are doing then I would suggest documenting the situation to Senator Inhofe’s office attention to his aviation staf..
 
They are required to give you a reason in writing. I could look it up, but it is on the very first page of one of those Technical Orders.
 
Back
Top