I posted the TB10 MM section above.
For EASA registered airplanes operated non-commercially and maintained under Part-ML, SB carry no weight unless listed in an AD or specified in an EASA approved maintenance manual, Limitations section.
The difference is in European ground politics 
Also EASA automatically approved a DGAC MM, without asking whether some bit of it is exploitative. The DGAC just loved throwing in all sorts of stuff into their highly prescriptive MMs, e.g. lifed parts like stainless steel fuel filters which can be inspected, cleaned, and re-used for ever. It’s even better business for a TBM shop, because the customers there don’t care (I was hangared in one for 10 years).
Peter posted it in post #10.
Fly310 wrote:
Peter posted it in post #10.
Peter posted the TB20 MM.
Here is the TB10 MM Ch. 4.
Fly310 wrote:
I would try and find a way around it by referring to the Advisory Circular from the FAA instead of Hartzells own service letter. They write “or”, not and. The AC says that you are recommended to follow it, therefore not obliged to do so.No matter what you, me or anyone else here think, the only person here who needs to interpret this correctly is the person reviewing your AMP…
Correct answer! Keep the prop on condition!
Termikas (where I have my plane for refurb) doesn’t want to sign the CRS without proof it’s ok to operate my prop on condition. They’re saying the AMP needs to reference the “propeller life time exception document”. Can anyone help me understand what this is and how I sort this out?
Not helpful I fear, but anything complex in Europe fly on N reg! Surprised they didn’t ask for all the hoses to be replaced because they are more than six years old.
For anyone’s future reference, I was able to sort this by amending the AMP to include FAA Advisory Circular No. 20-37, which is referenced in the Socata maintenance manual, as a basis for operating without the calendar time restriction.
or (!!!) Advisory Circular No. 20-37 (latest edition) issued by FAA (US DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION)…
In your AMP put a deviation for prop:
100 hrs / 12 months: inspection acc. FAA AC 20-37
The Hartzell TBO/Calendar is a Service Letter only, so it’s not mandatory for you.
Edit: I see you figured it out while I was typing ;). Great!
Quote
Not helpful I fear, but anything complex in Europe fly on N reg! Surprised they didn’t ask for all the hoses to be replaced because they are more than six years old
Complex EASA = turbojet/multi engine turbine etc… then NCC applies, and it does so just as well for N-regs based in EASA territory. So no difference there.
Even for „complex“ meant as in VP prop, retractable gear etc. operated acc. EASA NCO and maintained acc. ML there isn’t much difference to N-reg, if any.
Unless the „hoses“ are part of airworthiness limitations of the aircraft or an AD, nobody can force an owner to replace anything.
Again: EASA Pt. ML = Airworthiness Limits + ADs are mandatory. SL, SB etc… are not! Same as with N-reg.
Also I have to give props once again to the Romanian CAA for their incredible customer service. My contact there responded within one hour while sitting in the hospital about to undergo surgery, and he apologized for his late reply!! I’ve had nothing but consistently fantastic responsiveness from them.
