Scott 3200 Bearings

[HandsSlowLow]

Many of you probably know this already but I thought I’d post it for those that may not.

The Scott 3200 Tail Wheel takes two (2) Timken A4050 tapered roller bearings and two (2) A4138 bearing races. These sell for between $33-$37each for the bearings and #37-$41 each for the races on Spruce and Sky Geek. So you’re looking at $140-$160+ for a complete set.

These are available from any bearing supplier or even on eBay for $4.50 for the races and $8.95 each for the bearings. These are standard Timken bearings. Hope this saves someone some money$$$ !!!

PS Spruce does have an alternative to the McCreary tail wheel tire and tube used on the Scott 3200 tail wheel. The tire is $10 and tube $5 vs $46 and $20 for the McCreary.

[mike mcs repair]

ummmm....

if it's a real plane, it needs real plane parts...

I think the bearings are now marked AFTER they are inspected under the FAA PMA inspection program of the manufacturer/reseller.......

yes starts as same physical part..... but one is legal.....

bogus parts, traceability and such... they get quite cranky....

there are many parts like this...

[tempdoug]

Thanks, for taking care of us experimental guys. Its why we went that route. I probably never will own a real plane though, maybe i should never say never, i guess. And for you moisture resistant types that dont have a Super WalMart or NAPA out your front door but have a John Deere dealer, i like there grease part #TY24425. Its blue and matches 100LL in color. If it makes a difference, i dont know but i feel better using it. doug

[irishfield]

Hey.. don't be takin all the mark up out of our shop parts prices!! LOL

[RAC cubs]

PMA means no drug testing of workers

[kevin]

I got my bearings and races from Wup at Alaska Bushwheel. They are certified parts and are cheaper than Timken.

[Gary K]

Read AC 23-27 7-C-1

[cruiser]

How big an AH would you have to be to have a FAA rep dig far enough into your airplane to find tailwheel wheel bearings that may not be PMA'd? REALLY big, I'd say.

[mike mcs repair]

How big an AH would you have to be to have a FAA rep dig far enough into your airplane to find tailwheel wheel bearings that may not be PMA'd? REALLY big, I'd say.

well, if ya jump up and down and go and blab on here about it, ummmmm..........

some things in life you don't share, for obvious reasons..... it's like all the idiots video taping themselves breaking the law and posting the videos to you tube for their friends.... and the cops....

this exact subject(timken bearings) has come up with the FAA before, so........ just sharing the outcome....

[HandsSlowLow]

Didnt say to use it on a certified AC I just said its the exact same bearing, Timken A4050, and is available from other sources for much less. What you do with it is your business. The point of sharing it is to save someone a few $$s.

Also if you read AC 23-27 7-C-1, as advised above, it states that bearings (among other things) are specifically allowed to be replaced in antique AC with comparable units. I think a Timken A4050 could replace a Timken A4050.

[bob turner]

This always puzzles me. If your brakes or bearings fail in an auto on the freeway, you can kill a whole lot of people - nice folks who were just innocently driving next to you. If your tailwheel bearings fail, you will need a weapon to kill anything. In most taildraggers, you won't even know until you change the tire.

We can build an experimental PT6- powered homebuilt, equip it with non-TSO radios and lights, and happily blast off in positive controlled airspace with commercial jets in the same general area, all in the clouds. But dare to put, say, non-STC strobes on your J-3 and you are likely to go to Guantanamo for the rest of your life.

Too bad we cannot get some sensible folks to re-vamp the regs to make small airplane flying a bit more affordable. Ours is the last generation of normal folks who will be able to do this stuff. It is pretty much over for the twenty-somethings unless they are exceptional or have a trust fund.

Opinion.

[HandsSlowLow]

Yes Welcome to the brave new world.

[cubdriver2]

This always puzzles me. If your brakes or bearings fail in an auto on the freeway, you can kill a whole lot of people - nice folks who were just innocently driving next to you. If your tailwheel bearings fail, you will need a weapon to kill anything. In most taildraggers, you won't even know until you change the tire.

We can build an experimental PT6- powered homebuilt, equip it with non-TSO radios and lights, and happily blast off in positive controlled airspace with commercial jets in the same general area, all in the clouds. But dare to put, say, non-STC strobes on your J-3 and you are likely to go to Guantanamo for the rest of your life.

Too bad we cannot get some sensible folks to re-vamp the regs to make small airplane flying a bit more affordable. Ours is the last generation of normal folks who will be able to do this stuff. It is pretty much over for the twenty-somethings unless they are exceptional or have a trust fund.

Opinion.

Damm Bob, I love it when you talk like a conservative

Glenn

[tempdoug]

Trouble with that Bob is where do you start and where do you end. I like it the way it is. Either it is or it isnt.

[mike mcs repair]

I think this is what the hub bub was about back 11 years ago....... I think I remember wag aero got their hands slapped when this started too...

• BOGUS PARTS: A loosely defined term which has come to describe several parts categories, ranging from properly manufactured parts lacking required documentation

• UNAPPROVED PARTS: Under FAA regulations, all aircraft parts manufactured without FAA approval (specifically FARs Part 21.305 or repaired under the terms of Part 43) are unapproved parts. This catchall classification includes counterfeit parts, stolen parts, production overruns sold without authorization, parts in exceedance of their time limits, approved parts improperly returned to service, and fraudulently marked parts, or parts which have no traceability.

The Aircraft Safety Act of 2000

four-tier sentencing approach. A simple violation of the Act carries with it a maximum punishment of 10 years imprisonment and a fine of up to $250,000. If the offense relates to the "aviation quality" of a part and the part is installed in an aircraft or spacecraft, the maximum punishment increases to 15 years and a fine of up to $500,000. If, however, the part to which the offense is related fails to operate as represented and causes a malfunction or failure that results in serious bodily injury, then the maximum punishment rises to 20 years and a $1 million fine. Finally, if the part to which the offense is related fails to operate as represented and causes a malfunction or failure that results in death, then the maximum punishment increases to life imprisonment and a $1 million fine. Fines for corporate offenders can be as high as $20 million.

The title of the Aircraft Safety Act (the Act) reflects the primary purpose of the bill: to safeguard passengers and crewmembers from the dangers posed by installation of nonconforming, defective, and counterfeit parts in civil, public, or military aircraft or spacecraft. The problems associated with nonconforming, defective, and counterfeit aircraft parts are legion since a single domestic passenger airplane alone can contain as many as 6 million parts. Industry has estimated that as much as $2 billion in unapproved parts are now sitting on the shelves of parts distributors, airlines, and repair stations. Over the past few years, the Department of Transportation Inspector General and the Federal Bureau of Investigation have obtained 136 indictments, 98 convictions, nearly $50 million in criminal fines, restitutions, and recoveries in cases involving unapproved aircraft parts. Additional investigations are underway with no sign of abatement. Yet, until now, no single Federal law targeted the problem in a systematic, organized manner. The Aircraft Safety Act of 2000 has changed that and should prove to be a potent tool to combat this illegal activity.




As noted above, the Act employs a four-tier sentencing approach. A simple violation of the Act carries with it a maximum punishment of 10 years imprisonment and a fine of up to $250,000. If the offense relates to the "aviation quality" of a part and the part is installed in an aircraft or spacecraft, the maximum punishment increases to 15 years and a fine of up to $500,000. If, however, the part to which the offense is related fails to operate as represented and causes a malfunction or failure that results in serious bodily injury, then the maximum punishment rises to 20 years and a $1 million fine. Finally, if the part to which the offense is related fails to operate as represented and causes a malfunction or failure that results in death, then the maximum punishment increases to life imprisonment and a $1 million fine. Fines for corporate offenders can be as high as $20 million.


DEFINITION OF TERMS



• BOGUS PARTS: A loosely defined term which has come to describe several parts categories, ranging from properly manufactured parts lacking required documentation to defective and deliberately counterfeited parts.



• UNAPPROVED PARTS: Under FAA regulations, all aircraft parts manufactured without FAA approval (specifically FARs Part 21.305 or repaired under the terms of Part 43) are unapproved parts. This catchall classification includes counterfeit parts, stolen parts, production overruns sold without authorization, parts in exceedance of their time limits, approved parts improperly returned to service, and fraudulently marked parts, or parts which have no traceability.



• COUNTERFEIT PARTS: Parts made of inferior properties.


• APPROVED PARTS: These parts conform to FAA-approved production standards (FAR 21.305). They can be approved under a Parts Manufacturer Approval (PMA), under Technical Standard Orders (TSOS), in conjunction with type- certification procedures through FAA Administration approval, or by conforming to recognized Industry specifications.

[bob turner]

I was kidding about Guantanamo - are you sure they weren't contemplating the death penalty if you use a hardware store screw to attach your hub cap? If it falls off, it could act like a frisbee and go right through somebody. Ouch!

[Bill Ingerson]

Thank you for the Bearing numbers, I am just now getting ready to rebuild two Scott tail wheels. As far as the bearings and races go, they are the same with no other numbers or STC paper work. If I were selling bearings for airplanes it would be a different story because of liability. The last main wheel bearing for a cub, I purchased at a bearing shop. Bearing and Race were a little over $50.00. ea. I thought that was high for what it is. Amazing what my wifes cat pee can do to a bearing. Also would like to mention that BushWheel's sells a better bearing dust/dirt seal for each side of the bearing and cheap.

Bill

[qsmx440]

Yes thanks for the bearing numbers! But since this thread has moved a little to the legalities of parts.... As regards an "experimental" type build.. I have heard and read varying opinions about the experimental build. One is that you must have receipts for everything you use. For instance I have receipts for all the 4130 I used to build my tail feathers. But then I read about using "scrounged" parts like from friends or ebay. For instance I have a set of cleveland brake calipers but no "trace" for them. I just bought them off of here. Apparently I'll have no problem using them on my build. Another example is my fuselage cage. It is a 77 PA18 cage according to where I got it but there is zero paperwork and zero marks on it (I have looked in all the supposed correct places and no numbers). So far as I can prove it might have been from an experimental.. The point is I'm not worried about whether it's a pma'd part or not but instead , even though it's obvious what it is and that it's already "had a PA-18 life" so to speak, will it get "kicked out" because I have no history at all on it?? Maybe under the paint it's EMT tubing . Any thoughts??

[bob turner]

Dunno about that, but I copied Mike's post, and will present it in today's ground school. I truly will go to jail; my entire aircraft is untraceable, except for the major parts. The tires and tubes are 8:00x4, but still no traceability, and most of the hardware is only obviously A/N because of the head markings. There are no markings on the nuts and washers, and I have no receipts. Please send a cake with a file in it.

[S2D]

Didn't somebody just state on another thread that if a Manufacturer certifies a plane with a non Aircraft part, that non aircraft part is legal.

I remember buying a Delco Remy Regulator from Casper Air years ago. it came in a Delco Box with $15.00 on the outside, and they tried to charge us $75.00
A timken bearing is a timken bearing. period.



• APPROVED PARTS: These parts conform to FAA-approved production standards (FAR 21.305). They can be approved under a Parts Manufacturer Approval (PMA), under Technical Standard Orders (TSOS), in conjunction with type- certification procedures through FAA Administration approval, or by conforming to recognized Industry specifications.

[StewartB]

Timken® tapered roller bearings for landing wheels meet the stringent performance demands of these aircraft wheels – whether in large commercial transports or small private airplanes. Timken marks these bearings with “20629” (inch) or “N0629” (metric), signifying that they are designated and manufactured for these applications. In most commercial applications, Timken holds Part Manufacturer Approval (PMA) from the FAA. Click here to see a complete list of FAA-PMA parts available.

The AML for approved bearings-
http://www2.timken.com/faa/faa-print.asp

The source of the above information-
http://www.timken.com/EN-US/products...elBearing.aspx

[irishfield]

Thanks Stewart.. that puts all the BS to rest!

[qsmx440]

Ahhh SD2 answered my "experimental" question. I am the aircraft builder so "I" certify all the parts that go in it and I so say: All my parts are certified for my aircraft!

[Bill Ingerson]

Well that is good information on the bearings. What is the difference between this bearing and the one bought at a bearing supplyer ? other than maybe paper work and dollars.

[bob turner]

I think some of the Champion products come with Stewart Warner automobile gauges. At least they did when Bellanca was doing them. Even if your Timken bearing is built under a PMA, what about the traceability? Do you have to save the sales slip?

[mike mcs repair]

...... What is the difference between this bearing and the one bought at a bearing supplyer ? other than maybe paper work and dollars.

the aircraft ones used to have an "A" added/etched to part number after inspection.... looks like they just inspect all that might fit aircraft uses under their PMA now?? judging by stewart's links???...

[mike mcs repair]

.... come with Stewart Warner automobile gauges. ...

wasn't there a white paint dot inside on face on the aircraft ones? or am I remembering something else, like part of an amp meter AD??? long time ago....

[Fortysix12]

Can someone tell me how to easily remove the carrier tappered bearing race in the Scott 3200 casting. the race located just under the center shaft bushing,not the wheel half bearings. I looks inaccessable, also what is the easy way to remove the spring steel locker dowl, mine looks like its in there to stay with no access.

[aktango58]

Can someone tell me how to easily remove the carrier tappered bearing race in the Scott 3200 casting. the race located just under the center shaft bushing,not the wheel half bearings. I looks inaccessable, also what is the easy way to remove the spring steel locker dowl, mine looks like its in there to stay with no access.

Hook it on a log when landing downwind on a short bar...

Tailwheel removed, problem left behind.

The trouble with traceability really comes from insurance when you ground loop you PA-18 and the claim is denied because the wrong race is installed.

As far as manufactured parts, look at the Cub Crafter issue- they put in CC ribs on the -18, which have Univair stamps on them. But as the aircraft owner or a mechanic wants to replace it, they must buy from CC, and can not legally install one direct from Univair...

speaking of common sense, I wonder if TSA and the FAA are joining forces, becoming a "service" group: FATAAS

[mike mcs repair]

Can someone tell me how to easily remove the carrier tappered bearing race in the Scott 3200 casting. the race located just under the center shaft bushing,not the wheel half bearings. I looks inaccessable, also what is the easy way to remove the spring steel locker dowl, mine looks like its in there to stay with no access.

the pin you drive through into the center AFTER you remove the big bronze bushing which you normally replace(Its guaranteed worn)

if memory serves me.... the only way to get that race out is to add a 1/8" hole or?? or two to drive it out(they didn't leave a way).... dicey operation.... unless its real bad don't try.....

[12 Geezer]

A trick to remove a race or bushing that's pressed into a blind hole is to weld on it from the inside. The heat will make it try to expand, but because it's hot it will plastically deform to a smaller diameter. Let it all cool and the race will essentially fall out. Weld rapidly with a fairly high heat. The idea is to heat the race much more than the surrounding casting.

[mike mcs repair]

A trick to remove a race or bushing that's pressed into a blind hole is to weld on it from the inside. The heat will make it try to expand, but because it's hot it will plastically deform to a smaller diameter. Let it all cool and the race will essentially fall out. Weld rapidly with a fairly high heat. The idea is to heat the race much more than the surrounding casting.

never been brave enough to try that in an aluminum casting......

[Tim]

What Geezer said, did it all the time on truck wheels. Will work on Alu. housings also, no problem

Tim

[fixnflyr]

As far a certified parts are concerned there is a FAR called FAR21.303(b). Which stated the owner can produce or supply his own parts for his own aircraft.( GO read the FAR as I am sure it's paraphrased here). If an owner brought me a set of bearings and they were timkin with the correct #s and he said they were good bearings (owner purchases part and does inspection, performs the Quality Control function) I can install them and sign them off (at my discression if they are good parts) as "installed owner supplied parts P/N ...... in ..... IAW the limitations of FAR 21.303(b), unit ops. checks good" or similar statement and be completely legal in the eyes of the FAA ADMINISTRATOR. The key for this FAR to work is the owner has to be involved- owner buys part, inspects part, buys material, installs part fabricated, fabricates part, assists in some way. Otherwise how could an A&P fabricate a new piece of engine baffling or a hose legaly? He does not have a PMA for the hose even though he assembled it from approved parts. When he assembled the hose he manufactured it if he sold it to an owner for a certified aircraft. ( I see a big FAA spanking on the way!!!) Now if the A&P only replaced one fitting and the hose, that's a repair!!!! So our buearacrats have decided for us (because they know best) that a repaired hose with one old fitting is better than a new hose with 2 new fittings without paperwork cause w/o paperwork the part is "bogus" and we all know bogus parts are bad!!!.. As usual the blame will always fall back of the mechanic who has a licence the feds can go after. The bottom line is the mechanic is on the front line for the aviation safety programs and FAR's to work as the feds can't come out and repair the aviation fleet themselves and must rely on the trust of the mechanic to do things properly and follow the FAR's.
Now that being said, it does not mean the owner can have me install a Holly 4 barrel carburetor on his IO-520 continental, that would be an alteration and is not within the scope of FAR 21.303.
This is why I love the freedom of experimental aircraft. We can do what we know will work and be safe without having to deal with all of the FAR's that are written for all certified aircraft especially aircarrier types.

[12 Geezer]

never been brave enough to try that in an aluminum casting......

Heh! I hear you Mike. The key is RAPID heating of the inner part. Arc, not gas.

[Fortysix12]

So there's no "Scott" special instructions on to remove that particular bearing. It is showing some pitting but still servicable. Doesn't make sense. I can figure something but be nice to know how he factory does it or did it. The factory should chime in any time.

[Steve Pierce]

The factory built them but never rebuilt them. AK Bushwheels can rebuild it for you. I would not find a pitted bearing at all serviceable. I would TIG weld a big washer to it and knock it out.

[StewartB]

As far a certified parts are concerned there is a FAR called FAR21.303(b). Which stated the owner can produce or supply his own parts for his own aircraft.( GO read the FAR as I am sure it's paraphrased here). If an owner brought me a set of bearings and they were timkin with the correct #s and he said they were good bearings (owner purchases part and does inspection, performs the Quality Control function) I can install them and sign them off (at my discression if they are good parts) as "installed owner supplied parts P/N ...... in ..... IAW the limitations of FAR 21.303(b), unit ops. checks good" or similar statement and be completely legal in the eyes of the FAA ADMINISTRATOR. The key for this FAR to work is the owner has to be involved- owner buys part, inspects part, buys material, installs part fabricated, fabricates part, assists in some way. Otherwise how could an A&P fabricate a new piece of engine baffling or a hose legaly? He does not have a PMA for the hose even though he assembled it from approved parts. When he assembled the hose he manufactured it if he sold it to an owner for a certified aircraft. ( I see a big FAA spanking on the way!!!) Now if the A&P only replaced one fitting and the hose, that's a repair!!!! So our buearacrats have decided for us (because they know best) that a repaired hose with one old fitting is better than a new hose with 2 new fittings without paperwork cause w/o paperwork the part is "bogus" and we all know bogus parts are bad!!!.. As usual the blame will always fall back of the mechanic who has a licence the feds can go after. The bottom line is the mechanic is on the front line for the aviation safety programs and FAR's to work as the feds can't come out and repair the aviation fleet themselves and must rely on the trust of the mechanic to do things properly and follow the FAR's.
Now that being said, it does not mean the owner can have me install a Holly 4 barrel carburetor on his IO-520 continental, that would be an alteration and is not within the scope of FAR 21.303.
This is why I love the freedom of experimental aircraft. We can do what we know will work and be safe without having to deal with all of the FAR's that are written for all certified aircraft especially aircarrier types.

An owner buying a bearing at NAPA and handing to his mechanic doesn't even come close to compliance with the standards for owner produced parts.

For your consideration, this article provides information and entertainment.
http://www.aircraftrebuilder.com/ind...arts&Itemid=29

Stewart

[Fortysix12]

Not really pitting Steve, you know those little lines sometimes the bearings leave, it runs smooth in the race and it really would be Ok for a while , but I guess I need to learn how to tig. I was hoping there was a method that was discribed by the people who make it.

[Steve Pierce]

Not really pitting Steve, you know those little lines sometimes the bearings leave, it runs smooth in the race and it really would be Ok for a while , but I guess I need to learn how to tig. I was hoping there was a method that was discribed by the people who make it.

Water marks. I would replace if on the wheel bearing race but the head doesn't turn fast. I am sure Scott would say replace the whole head assembly. $$$ Maybe Wup will chime in with some words of wisdom.