• 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!

Unapproved Parts Notification- Dan's Aircraft?

I hope the feds go look at rareaircrafts Taperwing waco certified aircraft oh that's right they have a few original parts in them:wink:
 
Yarddart said:
I hope the feds go look at rareaircrafts Taperwing waco certified aircraft oh that's right they have a few original parts in them:wink:
Click to expand...
I can't comment directly on Rare Aircraft except to say that the Waco type certificates are in the public domain. Any person who acquires all of the drawings and data can produce and present the result to the FAA for an airworthiness certificate.
 
I know they pulled his tickets once before; I thought maybe this time they pulled the plug on the repair station...? There's got to be more to the story than what's contained in the letter- there always is. Steve, if the unapproved fabric is the only complaint with the airplane in question, wouldn't it be a simple matter of recovering with an approved process, demonstrating conformance to type design and/or approved data for proper mods and reissuing the airworthiness certificate? Think this type of thing has happened before...
 
yes, it would like to know exactly so i don't do something dumb too and get in trouble.... which rules they choose to enforce and which they ignore....
 
The airplane in question was built off a data plate, the rest of the airplane was left with the guy Dan bought the paperwork from. Makes no sense to me but that is what I am told by the guy who has the most to lose, the owner of the aircraft
 
Steve Pierce said:
The airplane in question was built off a data plate, the rest of the airplane was left with the guy Dan bought the paperwork from. Makes no sense to me but that is what I am told by the guy who has the most to lose, the owner of the aircraft
Click to expand...

Where's Paul Harvey, now when we need 'the rest of the story'.

Web
 
Ours mainly concerned blowing up the bad guys and not the good guys. It's called the "Fog of Battle."
 
Steve Pierce said:
The airplane in question was built off a data plate, the rest of the airplane was left with the guy Dan bought the paperwork from. Makes no sense to me but that is what I am told by the guy who has the most to lose, the owner of the aircraft
Click to expand...

strange,

i know of others like that....
someone want's a brand new one, and sells the old but flyable airframe & old pieces.....
 
And didn't this whole deal start because the engine crapped out. Bet it was FAA A number one approved too!!!
 
mike mcs repair said:
strange,

i know of others like that....
someone want's a brand new one, and sells the old but flyable airframe & old pieces.....
Click to expand...

That's the main reason that I think something else happened behind the scene. In the strict sense of the rules, building up a Cub type airplane under a data tag is not illegal as long as the builder is qualified, uses correct parts, and documents all work. This happens a lot with engines, especially when cases are replaced.

Web
 
I can't find a regulation that says I can't replace every part of an aircraft with an approved, pma'd or stc'd part either, yet at every IA conference they get up and show a slide of some craigslist ad where someone is selling cub paperwork with logs, airworthiness cert, registration, etc, and they say "building an airplane from parts and installing this data tag and calling it this airplane is NOT legal!" I understand we can't say "rebuilt" in the log entry, but I've never yet seen a reg that limits how many parts I can change at one time. I can buy a stc'd fuselage and everyone agrees it's perfectly legal to install, but I can't do pma'd wings, tail feathers, etc at the same time?
 
There is usually the Internet story and the Real story. Amazing how often they diverge.

Sounds to me like the Feds were flexing their muscles. They have the hammer and everything looks like a nail regardless of how nice and buddy, buddy they come on.
 
It has always been my understanding that you couldn't buy the logs & D plate off a "destroyed" aircraft. If the aircraft is written off as a total & de-registered. The Feds won't allow you to bring it back to life once destroyed. Buyer beware...
 
nanook said:
It has always been my understanding that you couldn't buy the logs & D plate off a "destroyed" aircraft. If the aircraft is written off as a total & de-registered. The Feds won't allow you to bring it back to life once destroyed. Buyer beware...
Click to expand...

You have to show the Feds that the aircraft that is reported as destroyed is rebuildable. My project was reported as such, but is now flying.
 
Big difference between salvaging a wreck and selling the data plate/logbooks to put on an aircraft that has none. This is what the Feds were cracking down on.
 
was just talking to someone on the field, and he said his fed told him Dan took his framed repair station certificate off the wall and threw it at the one FAA guy and hit him in the chest....

that don't sound like a productive or smart way to interact with the FAA :) might explain why this seems odd...

then he went and took his IA test to get an IA???
 
I've heard of guys tossing their license on the ground at the fed's feet, but throwing it AT them might be a step too far, particularly if you have any desire to stay in the industry...:???:
 
nanook said:
Big difference between salvaging a wreck and selling the data plate/logbooks to put on an aircraft that has none. This is what the Feds were cracking down on.
Click to expand...

30 years ago, it didn't take as much to make a cub not worth rebuilding....now a days, pretty much anything that's big enough to carry home is worth fixing......
John
 
flybynite said:
So, back to the original point of uncertified fabric or processes. How many stamps have to be visible to determine the entire stc was followed? Doesn't the IA's signed statement that the aircraft was covered iaw the stc indicate that certified materials were used if required by the stc? Can't see the tapes stamps. They are buried. Rib stitch materials certified? . Trust but verify? When is good enough good enough?

Wayne
Click to expand...

Ceconite tapes aren't stamped, and the Poly Fiber tapes are only stamped once at the start of the roll. The Ceconie tapes have a sticker on the roll identifying them as Ceconite tapes, but that's it. The STC referenced - SA4503NM - is Ceconite's STC, so I'd suspect that perhaps Poly Fiber's medium fabric was used, rather than the Ceconite 102 fabric. Same fabric, different stamp - but only Ceconite fabric can be used to comply with the Ceconite STC, and you can see those stamps easily after installation from the inside. I don't think he'd use uncertified light fabric as it isn't suitable for that type of aircraft.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

gdafoe
Can an Avionics Repair Station sign off work done on our Experimental Aircraft
2
Replies
31
Views
21K
hotrod180
hotrod180
mike mcs repair
FAA: Dozens of Alaska aircraft mechanics need to retake tests
2
Replies
41
Views
25K
barijr
B
sj
CUBCRAFTERS FIRST TO OFFER NON-TSO’d GLASS PANEL & AUTOPILOT IN PART 23 CERTIFIED AIRCRAFT
Replies
6
Views
10K
sj
sj
FlipFlop
Alaskan Bushwheel Tundra Tires...
Replies
2
Views
2K
diggler
D
Steve Pierce
Owner Produced Parts
Replies
11
Views
10K
cubdrvr
cubdrvr
Back
Top