STC TO INCREASE GROSS WT FROM 1500 TO 1700#
- Thread starter garyh
- Start date
Darrel Starr
Registered User
Plymouth, MN
The STC was owned by Roger Borer but since he passed away I am not sure who owns the STC. Here is the dialog from the 337 I turned in on my 1950 105 hp SC.
Increased gross weight from 1500 pounds to 1750 pounds (upgrade to PA-18-150 weight and C.G. envelope) per STC SA292AL. Complied with M. R. Borer Aircraft Services Drawing No. 102268, dated 21 October 1968, and Instruction Sheet, dated 29 January 1969. All work performed in accordance with AC 43.13-1B-2A. Installation to be inspected at every annual or 100 hr. inspection.
Increased gross weight from 1500 pounds to 1750 pounds (upgrade to PA-18-150 weight and C.G. envelope) per STC SA292AL. Complied with M. R. Borer Aircraft Services Drawing No. 102268, dated 21 October 1968, and Instruction Sheet, dated 29 January 1969. All work performed in accordance with AC 43.13-1B-2A. Installation to be inspected at every annual or 100 hr. inspection.
Darrel Starr
Registered User
Plymouth, MN
garyh, I will have to look when I next get out to the hangar but I believe that s2d, "The Handsome One", is right -- in order to increase the gross weight you would need to make the airframe and powerplant mods to upgrade to the 150hp SC version. I installed an 0-320-B2B at 160 hp during the extensive rebuild.
Darrel
Darrel
Ruidoso Ron
Registered User
Alto, NM
I did the gross weight increase when I had a 135 in my Cub. I know it applies to the O-290-D2.
Darrel Starr
Registered User
Plymouth, MN
Here is what the FAA web site has to say. As Ruidoso Ron said, 135 hp is the minimum for this STC.
Darrel
Darrel
Cardiff Kook
PATRON
Sisters, OR
Here is what the FAA web site has to say. As Ruidoso Ron said, 135 hp is the minimum for this STC.
Darrel
I think 135 hp is the minimum but only with a PA-18-135. A PA-18-105 upgraded to an o-290 would not count. It would only be valid if it was a PA-18-105 with an o320 installed.
Is that correct?
Without seeing the actual STC, it is hard to say. Based on what shows in the RGL, a PA18-108 Special would need an O-320 installed to be eligible to install this STC.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
bob turner
Registered User
Worse goes to worst, you could apply for a field approval based on the aircraft being modified to 135 configuration and having purchased the STC. I would just ignore it until somebody brought it up - it was issued to that aircraft by the STC holder.
Did not know Roger left us. Nice guy. Gave me a few hints on the Helio.
Did not know Roger left us. Nice guy. Gave me a few hints on the Helio.
Charlie Longley
MEMBER
Anchorage, AK
Give his daughter Karen a call. She can read the STC to you and would be happy to sell it as well.
https://fadodge.com/faqs/
https://fadodge.com/faqs/
txpacer
SPONSOR
Iowa Park, TX
I would be interested to know what she says. We have a 135 L-21B that could apply to.
Cardiff Kook
PATRON
Sisters, OR
I spoke with Karen Borer on the matter. We had a nice conversation about some of the history of her father's work and STC's; however, she was not able to give specific guidance on the question regarding upgrades other than what was listed on the STC.
txpacer
SPONSOR
Iowa Park, TX
This thread has pictures of all the STC paperwork
https://www.supercub.org/forum/showthread.php?t=46457
https://www.supercub.org/forum/showthread.php?t=46457
bob turner
Registered User
This is an opinion.
If one can convert back and forth between models just by using the type certificate, why would Roger have gone to the trouble? Yes the 90 and the 150 are on the same type certificate, but does that mean we are free to change a 90 to a 150 with logbook entries?
I guess it is more like three questions than an opinion.
And a fourth - since the data plate says “PA-18” would it override the factory designation of, say, PA-18-105?
If one can convert back and forth between models just by using the type certificate, why would Roger have gone to the trouble? Yes the 90 and the 150 are on the same type certificate, but does that mean we are free to change a 90 to a 150 with logbook entries?
I guess it is more like three questions than an opinion.
And a fourth - since the data plate says “PA-18” would it override the factory designation of, say, PA-18-105?
supercrow
FRIEND
Smith Pond near Millinocket, Me
I think there are few supercubs out there that are completely legal. And many off them are not that way purposely, as different people interpret written things very differently. STC's get partially completed or slightly modified by the owner or installer which in many cases makes the machine technically un-airworthy. And then there are those (mostly individual owners) who just don't care and will do whatever they want to get the plane the way they want it. They should be flying experimentals. Many go un-noticed for decades and may never be an issue unless there is an incident that involves the feds. Then it may be just a grounding of the machine and a slap on the wrist (or worse). Most of us who build and rebuild cubs for customers do our best to keep things legal because it is in our best interest to do so. I think today insurance companies are where the major problems arise. And they can frequently find reasons not to pay. There is a lot of material out there today that is better than Piper original equipment. It's too bad more of it can't be used in modernizing these old machines but the fed machine is just too big for us to battle on our budget. Just my 2 cents.
Steve Pierce
BENEFACTOR
Graham, TX
What are you wanting to do? They only way to up the gross weight that I am aware of is with the O-320 on any of the STCs and the additional tubes, balanced tail, cabane bolts etc.
The sad thing is that minor changes to an STC can easily be approved via Field Approval or 8110-3. It’s just that owners and mechanics are to lazy to actually go through the process to “make it right”.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
hotrod180
FRIEND
Port Townsend, WA
I think most of us who are involved with the mechanical aspect of flying are aware of field approvals-- form 8110-3's, maybe not so much.
I never knew about them until about 7 years ago when I found one, looking through the paperwork of an airplane I'd bought.
I'm curious as to what kind of fees DAR's charge?
For example, I got a field approval a couple years ago for 26" Goodyears on my 180.
BTW this is a pretty common mod, I was pretty surprised to find that no one seems to hold an STC for it.
I gathered up copies of a number of previously approved 337's for other airplanes to support my 337 application,
I finally got it approved through the local FSDO but it took 11 months, and several phone calls & emails prodding the inspector along. Very frustrating.
What would you yourself charge for doing an 8110-3 for this installation, and what sort of documentation would you need?
I never knew about them until about 7 years ago when I found one, looking through the paperwork of an airplane I'd bought.
I'm curious as to what kind of fees DAR's charge?
For example, I got a field approval a couple years ago for 26" Goodyears on my 180.
BTW this is a pretty common mod, I was pretty surprised to find that no one seems to hold an STC for it.
I gathered up copies of a number of previously approved 337's for other airplanes to support my 337 application,
I finally got it approved through the local FSDO but it took 11 months, and several phone calls & emails prodding the inspector along. Very frustrating.
What would you yourself charge for doing an 8110-3 for this installation, and what sort of documentation would you need?
For Field Approvals and DER approvals, I charge based on an hourly basis. They take a fair amount research, so either the applicant does the research or I have to. That all affects how much I charge. For either one (I can only do Field Approvals in the Baltimore FSDO), read AC43-210 to see what is required (for more advanced approvals, read Order 8110.4). The hardest part is determining what regulations are impacted, and then how to show compliance to those regulations. With all certification activities, it all starts with the Certification Checklist. Once that is completed, determining how to show compliance is the hard part.
bob turner
Registered User
As for paperwork errors and Cubs -
Most weight and balance forms have errors. Often that works in a favorable way, since re-computing can often convert a Cub back to 2 place. Cubs all have two different datums, driving mechanics into serious balance errors.
About half the major alteration 337s I see cite no "approved data" - in some cases the IA assumes he can simply sign it. In about half the fuel tank 337s, the IA cites an STC for a different model aircraft. I own two aircraft like that, and in the first week of ownership I got field approvals.
One stunningly beautiful Cub had a truly inaccurate fuel tank 337 - two different wing tanks, no nose tank, incorrect quantities in paperwork and markings - yow! That day I got five field approvals signed!
Most weight and balance forms have errors. Often that works in a favorable way, since re-computing can often convert a Cub back to 2 place. Cubs all have two different datums, driving mechanics into serious balance errors.
About half the major alteration 337s I see cite no "approved data" - in some cases the IA assumes he can simply sign it. In about half the fuel tank 337s, the IA cites an STC for a different model aircraft. I own two aircraft like that, and in the first week of ownership I got field approvals.
One stunningly beautiful Cub had a truly inaccurate fuel tank 337 - two different wing tanks, no nose tank, incorrect quantities in paperwork and markings - yow! That day I got five field approvals signed!
Yes it is amazing what you find! Working with AOPA now on the AA5B that will be next years give away. Has a 337 for ground adjustable cowl flaps, but doesn't cite anything other than a drawing, and of course that drawing is not with the paperwork. I suspect it is from a "Multiple" Field Approval, but the guy didn't identify the aircraft that has the original multiple field approval. I've had any number of airplanes over the years with the wrong engine model, wrong prop, wrong magnetos, major repair and major alterations with no approved data and the list goes on. What really gets me is that so many IAs don't realize that when they sign an annual, they are accepting EVERYTHING that has been done to that aircraft since it left the factory, including any 337s that don't cite approved data, or STCs that were not completely installed (Some STCs allow partial installation, but it has to be identified within the installation instructions). I know of a number of guys that have gotten REVOCATIONS of their A&P and IA for signing an annual on aircraft that had 337s from years ago that didn't have approved data. When doing an inspection, that last signature holds all the liability!
bob turner
Registered User
Shhh! I could get revocations going all the way back to the 1980s. Found a C-90-12 installed on a J3 in 1985, with IA approval. The aircraft since then was annualled over 30 times, mostly by approved repair shops, and meticulously restored in the early 'oughts.
One of my Cubs sailed through a restoration and 20 annuals with an unapproved wing tank.
A while ago a Mooney made it through 20 years of annuals by an FAA repair shop/Mooney dealership without even pencil whipping two major ADs.
If anybody looks too hard we are all going to jail!
One of my Cubs sailed through a restoration and 20 annuals with an unapproved wing tank.
A while ago a Mooney made it through 20 years of annuals by an FAA repair shop/Mooney dealership without even pencil whipping two major ADs.
If anybody looks too hard we are all going to jail!
The only way we can go to jail is if they can prove fraud. Otherwise it is all administrative actions, take our certificates. But they can also levy fines for each infraction. $10,000 for each one! That can add up in a hurry. To say nothing of the possible liability if the aircraft is in an accident.
I get a lot of owners that complain about what I charge for AD research and review of 337s but if they don’t like it they can go elsewhere. I usually figure about 10 hours for an airplane I’ve never seen before.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
bob turner
Registered User
10 hours is about what it takes me - 15 for a 180.
Steve Pierce
BENEFACTOR
Graham, TX
What are you wanting to do? They only way to up the gross weight that I am aware of is with the O-320 on any of the STCs and the additional tubes, balanced tail, cabane bolts etc.
bob turner
Registered User
I think his question is this: if an STC is specifically restricted to Cubs with 150 hp engines and makes an express exception for the PA-18-135, can you convert a 105 Special to 135 configuration (it is still a 105 Special, right?) and use the restrictive STC?
My question would be can you just use the type certificate, add all those tubes, and convert to 1750 gross? I think I have seen several 150/160 cubs that were originally 18-95s.
My question would be can you just use the type certificate, add all those tubes, and convert to 1750 gross? I think I have seen several 150/160 cubs that were originally 18-95s.
The answer would be No, unless you actually change the model designation to a PA-18-135. Of course you also need a serial number airplane that is eligible. Not looking at the TCDS now, but I think the serial numbers of the -105 may also be eligible as -135 airplanes as well. You’re going to need approved data to convert models, a supplemental data plate showing the conversion, get an amended Airworthiness Certificate showing the new model (requires a conformity inspection), and a replacement registration also showing the new model. Lots of moving pieces, time and money to do it.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Cardiff Kook
PATRON
Sisters, OR
Where exactly does it say "135", "125," "105" etc? All I see is "PA-18" on rego and data plate.
This plane came from factory with 0235 but also with flaps- so it's not a -105 and not a 105 special I don't think because factory heel brakes as well.
TC says almost all serial numbers can be any model except for -150's.
Seems this plane isn't any of the types listed.
I read another thread hear about these planes- apparently they were called "patrol cubs."
Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk
This plane came from factory with 0235 but also with flaps- so it's not a -105 and not a 105 special I don't think because factory heel brakes as well.
TC says almost all serial numbers can be any model except for -150's.
Seems this plane isn't any of the types listed.
I read another thread hear about these planes- apparently they were called "patrol cubs."
Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk
Cardiff Kook
PATRON
Sisters, OR
I may have hijacked the thread with that one. I am talking about a different plane than the original poster. Perhaps I should start a new thread?
Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk
