Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 40 of 48

Thread: Anchorage FSDO no longer allowing External loads???

  1. #1
    polardds's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Eagle River, Alaska
    Posts
    60
    Post Thanks / Like

    Anchorage FSDO no longer allowing External loads???

    Today I called the Anchorage FSDO to try and get the paperwork for the restricted airworthiness certificate so I can haul external loads. I was informed by the FSDO that external loads were no longer going to be permitted in Alaska. The old snow shoes, gun boot fishing rods were ok but the antlers and Atlee lumber racks were not. Can anyone else confirm this for me?

  2. #2
    www.SkupTech.com mike mcs repair's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    chugiak AK
    Posts
    10,325
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by polardds View Post
    Today I called the Anchorage FSDO to try and get the paperwork for the restricted airworthiness certificate so I can haul external loads. I was informed by the FSDO that external loads were no longer going to be permitted in Alaska. The old snow shoes, gun boot fishing rods were ok but the antlers and Atlee lumber racks were not. Can anyone else confirm this for me?
    eeek!!!

  3. #3
    gregory's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    AK
    Posts
    177
    Post Thanks / Like
    Time for 2" N numbers on the tail.

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Lake Hood
    Posts
    178
    Post Thanks / Like
    You say no longer permitted--are you implying; no more will be issued? Or, if you have one already they will longer be allowed to use legally?

    i got mine in the fall of 2012 and they made no indication it was on the chopping block--in fact they said they were re-working the dated phamplet/guidance they give you upon receiving the cert....

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Fairbanks Alaska
    Posts
    627
    Post Thanks / Like
    Interesting!
    Tim

  6. #6
    cubdriver2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    upstate NY
    Posts
    9,791
    Post Thanks / Like
    Looks like you guys are going to have to let your mother in law ride inside now.

    Glenn

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Fairbanks
    Posts
    869
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by cubdriver2 View Post
    Looks like you guys are going to have to let your mother in law ride inside now.

    Glenn
    It is comments like this that get you ex-communicated, where you serve the rest of your life on the Cirrus Forums.

  8. #8
    njneer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Chugiak, Alaska
    Posts
    94
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by gregory View Post
    Time for 2" N numbers on the tail.
    We need a "Like" button.
    Life in Alaska isn't always easy, but it has its rewards.

  9. #9
    nanook's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    northern alaska
    Posts
    1,643
    Post Thanks / Like
    I'm glad that I already have the Dodge rack and the external load permit approved.

  10. #10
    Chuck Avon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Hohenwald Tn
    Posts
    366
    Post Thanks / Like
    Did they bring a new manager from down here in the lower 48 that says no to every thing asked of him.

  11. #11
    Fat Kid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Nome
    Posts
    91
    Post Thanks / Like
    Yep got the same answer from an Anchorage Fed "no more external loads". The head Fed in DC sent out a directive telling the all FSDO's in the country that internal FAA memos from DC could not be used as a basis for approvals any more. As i understand it the external load permit we have been using was approved using one of these memos. If you have already have an approved external load permit your grand fathered in.

  12. #12
    SpainCub's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    612
    Post Thanks / Like
    My cub's for sale, 5500 hours 2100 since major overhaul, now at 65K with external load permit...

    If you have already have an approved external load permit your grand fathered in
    .
    Now
    seriously, is this common sense or is this a confirmation from the FAA?

  13. #13

    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    1,789
    Post Thanks / Like
    Important Note : External load permit is not transferable with the aircraft during ownership changes. Also, the following items have been evaluated and are not considered to be major alteration as defined by FAR 1.1. Snow shoes cross country skis, hunting rifle/scabbard, backpack frame and game tracking antenna. There are some exceptions to this requirement for certain aircraft, please contact your local FSDO for details.
    http://www.faasafety.gov/SPANS/noticeView.aspx?nid=3219

    another link of interest. Read the last paragraph of the opening page. Note the date.
    http://www.alaskaaircarriers.org/ser...ownload?id=566
    Last edited by sierra bravo; 03-05-2014 at 02:07 PM.

  14. #14
    Fat Kid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Nome
    Posts
    91
    Post Thanks / Like
    SpainCub I'm not sure what your asking exactly but I would not use FAA and common sense in the same sentence very often.

  15. #15
    DW's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    pacific northwest
    Posts
    2,064
    Post Thanks / Like
    Did you see SB's quote about not transferable does that mean that all of your field approvals are not transferable????

  16. #16
    Fat Kid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Nome
    Posts
    91
    Post Thanks / Like
    No your field approved 337's would stay with the aircraft they are field approved for regardless of aircraft ownership. SB's quote was about an external load permit which is not transferable.

  17. #17

    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Fairbanks Alaska
    Posts
    627
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Fat Kid View Post
    No your field approved 337's would stay with the aircraft they are field approved for regardless of aircraft ownership. SB's quote was about an external load permit which is not transferable.

    That is correct Ex load permit is for pilot and plane and does not transfer on a sale.
    Tim

  18. #18
    T.J.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    3,211
    Post Thanks / Like
    Lets see if I have this correct . Yesterday I could get an Ex. Permit, but today, because a bureaucrat in DC, who probably has never seen a Cub with moose antlers hung on the struts, decided I can't do that anymore. Why? Is it unsafe? How many Cubs with external loads have crashed lately? If it is unsafe today was it safe yesterday?
    Just more bureaucratic BS from DC.
    I wish I was a lawyer, I'd have fun with this one.

  19. #19

    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    1,789
    Post Thanks / Like
    Whether a lawyer could make a case that the FAA arbitrarily rescinded a well established policy without notice or a comment period would be interesting since the policy was a local exception that allowed us to deviate from restrictive regulations the FAA enforces elsewhere. Bottom line this change is more incentive for private guys to go experimental.

  20. #20
    SJ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Kansas City, USA
    Posts
    14,549
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by sierra bravo View Post
    Whether a lawyer could make a case that the FAA arbitrarily rescinded a well established policy without notice or a comment period would be interesting since the policy was a local exception that allowed us to deviate from restrictive regulations the FAA enforces elsewhere. Bottom line this change is more incentive for private guys to go experimental.
    True. I'm curious though, are there many commercial fixed wing operations involving external loads?

    sj
    "Often Mistaken, but Never in Doubt"
    ------------------------------------------

  21. #21
    tcraft128's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    St. Marys GA
    Posts
    789
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by sierra bravo View Post
    Bottom line this change is more incentive for private guys to go experimental.
    Are you saying that an experimental does not need an external load permit?
    Turning money into noise since 1996

    Our Build here


  22. #22
    Bill Rusk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Spokane Felts Field, WA/Poplar Grove, (Chicago) IL
    Posts
    5,216
    Post Thanks / Like
    Seems like it could be worded......Not to be used over populated areas and no passengers. Thus, if you want to take the risk and kill yourself thats OK, just don't hurt anyone else. That policy is the same in so many other parts of the FARS so why not here? You can do aerobatics without a parachute but if you have a passenger you must all have chutes. Same concept. Oh boy, here we go, the victimless crime debate....

    Bill
    Very Blessed.

  23. #23
    Gary Reeves's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Lake Clark National Park, Alaska
    Posts
    655
    Post Thanks / Like

  24. #24

    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    1,789
    Post Thanks / Like
    Beavers are allowed external loads per their type cert. The bigger impact of the rule change will be on Cub guys hauling antlers. Every new Cub owner wants to tie stuff to their struts.

  25. #25

    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Meadow Lakes / 29A
    Posts
    25
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by sierra bravo View Post
    Beavers are allowed external loads per their type cert. The bigger impact of the rule change will be on Cub guys hauling antlers. Every new Cub owner wants to tie stuff to their struts.
    If only the fish and game would do away with the 50 inch antler restriction on Moose I wouldn't have to strap them antlers on the out side of my cub .

    It might be time for me to move away from Lake hood and go to the valley on a private strip or lake and start flying alaskan style.

  26. #26
    mvivion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Bozeman,MT
    Posts
    10,435
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by SJ View Post
    True. I'm curious though, are there many commercial fixed wing operations involving external loads?

    sj
    Steve,

    No.

    The external load policy specifically prohibits such operation. On Page 3 of the policy booklet, under eligibility, part E: "When the aircraft is operated in the restricted category, carrying an external load as defined by paragraph D, it shall not be operated for compensation or hire."

    Note that many guides and outfitters in Alaska operate their aircraft under Part 91, ie: not for compensation or hire. They are selling a "hunt package" or a "camp package" or....which happens to include transportation to or from the field.

    The policy specifically defines things like tracking antennas, rifle scabbards, snowshoes, backpack frames and skis as NOT being considered major alterations, meaning the airplane may be operated in the standard category, as opposed to the restricted category, which is required to carry boats, antlers, lumber, etc.

    One question, with the change in this policy, is are they throwing the entire policy out? In other words, are they going to abandon the notion that rifle scabbards, snowshoes, etc are okay? And, what about tracking antennas? It is impossible in many districts in the Lower 48 to get approval for game tracking antennas, even by referencing the Alaska Region policy on external loads.

    I felt a change was probably inevitable when FAA Headquarters held meetings in Fairbanks and Anchorage to consider a new National Policy on carriage of external loads. It was pretty apparent that FAA HQ was pretty queasy about going with the AK policy as written, and that significant modifications would "have to be implemented" to make a national policy. It was made clear that if a national policy were to be developed, it would also apply to Alaska, even though it might be more restrictive. That initiative to develop a national policy died on the vine pretty quick, but it looks like ultimately, it is happening, as in Alaska is now having to conform to the lower 48 "policy", or lack thereof.

    As Stewart notes, the deHavilland Beaver was actually type certificated for external loads (on floats only). The TC requires proprietary attach hardware, which most everyone including the FAA seems to ignore. As far as I know, the Beaver is the only relatively common airplane out there with external loads called out in it's TC.

    MTV

  27. #27
    fabricfan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    341
    Post Thanks / Like
    Sorry FAA, but I have been waiting 10 years to be able lash a pair of Moose and Caribou antlers onto my struts and I am going to allegedly do it anyway.

  28. #28
    55-PA18A's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Dillingham, Alaska
    Posts
    585
    Post Thanks / Like
    I wonder if it would be possible to get someone from the FAA to explain the rationale for the departure from such a long-term policy? Anyone heard of antlers falling from planes and wiping out school kids?,…canoes through roofs of houses?,…sheets of plywood scattered across the land. Anyone heard of an aircraft accident caused by an external load?

    Likely it's just another knee jerk CYA action for a perceived but non-existent problem.

    Wonder what would happen if we all started submitting applications for external load permits? Perhaps some politician up for re election might be convinced that going after a government agency ignoring the needs of their constituents could get them some votes.

    Jim W

  29. #29
    skywagon8a's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    SE Mass
    Posts
    9,273
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by 55-PA18A View Post
    .... Anyone heard of an aircraft accident caused by an external load?
    Jim W
    Yes, Years ago in Northern Maine. I am not sure of the load or the airplane. As I recall it was a 185 on floats carrying plywood. Scratch one 185.
    N1PA

  30. #30
    www.SkupTech.com mike mcs repair's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    chugiak AK
    Posts
    10,325
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by 55-PA18A View Post
    .. Anyone heard of an aircraft accident caused by an external load?
    ..
    206 with lumber rack, hauling plywood, started plywood on fire... crash/landed few? years ago up here

  31. #31
    RaisedByWolves's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    3,771
    Post Thanks / Like
    Beaver and otter on the type cert can carry lumber and canoes Click image for larger version. 

Name:	ImageUploadedByTapatalk1394132221.810974.jpg 
Views:	62 
Size:	147.6 KB 
ID:	15182

    Otter
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	ImageUploadedByTapatalk1394132234.094307.jpg 
Views:	73 
Size:	166.1 KB 
ID:	15183

  32. #32
    mvivion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Bozeman,MT
    Posts
    10,435
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by mike mcs repair View Post
    206 with lumber rack, hauling plywood, started plywood on fire... crash/landed few? years ago up here
    Mike,

    Yes, that's accurate, but...... Strapping plywood to the belly of a wheel plane, and putting it right up against the exhaust stream.......duh!!

    I know of at least one airplane that departed Galena with a canoe and arrived without it, but other than the 206 on fire gig, I haven't heard of anyone hurting an airplane with external loads. I've flown a lot of external loads, of a number of different flavors, some of which LOOKED pretty ugly, and while some flew better than others, only one was scary.

    During those FAA HQ information gathering meetings (I attended the one in FAI) a lot of pilots talked about hauling a lot of external loads, and nobody allowed as how they had any issues. The FAA HQ guys were pretty amazed. I spoke with them after the FAI meeting, and they were pretty impressed. That deal got two divisions of the FAA in HQ pissing on each other's legs over turf, which was likely one reason it didn't go any further.

    MTV

  33. #33
    cubpilot2's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Anchorage Alaska
    Posts
    723
    Post Thanks / Like
    So what is the Canadian policy towards "external loads"?
    Ed

  34. #34

    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Inkom, Idaho
    Posts
    1,307
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by tcraft128 View Post
    Are you saying that an experimental does not need an external load permit?
    As far as I know, no problemo.
    Central Idaho, it beat driving the pickup.


  35. #35
    brown bear's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    emporia ks
    Posts
    541
    Post Thanks / Like
    So could someone do all the paper work and testing and get a STC for external loads on PA18s?
    Doug

  36. #36
    Fat Kid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Nome
    Posts
    91
    Post Thanks / Like
    The FAA's policy change doesn't just effect the external load permit. Again if i was understanding things correctly it effects any FAA internal Memo from DC that was used as a basis for an approval. I have received no explanation for the change in this policy. If i had to guess i would have to say it was a bureaucratic decision based off of a perceived FAA liability by a new FAA director that has never work in the aviation industry or doesn't know any thing about how the aviation industry works.

  37. #37
    irishfield's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Penetanguishene, Ontario Canada
    Posts
    2,944
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by cubpilot2 View Post
    So what is the Canadian policy towards "external loads"?
    That sometimes we ask tooo many questions!

    Was tie it.. fly it.. make a log entry that you made it back.. load passengers and go from there on out. Different type of load.. repeat. Someone's apparently working on screwing that proper mentality up North of the 49th as well !
    Last edited by irishfield; 03-06-2014 at 09:42 PM.

  38. #38
    mvivion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Bozeman,MT
    Posts
    10,435
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by brown bear View Post
    So could someone do all the paper work and testing and get a STC for external loads on PA18s?
    Doug
    Yes, you could. Wipaire went most of the way toward getting an STC for carriage of boats on float equipped Cessna 206 on floats some time back, including complete spin testing with a square stern boat tied on. I suspect they opted to drop the project for liability reasons, but my understanding is that they'd got through most of the testing with no problem.

    SPINNING a 206 on floats with a boat strapped on......of course, just one turn spins, but still......

    And there is one STC for a kayak on a Super Cub....but it's specific to one model kayak.

    MTV

  39. #39

    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Whitehorse, Yukon
    Posts
    424
    Post Thanks / Like
    Yeah so far it's still okay up here. You have to do a "test flight" , no PAX and document said test flight along with any unusual flight characteristics in the journey log. If the airplane flies good go for it, if it flies crappy then don't haul any PAX while you are hauling external. I have heard rumblings about that changing but nothing concrete so far

  40. #40

    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Space 801 at Lake Hood
    Posts
    23
    Post Thanks / Like
    I was issued an external load permit on 01/28/2014. In addition, the inspector removed the "No passenger" clause. As of 01/28/2014, I can haul a passenger with my external load.

Similar Threads

  1. External Loads
    By mvivion in forum Take Action Jackson
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 04-02-2006, 06:42 PM
  2. External Loads
    By floats in forum Cafe Supercub
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 01-03-2006, 09:37 PM

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •