• 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!

Catto Propellers On Certified Super Cubs

Status
Not open for further replies.
actually... the PA-12 has ONLY TWO seats... the back seat, just happens to be able to accommodate 2 passengers with using ONLY the ONE lap belt....

I bet that will fly...
The TCDS states "Number of Seats 3 (One at +6 and two at +34)Only one person permitted in rear seat when operating in Utility Category"

If the plane were placarded "Utility Category only" or "only one person may occupy rear seat", would that permit the Catto?
 
If the plane were placarded "Utility Category only" or "only one person may occupy rear seat" said:
I don't believe there is a utility category anymore in the rewrite. Not sure how that plays with airplanes that are already certificated under old regs.

I'm pretty disappointed about how this looks like it's going to shake out. Once again I'm left out high and dry when it comes to my PA-14....
 
I don't believe there is a utility category anymore in the rewrite. Not sure how that plays with airplanes that are already certificated under old regs.

I'm pretty disappointed about how this looks like it's going to shake out. Once again I'm left out high and dry when it comes to my PA-14....
Bummer but look on the bright side, there will be a plethora of used black props for sale when legal Cato's comes to market. Oh and by the way did I mention that mines in perfect condition especially compared to that gravel buster of Pierce's, but if that won't work well I've got a gray one as well.
 
How does the Part 23 rewrite apply to Part 3 airplanes? Once the prop is approved under the Part 23 rewrite it will be an approved prop. Then it should be a simple matter to install on Part 3 airplanes.
 
My understanding is that the certification standards for propellers on "class 1" airplanes (up to single pax) will be lower than class 2. So it's not as simple as being either Approved or not under part 23.
 
Got this in the mail last week- not sure if this went to all AK IA's, or just our area... sorry- not sure why it rotated... IMG_1736.JPG
 

Attachments

  • IMG_1736.JPG
    IMG_1736.JPG
    1.8 MB · Views: 455
Then received this in an email today:

To All,

I just wanted to follow up with a brief explanation on the CATTO Propeller letter. Please understand it’s an informational sharing letter, and not targeting anyone. Our ambition is ensure aviation safety. You all are an extension of the FAA and hope we all can work together.

I believe in the FAA Compliance Philosophy, working together through issues and conversations, not enforcement. I apologize to any of you if I said something that might have miss-represented myself.

Attached is some guidance that might help and the National Compliance Philosophy Flight Standard is promoting.

Thank you,
 
So from reading this , I think we got a skunk in the nest, FAA lurking in the dark. In the name of "SAFETY" its ok on a experimental but OMG you cant put that on a certified real one. When it comes to logic they FAA is in the toilet.

JOHN PERRY
 
So from reading this , I think we got a skunk in the nest, FAA lurking in the dark. In the name of "SAFETY" its ok on a experimental but OMG you cant put that on a certified real one. When it comes to logic they FAA is in the toilet.

JOHN PERRY

That is a pretty ridiculous statement. I would hope that most of us understand the difference between certified and experimental. There are lots of things that MAY (or may not) work just fine on experimental aircraft, as far as we know, but can't be used on certified.

i can think of one case years ago that involved several folks using a certified propeller on engines that the prop was never approved on. A mechanic pushed the propeller manufacturer to do a vibration survey on that prop/engine combination. They found some serious vibration issues, which were then solved by shortening the prop and adding a harmonic damper.

in that case, if those gents had been running the prop on an experimental, it could have ended ugly. But that's part of the deal with experimental....we are allowed to experiment.

Mr. Catto's props have not been certified yet. I have no doubt they will be at some point, maybe in their current form, or perhaps modified. But, for the moment, they are only approved on experimental aircraft. That is not the FAA's fault, but the FAA is tasked with ensuring the safety of certified aircraft.

i hardly think any of us are being harmed in any way because we can't use a Catto prop on a certified aircraft.

And, how fair would it be for the FAA to have required McCauley and Sensenich to have met the certification standards, but to permit Catto to skip them?

MTV
 
I am not advocating putting experimental parts on certified planes. Let's look at how many of these are out there . What better testing ground is there. Instead of just saying not airworthy. Let's see the failure rate or what issues . If any. Heck hook up a dynavibe and go fly . Look at the harmonics. Don't crush something good. Something that is working. If your gonna say it's not airworthy on certified how can it be airworthy on experimental.
 
I am not advocating putting experimental parts on certified planes. Let's look at how many of these are out there . What better testing ground is there. Instead of just saying not airworthy. Let's see the failure rate or what issues . If any. Heck hook up a dynavibe and go fly . Look at the harmonics. Don't crush something good. Something that is working. If your gonna say it's not airworthy on certified how can it be airworthy on experimental.

By definition, they're not "airworthy" on any aircraft. Look up the difinition of airworthy in 14 CFR part 3.5(a). To be airworthy they'd have to (1) conform to an approved type design, and (2) be in a condition for safe operation. We all know they don't conform to an approved type design.
 
I am not advocating putting experimental parts on certified planes. Let's look at how many of these are out there . What better testing ground is there. Instead of just saying not airworthy. Let's see the failure rate or what issues . If any. Heck hook up a dynavibe and go fly . Look at the harmonics. Don't crush something good. Something that is working. If your gonna say it's not airworthy on certified how can it be airworthy on experimental.

That would be fine if you surrender your Standard certificate, and decertify your airplane as Experimental Research and Development, because that is exactly what you are doing, R&D.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Craig Catto estimated certification in 4th quarter 2017 this last summer... Just got a note from Nicole, she said they are still chipping away and looking to be certified by late spring 2018.

A question?? I have a Catto that is sitting on the shelf...Craig said it is identical to the upcoming certified prop...field approval?? I guess it's a FSDO question but I would think.... but since it wasn't built with FAA oversight ....but if they won't approve a identical prop then field approvals are likely a thing of the past.

anyways, just a update.
Steve
 
Craig Catto estimated certification in 4th quarter 2017 this last summer... Just got a note from Nicole, she said they are still chipping away and looking to be certified by late spring 2018.

A question?? I have a Catto that is sitting on the shelf...Craig said it is identical to the upcoming certified prop...field approval?? I guess it's a FSDO question but I would think.... but since it wasn't built with FAA oversight ....but if they won't approve a identical prop then field approvals are likely a thing of the past.

anyways, just a update.
Steve
I hope they finally succeed. They've been after it for a long time. About 4-1/2 years ago I asked Craig his thoughts about getting a pre-cert. prop approved after the fact and he wasn't very optimistic.
 
I just read thru this and a note on the PA-12 , mine has a airwort cert. that state utility which makes the -12 a two seat aircraft .
 
I'm not trying to be the butt hole here, i have seen, waited, sign up, talked too...yaddad, yudda. On the catto props be cert for super cubs. Are we being played? Or just to impatient to have the process completed. I see a sign up sheet at Stoddards. What a joke. They had one started at the airman show "what" 2012, or 2014....I'm just positive they still have that list for the fools still waiting. NOT. I'll believe it when I see it.....but to be fair here, i have one on my cub and like it. But being played a fool for this meny year's? I think not....Scott
 
It was announced at the Airmen Show last year. Up until that point Craig was not committed. Had many conversations with Craig, Nichol and Sarah as well as the FAA ACO engineers in Anchorage. They have more business than they can keep up with as it is so I am sure it is not top priority.
 
Normal time for an STC is 2 years from application to issuance. Normal time for a TC and PC is about 5 years. Since they need to get TC & PC, then STC, I would think somewhere between 4 & 7 years is not out of the question. The wheels of progress (and the FAA) go slow!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Normal time for an STC is 2 years from application to issuance. Normal time for a TC and PC is about 5 years. Since they need to get TC & PC, then STC, I would think somewhere between 4 & 7 years is not out of the question. The wheels of progress (and the FAA) go slow!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This is a little different with the Part 23 rewrite and the fact that the FAA sees the Super Cub as a simple 2 place airplane. Less hoops to jump through than a full blown STC according to the two ACO engineers who called me about it.
 
I concur with both post listed above, but would add " they" have been telling us next year, soon, where working on it, sign up on the list to be first for what 5,6,7 plus years now. I'll take all bets the list I sign up for a cert prop at the airmans show in 12 and 14.....are not to be found. Unless you check the land fill. Scott
 
I think if you go back to the beginning of this thread that was the first Catto announced anything. They had a questionnaire a few years ago and that is all I have seen. I have been following this whole Catto prop thing for many years and looking for a legal solution for my certified Super Cub and having been around this stuff for way too long don't tend to look at things through rose colored glasses.
 
No rose colored glass here, I'm a realistic, to be blunt, i know it takes time, but we have been snow ball or strung along with there own words and actions. It is not I or your self with the unknown statements of soon, next year, sign the list. Year after year. Bottom line, if you don't know when it will be Done? Then say so. It's a cruel if not being played the fool to sign any more list. But if it make some feel better. Feel free to sign up another year of a cert prop that's pending again and again...I'll not waste my time ...Scott
 
I guess what I am saying is that I look at all this stuff as it will happen when it happens. It seems to take a long time be it a prop, battery, new fabric system, shock etc. That is why experimental is so nice.
 
Damn fellas, unless they've taken your money to produce a prop on a certain date, I don't think you have any gripe coming.

Sorry...Winter is getting to me.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top