Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 81 to 120 of 195

Thread: Catto Propellers On Certified Super Cubs

  1. #81

    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    20
    Post Thanks / Like
    Cubs with 3rd seat mod can't have a catto. Thats a bummer!!!
    Likes mike mcs repair liked this post

  2. #82
    BC12D-4-85's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Location
    Fairbanks, AK.
    Posts
    1,504
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Fowlplay View Post
    Cubs with 3rd seat mod can't have a catto. Thats a bummer!!!
    Unazz the STC if that's a problem.

    Gary

  3. #83
    txpacer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Iowa Park, TX
    Posts
    618
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Fowlplay View Post
    Cubs with 3rd seat mod can't have a catto. Thats a bummer!!!
    Leave out the seat belt attach fittings

  4. #84
    DJ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Bolivia
    Posts
    180
    Post Thanks / Like
    It's not a seat it's a baggage compartment

    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using SuperCub.Org mobile app
    The heavens declare the glory of God; the skies proclaim the work of His hands. Psalms 19:1

  5. #85
    Colorguns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Bloomfield NY
    Posts
    305
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by skywagon8a View Post
    AC 35-1 12/29/08
    j. Fixed pitch wood propellers of conventional design. A propeller that has the following physical properties:
    • One piece laminated wood construction
    • Two or four blades
    • The surface coating does not contribute to the propeller strength
    • The surface coating only provides environmental protection
    A fixed pitch propeller with a composite shell over a wood core is not a conventional design when the composite shell contributes to the strength and frequency response of the propeller. A fixed pitch wooden propeller with a fabric or composite covering that does not alter the structure for environmental protection is of conventional design.
    It in the third n forth line. Surface coating that get you.

  6. #86
    skywagon8a's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    SE Mass
    Posts
    9,066
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by CattoProps View Post
    Although the prop is over 50% wood by volume it's not considered a "wood" prop reason being the composite is the structure. The wood cannot exist without the carbon and the carbon cannot exist without the wood.
    Quote Originally Posted by Colorguns View Post
    It in the third n forth line. Surface coating that get you.
    Yes until CattoProps provided us with the above statement, we didn't have the definitive answer.
    N1PA

  7. #87
    Steve Pierce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Graham, TX
    Posts
    18,425
    Post Thanks / Like
    I had called the Anchorage Aircraft Certification Office to see if anyone had recorded the webinair they did on props about a month ago. They called yesterday and I was on a conference call with two of the engineers there. Seems that drew at Above Alaska got this whole ball rolling when he wanted to get a Catto prop approved on the Airman raffle Cub. The Super cub is considered a Class I airplane according to the new Part 23 rewrite which means it is a single passenger aircraft. With this rewrite a prop dos not have to have a Type Certificate to be installed on a Class I aircraft as long as it meets the ASTM standards for light Sport aircraft, meets the CAR3 over speed tests and the engine manufacturers rpm ranges and proper prop to ground clearance. There were two expensive tests that were dropped in this Part 23 rewrite. One was the lightning test which probably wouldn't apply to a non-metal prop anyway and the other is the bird strike test. It does have to go through a 50 hour continuous run test and a similar test on a prop with repaired damage. there is also a flight test which can be done in a day. None of this was specific to the Catto prop because they could not speak of any specifics on anything in the works right now but I believe it is safe to say that is what is in the works. It was an educational conversation and I really appreciate them taking the time to get me up to speed on the process. Thought I would pass this information on to the rest of you that might find it as interesting as I did.

    Hope to eliminate more of this.
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	20170527_093331.jpg 
Views:	1958 
Size:	1.71 MB 
ID:	31598
    Steve Pierce

    Everybody is ignorant, only on different subjects.
    Will Rogers
    Likes WanaBNACub, Hardtailjohn liked this post

  8. #88

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Eagle River
    Posts
    269
    Post Thanks / Like
    Thanks for checking on the Catto progress.
    Ya, filing down the prop is not the best weight lose method for a cub.

  9. #89

    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Nikiski , AK
    Posts
    368
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Steve Pierce View Post
    Got this message from Nicole yesterday.
    Hey! Saw the thread on SuperCub.org. The rewrite will only cover "simple aircraft" so many two seat aircraft under 250mph. So unfortunately the PA-20/22 and PA-12 won't be covered.

    So the PA22/20 colt can be covered. It is only a 2 seater. ?
    Likes mike mcs repair liked this post

  10. #90

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Meanwhile,...
    Posts
    4,960
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Steve Pierce View Post

    Hope to eliminate more of thiClick image for larger version. 

Name:	20170527_093331.jpg 
Views:	1958 
Size:	1.71 MB 
ID:	31598
    Ouch, that looks like my brushhog blades
    Remember, These are the Good old Days!
    Likes 180Marty, RaisedByWolves liked this post

  11. #91

    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    5
    Post Thanks / Like
    Yes, if the P20/22 only has two seats it should fall into the simple aircraft category.

  12. #92
    Gordon Misch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Toledo, Wa (KTDO)
    Posts
    3,281
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by mike mcs repair View Post
    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?
    Gordon

    N4328M KTDO
    My SPOT: tinyurl.com/N4328M (case sensitive)

  13. #93
    pa11driver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    104
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=If the plane were placarded "Utility Category only" or "only one person may occupy rear seat", would that permit the Catto?[/QUOTE]

    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....

  14. #94

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Meanwhile,...
    Posts
    4,960
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by pa11driver View Post
    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.
    Remember, These are the Good old Days!

  15. #95
    skywagon8a's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    SE Mass
    Posts
    9,066
    Post Thanks / Like
    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.
    N1PA

  16. #96
    pa11driver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    104
    Post Thanks / Like
    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.
    Thanks white mountain thanked for this post

  17. #97

    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    AK
    Posts
    99
    Post Thanks / Like
    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...Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_1736.JPG 
Views:	294 
Size:	1.78 MB 
ID:	31684

  18. #98

    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    AK
    Posts
    99
    Post Thanks / Like
    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,

  19. #99
    aktango58's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    18AA
    Posts
    9,045
    Post Thanks / Like
    Seems to me there is a shortage of Sensnich and McCulley stickers out there
    I don't know where you've been me lad, but I see you won first Prize!
    Likes RaisedByWolves, AKCRUISER liked this post

  20. #100
    BC12D-4-85's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Location
    Fairbanks, AK.
    Posts
    1,504
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by aktango58 View Post
    Seems to me there is a shortage of Sensnich and McCulley stickers out there
    ...and several Catto pre-approval props suddenly for sale. Shake the bushes and bugs crawl out. Hope they get it all taken care of and approved soon.

    Gary
    Likes cpa99 liked this post

  21. #101

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Meanwhile,...
    Posts
    4,960
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by aktango58 View Post
    Seems to me there is a shortage of Sensnich and McCulley stickers out there
    Because fraud is always such a good approach to regulation...
    Last edited by OLDCROWE; 06-15-2017 at 08:26 PM.
    Remember, These are the Good old Days!
    Likes mike mcs repair, moneyburner liked this post

  22. #102

    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Nikiski , AK
    Posts
    368
    Post Thanks / Like
    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

  23. #103
    mvivion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Bozeman,MT
    Posts
    10,350
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by eskflyer View Post
    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

  24. #104

    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Nikiski , AK
    Posts
    368
    Post Thanks / Like
    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.

  25. #105

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Palmer, AK
    Posts
    22
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by eskflyer View Post
    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.
    Thanks eskflyer, Jim Hann thanked for this post
    Likes moneyburner liked this post

  26. #106

    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    405
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by eskflyer View Post
    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
    Thanks eskflyer, Jim Hann thanked for this post

  27. #107

    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Idaho
    Posts
    216
    Post Thanks / Like
    Is the Catto prop an improvement on the 0-360? And if so, which model?

  28. #108

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Fowler, Ks
    Posts
    523
    Post Thanks / Like
    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
    Thanks KevinJ, OLDCROWE thanked for this post

  29. #109
    PerryB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Northern Calif.
    Posts
    1,763
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by flynlow View Post
    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.
    After Monday and Tuesday, even the calendar says WTF !

  30. #110
    algonquin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Seldovia,Ak
    Posts
    841
    Post Thanks / Like
    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 .
    Likes mike mcs repair liked this post

  31. #111

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    269
    Post Thanks / Like
    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

  32. #112
    Steve Pierce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Graham, TX
    Posts
    18,425
    Post Thanks / Like
    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.
    Steve Pierce

    Everybody is ignorant, only on different subjects.
    Will Rogers

  33. #113

    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    405
    Post Thanks / Like
    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
    Likes mike mcs repair, Hardtailjohn liked this post

  34. #114
    Steve Pierce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Graham, TX
    Posts
    18,425
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by dgapilot View Post
    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.
    Steve Pierce

    Everybody is ignorant, only on different subjects.
    Will Rogers
    Likes mike mcs repair liked this post

  35. #115

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    269
    Post Thanks / Like
    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
    Thanks Bowie thanked for this post
    Likes Bowie liked this post

  36. #116
    Steve Pierce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Graham, TX
    Posts
    18,425
    Post Thanks / Like
    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.
    Steve Pierce

    Everybody is ignorant, only on different subjects.
    Will Rogers
    Likes moneyburner liked this post

  37. #117

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    269
    Post Thanks / Like
    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
    Thanks Redwagon thanked for this post

  38. #118
    Steve Pierce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Graham, TX
    Posts
    18,425
    Post Thanks / Like
    I guess I have missed the list and any statements from Catto on any dates. Where is this information?
    Steve Pierce

    Everybody is ignorant, only on different subjects.
    Will Rogers

  39. #119
    Steve Pierce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Graham, TX
    Posts
    18,425
    Post Thanks / Like
    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.
    Steve Pierce

    Everybody is ignorant, only on different subjects.
    Will Rogers
    Likes DENNY, Hardtailjohn liked this post

  40. #120
    gbflyer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    PAGS
    Posts
    704
    Post Thanks / Like
    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.
    Likes aktango58, hotrod180, mike mcs repair liked this post

Similar Threads

  1. MT Composite Prop certified but Catto not certified
    By slowjunk in forum Cafe Supercub
    Replies: 39
    Last Post: 04-11-2017, 06:15 AM
  2. Replies: 21
    Last Post: 11-03-2015, 11:32 AM
  3. IFR certified Super Cub
    By Paul Siegel in forum Modifications
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 10-14-2002, 11:00 AM

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
  •