Results 1 to 15 of 15

Thread: Prop Field Approval

  1. #1

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Meanwhile,...
    Posts
    5,215
    Post Thanks / Like

    Prop Field Approval

    So what would be the chances be of getting a field approval for a certified prop that has been STC'd for similar aircraft but not (yet) for your specific aircraft but it is in the slow process of being STC'd ?
    Remember, These are the Good old Days!

  2. #2
    wireweinie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Palmer, AK
    Posts
    3,024
    Post Thanks / Like
    How similar?

    Web
    Life's tough . . . wear a cup.

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Meanwhile,...
    Posts
    5,215
    Post Thanks / Like
    I'm looking at Hartzel's Composite Top Prop for my 180 (IO-520D/300hp/2850 rpm).

    The same shape in aluminum blades at 80 & 82" has been approved for a 180 with a IO-520D @ 300hp/2850 but not yet the composite blades. I understand from multiple sources that the composite prop has been successfully vibration tested in my desired configuration but due to an unrelated engine problem on the test aircraft completion of the STC has been delayed.

    Talking with Hartzel's project manager for this prop at OSH I was impressed with what they offer in terms of warranty (including paint) through TBO.

    I really need to re-prop for noise (got neighbors now) and its no secret that my MAC (88x3) sure barks even when pulled pack into the green on take off and it is getting a bit long in the tooth plus the CG help would be appreciated.
    Remember, These are the Good old Days!

  4. #4
    www.SkupTech.com mike mcs repair's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    chugiak AK
    Posts
    10,988
    Post Thanks / Like
    we USED to get field approvals on 84" Pawnee props on O-360 cubs...

    but they quit, something about the vibration analysis we were using not being complete...

  5. #5
    wireweinie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Palmer, AK
    Posts
    3,024
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by mike mcs repair View Post
    we USED to get field approvals on 84" Pawnee props on O-360 cubs...

    but they quit, something about the vibration analysis we were using not being complete...
    That one never made sense. How many years have we run that prop/engine/airframe combo, multiplied by all the aircraft equipped like that (just in Alaska) equals about a gazillion hours. But not enough data!

    Web
    Life's tough . . . wear a cup.
    Likes mike mcs repair, WanaBNACub liked this post

  6. #6
    G44's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    SW Michigan
    Posts
    524
    Post Thanks / Like
    Oldcrowe,

    How about the MT? I would imagine its approved already, 2 and 3 blade. No BS hub AD's like many Hartzell's have. I have had 3 MT props on Husky's and really liked em, just a thought...

    Kurt

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Meanwhile,...
    Posts
    5,215
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by G44 View Post
    Oldcrowe,

    How about the MT? I would imagine its approved already, 2 and 3 blade. No BS hub AD's like many Hartzell's have. I have had 3 MT props on Husky's and really liked em, just a thought...

    Kurt
    I was headed that way until I looked at a new one that flew through a little rain going into New Holstein... it had no paint on the tips.
    Remember, These are the Good old Days!

  8. #8

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Meanwhile,...
    Posts
    5,215
    Post Thanks / Like
    But Hartzel covers it under warranty, the quote was "if we put it on we guarantee it to stay on."
    Remember, These are the Good old Days!
    Likes RaisedByWolves liked this post

  9. #9
    180Marty's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Paullina, Ia
    Posts
    2,052
    Post Thanks / Like
    Did the MT have the new bigger leading edge? My 7 year old still looks like new but never been in rain.

  10. #10
    G44's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    SW Michigan
    Posts
    524
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by OLDCROWE View Post
    I was headed that way until I looked at a new one that flew through a little rain going into New Holstein... it had no paint on the tips.
    I just flew 2 hours solid in rain with my new one, NO issues. In fact, I have flown in a lot of rain with all 3 MT props with NO issues or one speck of paint coming off. MT's are BY FAR the most durable props I have ever operated.
    Likes mike mcs repair liked this post

  11. #11
    FdxLou's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Atlanta Ga. 6ga0 Stoney Point Airfield
    Posts
    1,831
    Post Thanks / Like
    Kirby
    Why don't you just cut 2" off your 88". It's legal I believe.
    Lou

  12. #12
    skywagon8a's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    SE Mass
    Posts
    10,085
    Post Thanks / Like
    OLDCROW. What is the model of the prop? Go to FAA.gov to look up the prop TC. At the bottom of the TC there will be a list of engines which are approved vibrationwise along with any limitations. Start there, then ask either your IA (or you do it) to talk nice to his PMI at the FSDO. There are noise requirements which must be met which can become the issue depending on the PMI. OR offer Hartzell the use of your 180 for the noise tests.
    N1PA

  13. #13

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Meanwhile,...
    Posts
    5,215
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by FdxLou View Post
    Kirby
    Why don't you just cut 2" off your 88". It's legal I believe.
    Lou
    Lou I have thought about doing just that (would deffinately be the less expensive route) to just have the full inspection/rehab done and clip it in the process and go on. But what I don't know is how much quieter it would be, the only example I've flown is SJ's with a PPonk and 86X3 and while it has to be quieter with less diameter and less rpm, let's just say it doesn't whisper either.
    Last edited by OLDCROWE; 09-16-2017 at 06:34 AM.
    Remember, These are the Good old Days!

  14. #14
    Steve Pierce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Graham, TX
    Posts
    19,489
    Post Thanks / Like
    A local 185 with a 550 conversion had vibration issues with the MT. After lots of troubleshooting, time and money the McCauley was installed and no vibration and better performance.
    Steve Pierce

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

  15. #15

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Meanwhile,...
    Posts
    5,215
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by 180Marty View Post
    Did the MT have the new bigger leading edge? My 7 year old still looks like new but never been in rain.
    Don't know, owner just said it was first trip new. It was on one of the 180's that came in for the short field stuff.
    Remember, These are the Good old Days!
    Thanks 180Marty thanked for this post

Similar Threads

  1. Field approval for c-206
    By tptailwheel in forum Modifications
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 09-17-2016, 04:44 AM
  2. (non-Cub) 82 inch seaplane prop on C-172 stc or field approval?
    By Alex Clark in forum Super Cub Sick Bay
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 11-21-2013, 09:48 PM
  3. 337/Field Approval for Mac 74" Prop on C-85?
    By stearmann4 in forum Cafe Supercub
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 03-06-2010, 11:12 AM
  4. Do you think I would need a field approval???
    By behindpropellers in forum Cafe Supercub
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 08-13-2004, 03:38 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
  •