Results 1 to 26 of 26

Thread: J-3 with wood spars and 0200 engine

  1. #1

    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Posts
    2
    Post Thanks / Like

    J-3 with wood spars and 0200 engine

    Does anyone have field approval for a J-3 with wood spars and an 0200 engine? Thank you, Julie

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    6,912
    Post Thanks / Like
    The field approval would be for a J3C65. There is no difference between wood and metal spars. Problem is, you cannot simply use a field approval; you need the original installer or a new field approval.

  3. #3
    39-J3's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Maine
    Posts
    545
    Post Thanks / Like
    Does F. Atlee Dodge have field approval Drawings for this conversion?

    I am asking, not saying they do.

    Larry.

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Posts
    2
    Post Thanks / Like
    My Dad has a J-3 with original wood spars. He had the engine replaced with an 0200, 100 HP engine. When the current owner of the airport where the work was done placed an ad on Barnstormers, he found out that this combination is "illegal" or not approved by the FAA. The previous owner who did the work, passed away, sadly. So, if we understand it correctly, the plane isn't "legal" with wood spars and this 0200 engine. If anyone on this thread believes otherwise, please let me know. Our Ag Pilot suggested that I post a question on this Forum to see if there is possibly anyone else who has this same setup and has been able to obtain field approval from the FAA. If so, he believes that we could use that precedence for our plane. At least it may help. Like you say, we would probably have to get a field approval on our plane. Thanks so much for any advice we can get.

  5. #5
    supercub's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Let me check my GPS, gee how'd we ever navigate with those sectional things?
    Posts
    806
    Post Thanks / Like
    I believe Univair is the only STC for an O-200 in a J-3. I believe it calls for the addition of a wing tank also. I know a lot of O-200 installations are field approved by limiting the RPM (red line on the tach) to 90hp........still takes a field approval.
    Thanks juliecat13 thanked for this post

  6. #6
    cubdriver2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    upstate NY
    Posts
    9,972
    Post Thanks / Like
    Check over here also

    www.j3-cub.com

    Glenn
    "Optimism is going after Moby Dick in a rowboat and taking the tartar sauce with you!"
    Thanks juliecat13 thanked for this post

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    6,912
    Post Thanks / Like
    Julie - look for a 337 filed for that engine. If you don't have all the paperwork, you can get it from the FAA records branch.

    If no 337 has been filed then you indeed do have an illegal installation, and it has nothing to do with the spars.

    I run into this stuff fairly often, considering that I do not make a living being a mechanic. The latest was a C-90-12, and the 337 listed neither an STC nor did it have a field approval stamp in block 3. One of those two things is required.

    So for a quarter century that bird went through annual after annual, and nobody caught it. Last month I got it field approved.

    As I understand it, I might have gotten the last five field approvals of my career that day - but now that aircraft is legal!

    Best of luck.
    Thanks juliecat13 thanked for this post

  8. #8
    BC12D-4-85's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Location
    Fairbanks, AK.
    Posts
    1,866
    Post Thanks / Like
    Aircraft records: https://www.faa.gov/licenses_certifi...craft_records/

    The CD takes a week to a bit more by USPS and included Airworthiness (Form 337 and others) and Registered Owner records. No logbook data. If you can find another plane with the mods you want approved then obtain the records for that as a help.

    Edit: Search for "JimC" here as I recall him mentioning a J-3 and O-200: https://www.supercub.org/forum/searc...archid=4755382

    Gary
    Last edited by BC12D-4-85; 09-22-2019 at 11:33 PM.
    Thanks juliecat13 thanked for this post

  9. #9
    cruiser's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    South Glens Falls, NY
    Posts
    1,442
    Post Thanks / Like
    I do not have the face side of the 337 and N42527 is now a Bell helicopter, however N23375 is still around. Perhaps purchasing a CD of the OK City file on the airplane would be helpful. I owned 3590K for awhile, it had an 0200 although some of the paperwork might be sketchy. Or try to gain some traction with the FSDO letter, should be fun, Jim
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version. 

Name:	0200 337.png 
Views:	120 
Size:	503.2 KB 
ID:	44568   Click image for larger version. 

Name:	FSDO 0200.png 
Views:	131 
Size:	245.1 KB 
ID:	44569  
    Thanks juliecat13 thanked for this post
    Likes skywagon8a liked this post

  10. #10
    BC12D-4-85's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Location
    Fairbanks, AK.
    Posts
    1,866
    Post Thanks / Like
    Maybe contact JimC here if he has e-mail listed (click on his name in the searches I linked above) and ask about the combo. He's very good about helping and knows what it's all about.

    Gary

  11. #11
    Steve Pierce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Graham, TX
    Posts
    19,109
    Post Thanks / Like
    The problem is that the 100 hp STC calls out aluminum spars only. Worked on a Clipped wing Cub with the O-200 STC and wood spars. There was a field approval to derate the engine to 90 hp via RPM because the C90 is on the type certificate. I guess someone thought the O-200 was to much horse power for the wood spar. I have never seen anyone get 100 hp out of an O-200 on a Cub because they prop won't get that high an rpm. Only way I can see to do it would be via a field approval using these other 337s as acceptable data.
    Steve Pierce

    Everybody is ignorant, only on different subjects.
    Will Rogers

  12. #12

    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    573
    Post Thanks / Like
    The bigger issue is under CAR 4, if you only have the 12 gallon tank, maximum continuous HP is limited to 80 HP by CAR 4.620. 0.15 gallons per maximum HP except take off. .15X 80= 12

    Has nothing to do with structure, only available fuel. That’s why if you look at items 9 & 10, for the C85 and C90, they are limited to 80HP “for all other operations”

    Now, if you add additional fuel tanks and want to go beyond the 80HP continuous limit, structure could enter into it, and you would need to verify that.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  13. #13
    cruiser's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    South Glens Falls, NY
    Posts
    1,442
    Post Thanks / Like
    Citing the authority spelled out by the Manager, Systems and Flight Test Branch letter dated March 20, 1997 install the 0200, remark the red line on the tach to derate the engine to 90 hp, amend the W&B as required and consider it a minor alteration. He certainly has.
    Last edited by cruiser; 09-24-2019 at 01:15 PM.

  14. #14

    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    573
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by cruiser View Post
    Citing the authority spelled out by the Manager, Systems and Flight Test Branch letter dated March 20, 1997 install the 0200, remark the red line on the tach to derate the engine to 90 hp, amend the W&B as required and consider it a minor alteration. He certainly has.
    Can’t argue with what you have from NY ACO, but from experience, I’ve had to educate the same engineer in that office that CAR 4 is a predecessor regulation to CAR 3. They simply have no idea when it comes to old airplanes!

    I’d be in agreement with 90 hp for TO, and 80 HP continuous.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  15. #15

    Join Date
    Mar 2019
    Posts
    23
    Post Thanks / Like
    Does the Univair O-200 STC apply to the PA-11 as well? It wasn't explicit, I know they share the same TCDS, but not all things are the same between them. Anyway I'm looking at a PA-11 project, but sure would like to have a starter; don't need the rest of the electrical system though (generator, lights, etc.)

  16. #16
    hotrod180's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Port Townsend, WA
    Posts
    2,865
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by bob turner View Post
    The field approval would be for a J3C65. There is no difference between wood and metal spars. Problem is, you cannot simply use a field approval; you need the original installer or a new field approval.
    An existing field-approved 337 can be used to document "accepted data",
    whether or not that helps you actually get a new field approval depends on your inspector and/or FSDO.
    FWIW I've heard that a field approval dating from before 1956(?) is considered approved data,
    and that this can be cited on a 337 which can then be signed off by an IA--
    just like an STC.
    Cessna Skywagon-- accept no substitute!
    Likes dgapilot liked this post

  17. #17

    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    573
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by hotrod180 View Post
    An existing field-approved 337 can be used to document "accepted data",
    whether or not that helps you actually get a new field approval depends on your inspector and/or FSDO.
    FWIW I've heard that a field approval dating from before 1956(?) is considered approved data,
    and that this can be cited on a 337 which can then be signed off by an IA--
    just like an STC.
    You are correct in that pre October’56 or’57 (I need to double check the date) is approved data and can be used to modify additional aircraft of the same make and model providing you do it the same way.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  18. #18

    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Upper Peninsula of Michigan
    Posts
    416
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Dnh98221 View Post
    Does the Univair O-200 STC apply to the PA-11 as well? It wasn't explicit, I know they share the same TCDS, but not all things are the same between them. Anyway I'm looking at a PA-11 project, but sure would like to have a starter; don't need the rest of the electrical system though (generator, lights, etc.)
    I think a PA 11 would fit into the 10% HP increase rule since that plane is approved for 85 and 90 HP on the TC. Somebody correct me if I’m wrong

  19. #19

    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    24
    Post Thanks / Like
    Who would want to put an o-200 engine on a J-3 anyways, save the hassle, sell the 0-200 and slap on a C-85 stroker with just a logbook entry, lighter weight and puts out almost as much power.

  20. #20
    BC12D-4-85's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Location
    Fairbanks, AK.
    Posts
    1,866
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by dgapilot View Post
    You are correct in that pre October’56 or’57 (I need to double check the date) is approved data and can be used to modify additional aircraft of the same make and model providing you do it the same way.
    I have a note here that it's a 337 prior to 10/1/55. I found several Taylorcrafts that had engine and gross weight changes post WWII that were later covered by STC's.

    Edit: See page 8 item 6: https://www.faa.gov/training_testing...-g-8082-19.pdf

    Gary
    Last edited by BC12D-4-85; 01-17-2020 at 12:56 PM.

  21. #21

    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    573
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by BC12D-4-85 View Post
    I have a note here that it's a 337 prior to 10/1/55. I found several Taylorcrafts that had engine and gross weight changes post WWII that were later covered by STC's.

    Edit: See page 8 item 6: https://www.faa.gov/training_testing...-g-8082-19.pdf

    Gary
    You are correct, 10/1/1955.it is in Order 8300.16A.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Thanks BC12D-4-85 thanked for this post

  22. #22
    supercrow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Smith Pond near Millinocket, Me
    Posts
    326
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by AKjurnees View Post
    Who would want to put an o-200 engine on a J-3 anyways, save the hassle, sell the 0-200 and slap on a C-85 stroker with just a logbook entry, lighter weight and puts out almost as much power.
    I have to respectfully disagree with you on this statement. I have never seen an 0200 that puts out what a correctly done 85 stroker does. The stroker puts out 10% to 15% more power. I have seen very few 0200s that will run with a good C90!

  23. #23
    BC12D-4-85's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Location
    Fairbanks, AK.
    Posts
    1,866
    Post Thanks / Like
    I have a C-85 Stroker w/Cessna exhaust and would not trade for a higher rpm O-200. Finding the right prop for an O-200 helps, but...

    Gary

  24. #24
    cubdriver2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    upstate NY
    Posts
    9,972
    Post Thanks / Like
    I have owned and run all of them, C85 stroker, C90 and 0200. A prop that turns rated hp rpm taking off is where the magic is.

    Glenn
    "Optimism is going after Moby Dick in a rowboat and taking the tartar sauce with you!"
    Likes BC12D-4-85, CenterHillAg, DENNY liked this post

  25. #25
    CenterHillAg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Texas Coast
    Posts
    111
    Post Thanks / Like
    A McCauley 7438 pulling a C85 stroker on a non-electric Cub is an outstanding combination.

    So I’ve been told, I’d never run that since it’s not a legal prop on a C85

  26. #26
    Steve Pierce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Graham, TX
    Posts
    19,109
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Dnh98221 View Post
    Does the Univair O-200 STC apply to the PA-11 as well? It wasn't explicit, I know they share the same TCDS, but not all things are the same between them. Anyway I'm looking at a PA-11 project, but sure would like to have a starter; don't need the rest of the electrical system though (generator, lights, etc.)
    The starter is approved for the engine, C85-12, C90-12 or an O-200 etc. You can install a battery in a J3 or PA11 via logbook entry and AC43.13. no need for an STC or a field approval.
    Steve Pierce

    Everybody is ignorant, only on different subjects.
    Will Rogers

Similar Threads

  1. Wood spars
    By donnuts in forum Cafe Supercub
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 10-15-2007, 06:26 PM
  2. Wood Spars
    By J5Ron in forum Tips and Tricks
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 11-12-2004, 08:37 PM
  3. wood spars /flaps
    By T Willson in forum The Art and Science of Flying
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 06-22-2004, 08:19 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
  •