---------------------------------------------------------- TeamGrumman-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Fri 08/27/04: 9 ---------------------------------------------------------- Today's Message Index: ---------------------- 1. 12:23 AM - Re: TeamGrumman-List Digest: 1 Msgs - 08/26/04 (Tiger 67B) 2. 02:02 AM - Re: Paint Gun Needle Size (TeamGrumman@AOL.COM) 3. 02:08 AM - Re: Tiger Inspection (TeamGrumman@AOL.COM) 4. 06:00 AM - Re: Re: TeamGrumman-List Digest: 1 Msgs - 08/26/04 (Steven Jackson) 5. 06:17 AM - Aileron repair and bondo (Weir, Douglas (CALYON)) 6. 06:24 AM - Re: Paint Gun Needle Size (linn walters) 7. 11:49 AM - 337s and GPS and AC 20-138A (TeamGrumman@AOL.COM) 8. 06:13 PM - no TFRs for Kerry? (Anna3003@AOL.COM) 9. 09:37 PM - Re: no TFRs for Kerry? (Walt Beaulieu) ________________________________ Message 1 _____________________________________ Time: 12:23:20 AM PST US From: Tiger 67B Subject: TeamGrumman-List: Re: TeamGrumman-List Digest: 1 Msgs - 08/26/04 --> TeamGrumman-List message posted by: Tiger 67B If you replace it, you'll have to hang your hand out now to signal a turn.... TeamGrumman-List Digest Server wrote: > * > > ================================================== > Online Versions of Today's List Digest Archive > ================================================== > > Today's complete TeamGrumman-List Digest can be also be found in either > of the two Web Links listed below. The .html file includes the Digest > formatted in HTML for viewing with a web browser and features Hyperlinked > Indexes and Message Navigation. The .txt file includes the plain ASCII > version of the TeamGrumman-List Digest and can be viewed with a generic > text editor such as Notepad or with a web browser. > > HTML Version: > > http://www.matronics.com/digest/teamgrumman-list/Digest.TeamGrumman-List.2004-08-26.html > > Text Version: > > http://www.matronics.com/digest/teamgrumman-list/Digest.TeamGrumman-List.2004-08-26.txt > > > ================================================ > EMail Version of Today's List Digest Archive > ================================================ > > > TeamGrumman-List Digest Archive > --- > Total Messages Posted Thu 08/26/04: 1 > > > Today's Message Index: > ---------------------- > > 1. 10:28 PM - Tail Beacon (Steven Jackson) > > > > ________________________________ Message 1 _____________________________________ > > > Time: 10:28:53 PM PST US > From: "Steven Jackson" > Subject: TeamGrumman-List: Tail Beacon > > --> TeamGrumman-List message posted by: "Steven Jackson" > > Finishing up my annual today--my mechanic noticed that someone along the way > had removed the original tail beacon and replaced it with an automotive turn > signal flasher and bulb. They just cut the wires to the old power supply > and light, and spliced it in. They left the old power supply mounted in the > tail cone. It even sounds like a turn signal when its on and the engine > isn't running. I hadn't done very much night flying to notice. > > Hmmmmmmmmm--what will they think of next? > > > Steven Jackson > N1434R > L22 > Yucca Valley, CA > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- Visit our PERSONAL WEBSITE at: http://www.geocities.com/tiger67bravo/ ________________________________ Message 2 _____________________________________ Time: 02:02:25 AM PST US From: TeamGrumman@AOL.COM Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Paint Gun Needle Size --> TeamGrumman-List message posted by: TeamGrumman@aol.com In a message dated 8/25/04 11:46:14 PM, steven.jackson14@adelphia.net writes: > Can someone explain to me what difference the size of the paint gun needle > makes?=A0 Also, what size needle for certain applications? > > The needle sizes vary greatly with the gun type and the gun and the available air pressure, and the viscosity of the paint, and ..... Your best bet is to go to your local auto paint jobber, get a reference for a body shop which uses your type of gun, and talk to them and get some guidance. Ny experience is that body shops are more than happy to help wanna be painters. I have also called the makers of the gun and talked to technical folks to get info. They are usually very helpfull. Also, the paint suppliers, here in Lancaster at least, know a lot about painting and what works and what doesn't. I've been told more than once to get a compressor with more volume output. Gary PS, I've also thought about removing the wings and taking the fuselage to a custom paint shop and have them put a trick paint job on it. Then, just paint the wings white. ________________________________ Message 3 _____________________________________ Time: 02:08:07 AM PST US From: TeamGrumman@AOL.COM Subject: TeamGrumman-List: Re: Tiger Inspection --> TeamGrumman-List message posted by: TeamGrumman@aol.com In a message dated 8/26/04 11:09:14 AM, edward.park@IngramMicro.com writes: > I heard that hail damage on control surfaces cannot be repaired due to the > bondo throwing off the weight/balance too much - what do you think about this > ? > > thank you > > I would agree if it's too badly dented. if they are simply a few thousa ndths deep and just need a light skim coat, bondo or a high fill sanding surfacer (K-36 or K200) will do the trick. Always have the surfaces checked for balance both before and after any repair (before and after to get a comparison of just how much was added.) The Tiger to which you refer can be cleaned up, but, it will always have damage. ________________________________ Message 4 _____________________________________ Time: 06:00:26 AM PST US From: "Steven Jackson" Subject: RE: TeamGrumman-List: Re: TeamGrumman-List Digest: 1 Msgs - 08/26/04 --> TeamGrumman-List message posted by: "Steven Jackson" Nah, I'll just honk the horn... -----Original Message----- From: owner-teamgrumman-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-teamgrumman-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Tiger 67B Subject: TeamGrumman-List: Re: TeamGrumman-List Digest: 1 Msgs - 08/26/04 --> TeamGrumman-List message posted by: Tiger 67B If you replace it, you'll have to hang your hand out now to signal a turn.... ________________________________ Message 5 _____________________________________ Time: 06:17:09 AM PST US From: "Weir, Douglas (CALYON)" Subject: TeamGrumman-List: Aileron repair and bondo --> TeamGrumman-List message posted by: "Weir, Douglas (CALYON)" Before I had my plane painted, I spoke with both the paint shops and Bob Stewart about the fact I had light, but wide-spread hail damage on the plane including the control surfaces. One shop said they would not/could not repair the hail damage to the control surfaces, and the only solution was to replace the ailerons and elevators - we're talking $8000.... They even showed me a Tiger which had just been painted - to the tune of $15k - which had similar hail damage visible after the paint. Really unfortunate. OTOH, I spoke to Bob Stewart, and the other paint shop who both said a little bondo repair to the control surfaces was OK as long as they were balanced. Evidently on the Tiger there is some leeway since we are not approaching the speed of sound, and upon repair an repainting of my plane all was OK. There is no sign of hail damage any more, and the plane flies fine. In answer to the question of whether the aileron was removed a second time for the trailing edge repair, the answer is no. But the amount of light-weight bondo that was added was tiny. I don't want to suggest this was the "book" repair proceedure, but I'm not losing sleep over the prospect of getting sudden uncontrolable aileron flutter and losing control of the plane. My feeling is go to a reputable shop that you are comfortable with, and see what they recommend. I my case, I am pleased with the end result. My plane also won Best 4-Place at Baraboo, so it shows. Good luck. *** Calyon **************************************************** This message and/or any attachments (the "message") is intended for the sole use of its addressee. If you are not the addressee, please immediately notify the sender and then destroy the message. The unauthorized disclosure, use, dissemination or copying (either whole or partial) of this e-mail, or any information it contains, is prohibited. E-mails are susceptible to alteration and their integrity cannot be guaranteed. As this message and/or any attachments may have been altered without our knowledge, its content is not legally binding on CALYON Corporate and Investment Bank. All rights reserved. ________________________________ Message 6 _____________________________________ Time: 06:24:54 AM PST US From: linn walters Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Paint Gun Needle Size --> TeamGrumman-List message posted by: linn walters TeamGrumman@AOL.COM wrote: >--> TeamGrumman-List message posted by: TeamGrumman@aol.com > > >In a message dated 8/25/04 11:46:14 PM, steven.jackson14@adelphia.net writes: > > > > >>Can someone explain to me what difference the size of the paint gun needle >>makes?=A0 Also, what size needle for certain applications? >> >> >> >> > >The needle sizes vary greatly with the gun type and the gun and the available >air pressure, and the viscosity of the paint, and ..... Your best bet is to >go to your local auto paint jobber, get a reference for a body shop which uses >your type of gun, and talk to them and get some guidance. Ny experience is >that body shops are more than happy to help wanna be painters. > >I have also called the makers of the gun and talked to technical folks to get >info. They are usually very helpfull. > >Also, the paint suppliers, here in Lancaster at least, know a lot about >painting and what works and what doesn't. I've been told more than once to get a >compressor with more volume output. > >Gary >PS, I've also thought about removing the wings and taking the fuselage to a >custom paint shop and have them put a trick paint job on it. Then, just paint >the wings white. > But if you have the wings off, why not take them to the paint shop too? Get the whole job done!!! Linn do not archive > > > > ________________________________ Message 7 _____________________________________ Time: 11:49:40 AM PST US From: TeamGrumman@AOL.COM Subject: TeamGrumman-List: 337s and GPS and AC 20-138A --> TeamGrumman-List message posted by: TeamGrumman@aol.com I'm adding this to TeamGrumman because I feel it's relavant. Way too much time and effort is expended over working the problem of 337s, simlpy out of ignorance. I, too, was sucked into writing 337s for each and every item added to or subtracted from an airplane. There is a guy here at FOX (I call him 310_Bill because he built a 310 from scratch. I'm not exaggerating) who went head to head with the FSDO on the (re)construction of his 310. He wasn't an A&P, but, he is an engineer and was an inspector on the B-2 from its inception. 310_Bill would read the FARs, something I'll bet none of us do, and do to his plane anything not prohibited. Once he got his A&P, he really went to town, pushing the regulation envelope to its limit. I've had many a discussion with him regarding what is and isn't a major repair or alteration. His logic is very enlightening. Even when it comes to aircraft interiors (where he showed me there is no requirement for an FAA person or FAA approved lab to validate the suitability of a material for an aircraft) he corrected many misconceptions=20I had about the FAAs requirements. The following covers the changes to installing GPSs, both IFR and VFR, without a field approval. ------------------------------------- In a message dated 8/26/04 6:32:09 AM, rblevy@mindspring.com writes: > First, since the AC says no field approval is required, why did your > avionics guy ask for it? > Well, that is a good question.=C2=A0 I asked him the same thing.=C2=A0 He told me that since his PAI had always signed the 337 (field approval), and it was the way he had always done it so, with a dozen planes ready to be worked on and or deilvered, he mailed the 337s to his PAI.=C2=A0 It was over a week before he received word that, not only were the being returned, but that the ENTIRE format he had been using for 8 years was wrong.=C2=A0 I saw the new format.=C2=A0 All references to using FAR 43.13 to do the installation was removed and a whole series of ACs were inserted to replace=20the authority to do the installations. > Second, I'm pretty sure a 337 is still required for all avionics > installations, but the MIDO approval of the individual installation is definitely no > longer required for GPS installations.=C2=A0 Field approval by the FSDO was never, I > believe, an issue, since panel mount GPS's are STC'd -- you only need field > approval if there's no STC for your aircraft. > I'm not going to debate who is or isn't involved.=C2=A0 Field approvals, according to the original AC 20-138, were required prior to the 22 Dec 03 change (AC 20-138A) because GPS was considered unproven technology and required a field approval.=C2=A0 It is now considered a minor alteration for an IFR installation [para, 8(c)(1)(iii)] and for a VFR installation [para, 8(c)(1)(iii)] With respect to avionics requiring a 337, there is nothing in the regulations which indicates that installing or removing avionics is a major alteration.=C2=A0=C2=A0 The original intent of the 337 was to record any major alterations or repairs to the airframe, engine, etc.=C2=A0 The FARs are very specific regarding what is and what is not a major alteration.=C2=A0 337s were NOT intended to be used=20to record variations to the type certificate. =C2=A0 That is what log books are for.=C2=A0 Far too many 337s are sent to the FAA which have nothing to do with major repair or alteration of any part of the airplane.=C2=A0=C2=A0 Sure, you can inundate the FAA with paperwork and use them to justify the work performed, but, the fact is, 337s are not required for each and every change to the airplane.=C2=A0 If an owner is concerned about a premanent record, make a copy of the logs and keep it in a safe. > Third, if a local airworthiness inspector is insisting on field approvals > for GPS installations despite the latest change to AC 20-138A, ask the FSDO > manager to read the current version of AC 20-138A and intervene.=C2=A0 If=20that > doesn't work, contact the avionics person in the airworthiness section of=20the > flight standards group at your regional HQ.=C2=A0 If THAT doesn't work, contact me and > I'll get the HQ FAA people to look into the situation. > I appreciate your willingness to get involved.=C2=A0 The avionics shop contacted his guy (? Sorry, brain fart, it was some sort of lawyer/advocate for avionics shops) in Washington and was told the FSDO was wrong on some accounts and did misunderstand AC 20-138A BUT ... it might be easier to just 'go-along-with-the-FSDO requirements since it would take less time than fighting the FSDO.=C2=A0 The bottom line was, do what you need to do to get the job done and get paid. I suggested to the avionics guy to talk to the new FSDO guy regarding the new AC and he was told that one line in AC 20-138A limiting flight to VFR only totally negates the value of the intention of AC 20-138A.=C2=A0 That line, which applies only to VFR, is in paragraph 9 and states:=C2=A0 Installation guidelines for such an installation are provided in appendix 5 of this AC. Loss of or misleading VFR navigation information is considered a minor failure condition; therefore, Software Development Assurance Level D is acceptable. A readable=20placard stating "GPS limited to VFR use only" must be installed in clear view of the pilot, unless the equipment automatically displays this message on start-up=20and pilot action is required to clear the message.=C2=A0 An A/RFM(S) is not required since the placard or display contains the equipment limitation. From the FAAs FSDO inspector's point-of-view, any change to the aircraft operating limitations requires a FIELD APPROVAL.=C2=A0 When I asked if a field approval is required for a failed instrument, which is not required for VFR flight, but which is placarded as inop, he told me no.=C2=A0 He clearly did not know how to differentiate between changing an 'aircraft's' limitations and changes to an aircraft's operational limitations.=C2=A0 I still haven't found the regulation which states limiting a plane to VFR requires a field approval. ------------------------ if you are NOT curious, ignore this part. In case you are curious, here is the approval required for installing a GPS.=C2=A0 AC 20-138A states it is a minor alteration and=C2=A0 does not require a 337. Para 8=C2=A0 APPROVAL PROCESS. This paragraph describes the general approval process applicable to GNSS equipment intended for IFR navigation (paragraph 9 provides guidance addressing installation of GNSS equipment for VFR use). Unique approval issues associated with GPS for Oceanic/Remote Navigation and GLONASS are defined in appendices 1 and 2, respectively. (1) Evaluation of installation. The installation should be evaluated to classify the installation and determine the type of approval vehicle. The following guidelines are provided: (i) Major change to type design: Per 14 CFR Part 21.93, the applicant should determine if the installation has an appreciable effect on the structural strength or operational characteristics affecting the airworthiness of the product. An example is installation in multiple-pilot aircraft where another, dissimilar area navigation system is also installed (see paragraph 18f), which should be thoroughly evaluated under the TC/STC process unless intermixing of the same GNSS equipment was part of the initial design approval or specifically addressed under an approved model list (e.g., the Brand-A, model X instructions may adequately address intermixing with Brand-A model Y equipment). (ii) Major alteration: Per 14 CFR Part 43 Appendix A, installation of GNSS equipment may be a major alteration requiring FAA-approved data pertinent to that installation. For example, installation of the GNSS antenna may impact structural strength, and the GNSS equipment may be connected to other equipment that has not been previously determined to be compatible or for which the installation instructions are not adequate to ensure compatibility under all conditions. If the installation is determined to be a major alteration, the applicant can obtain an STC or a field approval using FAA Form 337 (Major Repair and Alteration). (iii) Minor alteration: Under the original AC 20-138, installation of GPS equipment required the use of approved data (under an STC or major alteration) because GPS was a new and unique technology. However, since GPS technology is now common and considerable experience has been obtained in the installation of GPS, approved data for every installation is no longer appropriate. Instead, installations that do not qualify as major alterations above should be accomplished as minor alterations. These installations should be based on acceptable data including the following: (A) Data previously approved as applicable to the aircraft (e.g., STC, Approved Model List). (B) Data previously approved as applicable to a different make/model aircraft (e.g., an initial STC obtained by the equipment manufacturer), provided the installation is installed in accordance with the manufacturer=E2=80=99s instructions, any equipment interfaces are adequately addressed in the installation instructions for the GNSS equipment and the equipment with which it is interfacing, and the equipment is installed in accordance with the guidelines in this AC. For example, installation of GNSS navigation equipment that only interfaces with an antenna, power, ground, an external HSI/CDI with a single source selector switch, and a left/right (deviation-based) autopilot would typically be considered a minor alteration. Para 9 GNSS EQUIPMENT LIMITED TO VFR USE. GNSS equipment may be installed on a no-hazard basis as a supplement to VFR navigation. Such installations need only to verify that the GNSS installation does not introduce a hazard to the aircraft (e.g., properly secured for crashworthiness, not combustible, etc). GNSS installations limited to VFR USE ONLY should be evaluated under the criteria described in paragraph Par 8 8c(1) to classify the type of aircraft/appliance modification. The only exception is that, for installations where the GNSS equipment does not interface with other equipment (except a dedicated remote indicator if applicable), the installation can be accomplished without any reference to previously approved data (i.e., the equipment does not need a TSO or prior STC). Installation guidelines for such an installation are provided in appendix 5 of this AC. Loss of or misleading VFR navigation information is considered a minor failure condition; therefore, Software Development Assurance Level D is acceptable. A readable placard stating "GPS limited to VFR use only" must be installed in clear view of the pilot, unless the equipment automatically displays this message on start-up and pilot action is required to clear the message. An A/RFM(S) is not required since the placard or display contains the equipment limitation. In a message dated 8/27/04 7:49:07 AM, rblevy@mindspring.com writes: > any IFR GPS installation is a major alteration because it changes the > operating limitations of the > aircraft per the Approved Flight Manual Supplement.=C2=A0 A major alteration > requires either an STC or a field approval, and a 337 in either case, the > difference being whether it's a "stamp and forward" (STC) or "review and approve" > (field approval).=C2=A0 > AC 20-138A states for IFR, under MINOR alteration For these installations, any A/RFM(S) associated with the original approved data should be used as the basis for an A/RFM(S) for this installation. Limitations imposed on the GNSS equipment during the initial approval should be imposed for follow-on equipment approval unless an FAA re-evaluation of the relevant issues determines that they do not apply. NOTE: An A/RFM(S) is not necessary if it was not part of the original installation, if the operating manual addresses the use of the equipment and associated installed components (e.g., remote source selection), and there are no unique limitations associated with the particular installation. Yea, I know, a gray area.=C2=A0 Very poorly worded, but, then, consider the source.=C2=A0 AC 20-138A gives a sample of Flight Manual Supplement.=C2=A0 The flight manual supplement does NOT change the aircraft's operating limitations.=C2=A0 Only=20the Type Certificate holder (or STC) can change the aircraft's operating limitations.=C2=A0 The Flight Manual Supplement (sample) states: This document must be carried in the airplane at all times. It describes the operating procedures for the ABC Model XXX GPS navigation system when it has been installed in accordance with . Thus, the FMS MAY, or may not, change the operating PROCEDURES.=C2=A0 It does NOT change the aircraft limitations.=C2=A0 NO 337 for a major alteration is required. ________________________________ Message 8 _____________________________________ Time: 06:13:55 PM PST US From: Anna3003@AOL.COM Subject: TeamGrumman-List: no TFRs for Kerry? --> TeamGrumman-List message posted by: Anna3003@aol.com Today, I scheduled a flight from Palo Alto to Half Moon Bay (the coast is indeed clear all the way to Crescent city-yippee fall wx in northern CA!). Because I knew Kerry was in SF, I called Oakland FSS and asked about TFRs. I was really surprised when the briefer told me, yes, Mr. Kerry rates TFR's but he's declined them. This man can campaign in the bay area all he wants! Politics is one thing, but flying the sf bay area on a clear day is something else. ________________________________ Message 9 _____________________________________ Time: 09:37:34 PM PST US From: "Walt Beaulieu" Subject: RE: TeamGrumman-List: no TFRs for Kerry? --> TeamGrumman-List message posted by: "Walt Beaulieu" Al Queeeda luv's John Kerry. He is in no danger from them. -----Original Message----- From: owner-teamgrumman-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-teamgrumman-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Anna3003@AOL.COM Subject: TeamGrumman-List: no TFRs for Kerry? --> TeamGrumman-List message posted by: Anna3003@aol.com Today, I scheduled a flight from Palo Alto to Half Moon Bay (the coast is indeed clear all the way to Crescent city-yippee fall wx in northern CA!). Because I knew Kerry was in SF, I called Oakland FSS and asked about TFRs. I was really surprised when the briefer told me, yes, Mr. Kerry rates TFR's but he's declined them. This man can campaign in the bay area all he wants! Politics is one thing, but flying the sf bay area on a clear day is something else.