Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 08:23 AM - Re: oil cooler overhaul (doug sapp)
2. 12:15 PM - Re: prop inspection (Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD)
3. 12:26 PM - Re: prop inspection (Tom Elliott)
4. 01:00 PM - Re: prop inspection (Robin Hou)
5. 02:19 PM - Re: prop inspection (Robin Hou)
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: oil cooler overhaul |
Mike and all,
Back in the office today after a short break from the cold and snow.
Mike, I have both new and used coolers in stock.
Best,
Doug
On Sun, Feb 24, 2013 at 1:19 PM, skidmk <skidmk@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Looking like the oil cooler is starting to leak. Overhaul time. Any
> recommendations out there? Cheaper to replace? Thoughts?
>
> Mike
> CJ6A Housai equipped
>
> --------
> Mike "Skidmk" Bourget
> Ottawa, Ontario
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=394955#394955
>
>
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
This minor addition to what Dennis wrote is specifically pointed towards
AD's .... not just prop AD's but *ALL* AD's that are written on Type
Certificated Parts that happen to reside in an Experimental Aircraft.
I've been through this in detail with both the FAA and the EAA, and can
speak to it from personal experience and please realize local FSDO's
might not agree with what I am saying here, but will shortly after they
read the material you can get from the EAA.
Aircraft owners that have AD's on Type Certificated Parts that are in
their Experimental Aircraft must comply with *THE INTENT* of the AD but
not necessarily with exactly what the AD specifies. On a Certificated
Aircraft, the owner must comply with EXACTLY what the AD says.
So what does that mean exactly? Let's say you removed the mechanical
fuel pump from the GSO-480 Lycoming Engine in your UTVA-66 and replaced
it with an external fuel pump. An AD comes out on the GSO-480 original
engine fuel pump. Kind of hard to comply with since you put in an
electric pump, so you no longer have the mechanical pump, and thus by
changing the design you have "complied with the intent" of the AD.
The same thing could apply to say .... the MAG's, when you replaced them
with some kind of electronic ignition. You're allowed to do this kind
of thing even on a certificated engine, because it does indeed reside in
an Experimental Aircraft.
So while this is a small point to make, it is indeed true. There is a
small, but notable difference in doing EXACTLY what the AD says
(certificated aircraft) and what the INTENT of the AD is, in an
Experimental Aircraft with a Certificated Part.
Mark Bitterlich
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of A. Dennis
Savarese
Sent: Saturday, February 23, 2013 15:17
Subject: Re: Yak-List: prop inspection
<dsavarese0812@bellsouth.net>
It depends on the certification of the prop. ie: if the propeller has
been issued a Type Certificate Data Sheet (TCDS), then whatever the TCDS
says or if the prop has any AD's, then whatever the AD's say. The
certification of the aircraft does not negate the prop certification.
A. Dennis Savarese
334-285-6263
334-546-8182 (mobile)
www.yak-52.com
Skype - Yakguy1
On 2/23/2013 1:57 PM, Joe Howse wrote:
> is there a mandatory inpection for props on experimental aircraft?
> *
>
>
> *
Message 3
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Question? I have been told that if you remove the ( Certified ) Engine etc. Data
plate it is now
completely experimental
and the AD's are moot? Anyone have good info on this?
Tom Elliott
CJ-6A NX63727
777 Quartz Ave
PMB 7004
Sandy Valley NV
89019
Cell 541-297-5497
N13472@AOL.COM
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD
Sent: Monday, February 25, 2013 12:11 PM
Subject: RE: Yak-List: prop inspection
--> <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
This minor addition to what Dennis wrote is specifically pointed towards AD's ....
not just prop
AD's but *ALL* AD's that are written on Type Certificated Parts that happen to
reside in an
Experimental Aircraft.
I've been through this in detail with both the FAA and the EAA, and can speak to
it from personal
experience and please realize local FSDO's might not agree with what I am saying
here, but will
shortly after they read the material you can get from the EAA.
Aircraft owners that have AD's on Type Certificated Parts that are in their Experimental
Aircraft
must comply with *THE INTENT* of the AD but not necessarily with exactly what the
AD specifies. On
a Certificated Aircraft, the owner must comply with EXACTLY what the AD says.
So what does that mean exactly? Let's say you removed the mechanical fuel pump
from the GSO-480
Lycoming Engine in your UTVA-66 and replaced it with an external fuel pump. An
AD comes out on the
GSO-480 original engine fuel pump. Kind of hard to comply with since you put in
an electric pump,
so you no longer have the mechanical pump, and thus by changing the design you
have "complied with
the intent" of the AD.
The same thing could apply to say .... the MAG's, when you replaced them with some
kind of
electronic ignition. You're allowed to do this kind of thing even on a certificated
engine, because
it does indeed reside in an Experimental Aircraft.
So while this is a small point to make, it is indeed true. There is a small, but
notable difference
in doing EXACTLY what the AD says (certificated aircraft) and what the INTENT of
the AD is, in an
Experimental Aircraft with a Certificated Part.
Mark Bitterlich
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of A. Dennis Savarese
Sent: Saturday, February 23, 2013 15:17
Subject: Re: Yak-List: prop inspection
<dsavarese0812@bellsouth.net>
It depends on the certification of the prop. ie: if the propeller has been issued
a Type
Certificate Data Sheet (TCDS), then whatever the TCDS
says or if the prop has any AD's, then whatever the AD's say. The certification
of the aircraft
does not negate the prop certification.
A. Dennis Savarese
334-285-6263
334-546-8182 (mobile)
www.yak-52.com
Skype - Yakguy1
On 2/23/2013 1:57 PM, Joe Howse wrote:
> is there a mandatory inpection for props on experimental aircraft?
> *
>
>
> *
much more:
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: prop inspection |
I think AC 39-7D is the latest authority on these issue. I am attaching it
here.=0A=0ASee paragraph 9 & 10 on pages 3 and 4.=0A=0A=0A"Each AD contains
an applicability statement specifying the=C2-product (aircraft, aircraft
engine, propeller, or appliance) to which it applies. Unless stated=C2-o
therwise (see subparagraph 9b of this AC), ADs only apply to type-certifica
ted (TC) aircraft,=C2-including ADs issued for an engine, propeller, and
appliance."=0A=0A"Non-TC=99d aircraft=C2-(e.g., amateur-built aircr
aft, experimental exhibition) are aircraft for which the FAA has not=0Aissu
ed a TC under part 21. The AD applicability statement will identify if the
AD applies to=C2-non-TC=99d aircraft or engines, propellers, and ap
pliances installed thereon."=0A=0A=0A________________________________=0A Fr
om: Tom Elliott <N13472@aol.com>=0ATo: yak-list@matronics.com =0ASent: Mond
ay, February 25, 2013 12:23 PM=0ASubject: RE: Yak-List: prop inspection=0A
tion? I have been told that if you remove the ( Certified ) Engine etc. Dat
a plate it is now=0Acompletely experimental=0Aand the AD's are moot? Anyone
have good info on this?=0A=0ATom Elliott=0ACJ-6A NX63727=0A777 Quartz Ave
=0APMB 7004=0ASandy Valley NV=0A89019=0ACell 541-297-5497=0AN13472@AOL.COM
=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A-----Original Message-----=0AFrom: owner-yak-list-server@mat
ronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of=0ABitt
erlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD=0ASent: Monday, February 25, 2013 12:11 PM=0A
ark.bitterlich@navy.mil>=0A=0AThis minor addition to what Dennis wrote is s
pecifically pointed towards AD's .... not just prop=0AAD's but *ALL*=C2-
AD's that are written on Type Certificated Parts that happen to reside in a
n=0AExperimental Aircraft.=0AI've been through this in detail with both the
FAA and the EAA, and can speak to it from personal=0Aexperience and please
realize local FSDO's might not agree with what I am saying here, but will
=0Ashortly after they read the material you can get from the EAA.=C2- =0A
=0AAircraft owners that have AD's on Type Certificated Parts that are in th
eir Experimental Aircraft=0Amust comply with *THE INTENT* of the AD but not
necessarily with exactly what the AD specifies.=C2- On=0Aa Certificated
Aircraft, the owner must comply with EXACTLY what the AD says.=C2- =0A=0A
So what does that mean exactly?=C2- Let's say you removed the mechanical
fuel pump from the GSO-480=0ALycoming Engine in your UTVA-66 and replaced i
t with an external fuel pump.=C2- An AD comes out on the=0AGSO-480 origin
al engine fuel pump.=C2- Kind of hard to comply with since you put in an
electric pump,=0Aso you no longer have the mechanical pump, and thus by cha
nging the design you have "complied with=0Athe intent" of the AD.=C2- =0A
=0AThe same thing could apply to say .... the MAG's, when you replaced them
with some kind of=0Aelectronic ignition.=C2- You're allowed to do this k
ind of thing even on a certificated engine, because=0Ait does indeed reside
in an Experimental Aircraft.=C2- =0A=0ASo while this is a small point to
make, it is indeed true.=C2- There is a small, but notable difference=0A
in doing EXACTLY what the AD says (certificated aircraft) and what the INTE
NT of the AD is, in an=0AExperimental Aircraft with a Certificated Part.=C2
- =0A=0AMark Bitterlich=0A=0A=0A-----Original Message-----=0AFrom: owner-
yak-list-server@matronics.com=0A[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
] On Behalf Of A. Dennis Savarese=0ASent: Saturday, February 23, 2013 15:17
=0ATo: yak-list@matronics.com=0ASubject: Re: Yak-List: prop inspection=0A
llsouth.net>=0A=0AIt depends on the certification of the prop.=C2- ie: if
the propeller has been issued a Type=0ACertificate Data Sheet (TCDS), then
whatever the TCDS=0A=0Asays or if the prop has any AD's, then whatever the
AD's say.=C2- The certification of the aircraft=0Adoes not negate the pr
op certification.=0A=0AA. Dennis Savarese=0A334-285-6263=0A334-546-8182 (mo
bile)=0Awww.yak-52.com=0ASkype - Yakguy1=0A=0AOn 2/23/2013 1:57 PM, Joe How
se wrote:=0A> is there a mandatory inpection for props on experimental airc
raft?=0A> *=0A>=0A>=0A> *=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0Amuch more:=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A
==C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS
==C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2-
Message 5
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: prop inspection |
Hi Tom,=0A=0AParagraph 9.c. of AC 39-7D states the following:=0A=0A=0A"An A
D applies to each product identified in the applicability=C2-statement, r
egardless of whether it has been modified, altered, or repaired in the area
subject to=C2-the requirements of the AD."=0A=0AHere is my reading: If t
he removal of the data plate is a modification to the engine, the AD is sti
ll applicable to the modified engine.=0A=0AMost Lycoming AD's have the simi
lar language in the AD. For example, #98-02-08 says: "This airworthiness di
rective (AD) applies to=C2-each engine identified in the preceding applic
ability=C2-provision, regardless of whether it has been modified,=C2-al
tered, or repaired in the area subject to the requirements=C2-of this AD.
"=0A=0ASo the removal of the data plate most likely does not change the AD
applicability.=0A=0ARobin=C2-=0A=0A=0A________________________________
=0A From: Robin Hou <rmhou@yahoo.com>=0ATo: "yak-list@matronics.com" <yak-l
ist@matronics.com> =0ASent: Monday, February 25, 2013 12:58 PM=0ASubject: R
e: Yak-List: prop inspection=0A =0A=0AI think AC 39-7D is the latest author
ity on these issue. I am attaching it here.=0A=0ASee paragraph 9 & 10 on pa
ges 3 and 4.=0A=0A"Each AD contains an applicability statement specifying t
he=C2-product (aircraft, aircraft engine, propeller, or appliance) to whi
ch it applies. Unless stated=C2-otherwise (see subparagraph 9b of this AC
), ADs only apply to type-certificated (TC) aircraft,=C2-including ADs is
sued for an engine, propeller, and appliance."=0A=0A"Non-TC=99d aircr
aft=C2-(e.g., amateur-built aircraft, experimental exhibition) are aircra
ft for which the FAA has not=0Aissued a TC under part 21. The AD applicabil
ity statement will identify if the AD applies to=C2-non-TC=99d airc
raft or engines, propellers, and appliances installed thereon."=0A=0A=0A___
_____________________________=0A From: Tom Elliott <N13472@aol.com>=0ATo: y
ak-list@matronics.com =0ASent: Monday, February 25, 2013 12:23 PM=0ASubject
Elliott" <N13472@aol.com>=0A=0AQuestion? I have been told that if you remov
e the ( Certified ) Engine etc. Data plate it is now=0Acompletely experimen
tal=0Aand the AD's are moot? Anyone have good info on this?=0A=0ATom Elliot
t=0ACJ-6A NX63727=0A777 Quartz Ave=0APMB 7004=0ASandy Valley NV=0A89019=0AC
ell 541-297-5497=0AN13472@AOL.COM=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A-----Original Message-----
=0AFrom: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@
matronics.com] On Behalf Of=0ABitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD=0ASent: Mon
day, February 25,=0A 2013 12:11 PM=0ATo: yak-list@matronics.com=0ASubject:
ich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD" =0A--> <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>=0A=0AThis min
or addition to what Dennis wrote is specifically pointed towards AD's ....
not just prop=0AAD's but *ALL*=C2- AD's that are written on Type Certific
ated Parts that happen to reside in an=0AExperimental Aircraft.=0AI've been
through this in detail with both the FAA and the EAA, and can speak to it
from personal=0Aexperience and please realize local FSDO's might not agree
with what I am saying here, but will=0Ashortly after they read the material
you can get from the EAA.=C2- =0A=0AAircraft owners that have AD's on Ty
pe Certificated Parts that are in their=0A Experimental Aircraft=0Amust com
ply with *THE INTENT* of the AD but not necessarily with exactly what the A
D specifies.=C2- On=0Aa Certificated Aircraft, the owner must comply with
EXACTLY what the AD says.=C2- =0A=0ASo what does that mean exactly?=C2
- Let's say you removed the mechanical fuel pump from the GSO-480=0ALycom
ing Engine in your UTVA-66 and replaced it with an external fuel pump.=C2
- An AD comes out on the=0AGSO-480 original engine fuel pump.=C2- Kind
of hard to comply with since you put in an electric pump,=0Aso you no longe
r have the mechanical pump, and thus by changing the design you have "compl
ied with=0Athe intent" of the AD.=C2- =0A=0AThe same thing could apply to
say .... the MAG's, when you replaced them with some kind of=0Aelectronic
ignition.=C2- You're allowed to do this kind of thing even on a certifica
ted engine, because=0Ait does indeed reside in an Experimental Aircraft.=C2
- =0A=0ASo while this=0A is a small point to make, it is indeed true.=C2
- There is a small, but notable difference=0Ain doing EXACTLY what the AD
says (certificated aircraft) and what the INTENT of the AD is, in an=0AExp
erimental Aircraft with a Certificated Part.=C2- =0A=0AMark Bitterlich=0A
=0A=0A-----Original Message-----=0AFrom: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.co
m=0A[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of A. Dennis Sav
arese=0ASent: Saturday, February 23, 2013 15:17=0ATo: yak-list@matronics.co
m=0ASubject: Re: Yak-List: prop inspection=0A=0A--> Yak-List message posted
by: "A. Dennis Savarese"=0A<dsavarese0812@bellsouth.net>=0A=0AIt depends o
n the certification of the prop.=C2- ie: if the propeller has been issued
a Type=0ACertificate Data Sheet (TCDS), then whatever the TCDS=0A=0Asays o
r if the prop has any AD's, then whatever the AD's say.=C2- The certifica
tion of the aircraft=0Adoes not negate the prop certification.=0A=0AA. Denn
is Savarese=0A334-285-6263=0A334-546-8182 (mobile)=0Awww.yak-52.com=0ASkype
- Yakguy1=0A=0AOn 2/23/2013 1:57 PM, Joe Howse wrote:=0A> is there a manda
tory inpection for props on experimental aircraft?=0A> *=0A>=0A>=0Asp; =C2
- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- - List Contribution Web Site -=0A_; =C2-
=C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- &nb://www.m
atronics.com/contribution"=0A======
Other Matronics Email List Services
These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.
-- Please support this service by making your Contribution today! --
|