Is TSO Required for Certified Glider Communications Radio?

[sky[_2_]]

What are the FAA regulations regarding installing a communications
radio in a certified glider. I have had many opinions expressed and
would appreciate any definitive answers with references to the
appropriate regulations.

[Darryl Ramm]

On Mar 21, 7:12*pm, sky > wrote:
> What are the FAA regulations regarding installing a communications
> radio in a certified glider. *I have had many opinions expressed and
> would appreciate any definitive answers with references to the
> appropriate regulations.

Part 43 requires an A&P to at a minimum sign off the installation,
maybe do a 337. I believe there is no actual requirement to have a TSO
radio. However your A&P/avionics shop may disagree. They may require
the radio be TSO'ed to feel comfortable about complying with the
language in part 43.13 and maybe elsewhere. If you disagree with their
position you should ask that person to explain why they believe what
the radio must be TSO'ed. You likely are getting many options
expressed because different people interpret part 43 requirements in
different ways, and in some cases may be dealing with local FSDO
preferences for 337 paperwork which might further encourage caution on
the part of the A&P. I would find a competent A&P you trust and follow
the requirements/procedures they recommended.

Darryl

[[email protected]]

On Mar 22, 3:05*am, Darryl Ramm > wrote:
> On Mar 21, 7:12*pm, sky > wrote:
>
> > What are the FAA regulations regarding installing a communications
> > radio in a certified glider. *I have had many opinions expressed and
> > would appreciate any definitive answers with references to the
> > appropriate regulations.
>
> Part 43 requires an A&P to at a minimum sign off the installation,
> maybe do a 337. I believe there is no actual requirement to have a TSO
> radio. However your A&P/avionics shop may disagree. They may require
> the radio be TSO'ed to feel comfortable about complying with the
> language in part 43.13 and maybe elsewhere. If you disagree with their
> position you should ask that person to explain why they believe what
> the radio must be TSO'ed. You likely are getting many options
> expressed because different people interpret part 43 requirements in
> different ways, and in some cases may be dealing with local FSDO
> preferences for 337 paperwork which might further encourage caution on
> the part of the A&P. I would find a competent A&P you trust and follow
> the requirements/procedures they recommended.
>
> Darryl

The shop where I work just installed an non TSO radio in a glider. I
asked the avionics "guru" (my boss) about it. He said there is no
problem at all. Just paperwork issues. He has a great rapport with
the FSDO so never any paperwork problems. Basically the installation
requires a 337 and "field approval". He said somthing about providing
"approved data" which can be as simple as the install manual.


Cookie

[jb92563]

On Mar 22, 4:56*am, "
> wrote:
> On Mar 22, 3:05*am, Darryl Ramm > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Mar 21, 7:12*pm, sky > wrote:
>
> > > What are the FAA regulations regarding installing a communications
> > > radio in a certified glider. *I have had many opinions expressed and
> > > would appreciate any definitive answers with references to the
> > > appropriate regulations.
>
> > Part 43 requires an A&P to at a minimum sign off the installation,
> > maybe do a 337. I believe there is no actual requirement to have a TSO
> > radio. However your A&P/avionics shop may disagree. They may require
> > the radio be TSO'ed to feel comfortable about complying with the
> > language in part 43.13 and maybe elsewhere. If you disagree with their
> > position you should ask that person to explain why they believe what
> > the radio must be TSO'ed. You likely are getting many options
> > expressed because different people interpret part 43 requirements in
> > different ways, and in some cases may be dealing with local FSDO
> > preferences for 337 paperwork which might further encourage caution on
> > the part of the A&P. I would find a competent A&P you trust and follow
> > the requirements/procedures they recommended.
>
> > Darryl
>
> The shop where I work just installed an non TSO radio in a glider. *I
> asked the avionics "guru" (my boss) about it. *He said there is no
> problem at all. *Just paperwork issues. *He has a great rapport with
> the FSDO so never any paperwork problems. *Basically the installation
> requires a 337 and "field approval". *He said somthing about providing
> "approved data" which can be as simple as the install manual.
>
> Cookie- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Handheld radios that are frequently used in club gliders like the
2-33's are also not TSO'd either.

I think the issue with a radio in a glider is more about the
installation being approved rather than the
radio device itself since many gliders do not have a radio listed on
the minimum required instrumentation list.

Just follow what the A&P that does your annual says or get one that
agrees with your interpretation, just so long
as it gets signed off and you are covered.

If the rules are vague and open to interpretation then the FAA will
have to revise them if they expect a particular result
and are not getting it.

Ray

[noel.wade]

Here are some questions that help clarify the answers to this issue:
(as annoying as this can be)

1) Is a radio "required" equipment for a day-VFR flight?
(which covers 99.99% of all Glider flying; at least in the USA)

2) How is the glider in question certified (standard vs.
experimental)?

What do the FARs say about items #1 and #2 above? More importantly,
what do they _not_ say about radios?
(Hint: see 91.205, the sections of Part 91 that apply to the airspace
you expect to fly in/through, and Part 43).

--Noel
P.S. Don't forget this "gotcha": Your weight and balance is
technically affected by instrument changes in the cockpit. See the
FARs about how you can re-calculate your W&B based on an "equipment
list" and the instrument location (i.e. Arm or Datum point).
Insurance companies or FAA inspectors may not look kindly on an
incorrect equipment list or a W&B that doesn't take new items - like
radios - into account.

[HL Falbaum[_2_]]

"noel.wade" > wrote in message
...
> Here are some questions that help clarify the answers to this issue:
> (as annoying as this can be)
>
> 1) Is a radio "required" equipment for a day-VFR flight?
> (which covers 99.99% of all Glider flying; at least in the USA)
>
> 2) How is the glider in question certified (standard vs.
> experimental)?
>
> What do the FARs say about items #1 and #2 above? More importantly,
> what do they _not_ say about radios?
> (Hint: see 91.205, the sections of Part 91 that apply to the airspace
> you expect to fly in/through, and Part 43).
>
> --Noel
> P.S. Don't forget this "gotcha": Your weight and balance is
> technically affected by instrument changes in the cockpit. See the
> FARs about how you can re-calculate your W&B based on an "equipment
> list" and the instrument location (i.e. Arm or Datum point).
> Insurance companies or FAA inspectors may not look kindly on an
> incorrect equipment list or a W&B that doesn't take new items - like
> radios - into account.
>

Just a reminder---
The FAA and the FCC have someting to say about this. Many radios that were
found in gliders a few years ago are no longer legal for the FCC. Has to do
with channel separation and stability. I don't recall the details anymore,
but be wary of 360 channel radios and old radios.

Hartley Falbaum

[Darryl Ramm]

On Mar 22, 1:03*pm, "HL Falbaum" > wrote:
> "noel.wade" > wrote in message
>
> ...
>
>
>
> > Here are some questions that help clarify the answers to this issue:
> > (as annoying as this can be)
>
> > 1) Is a radio "required" equipment for a day-VFR flight?
> > (which covers 99.99% of all Glider flying; at least in the USA)
>
> > 2) How is the glider in question certified (standard vs.
> > experimental)?
>
> > What do the FARs say about items #1 and #2 above? *More importantly,
> > what do they _not_ say about radios?
> > (Hint: see 91.205, the sections of Part 91 that apply to the airspace
> > you expect to fly in/through, and Part 43).
>
> > --Noel
> > P.S. *Don't forget this "gotcha": *Your weight and balance is
> > technically affected by instrument changes in the cockpit. *See the
> > FARs about how you can re-calculate your W&B based on an "equipment
> > list" and the instrument location (i.e. Arm or Datum point).
> > Insurance companies or FAA inspectors may not look kindly on an
> > incorrect equipment list or a W&B that doesn't take new items - like
> > radios - into account.
>
> Just a reminder---
> The FAA and the FCC have someting to say about this. Many radios that were
> found in gliders a few years ago are no longer legal for the FCC. Has to do
> with channel separation and stability. I don't recall the details anymore,
> but be wary of 360 channel radios and old radios.
>
> Hartley Falbaum

The 360 channel radio issue is very old news and since the aircraft
under discussion is type certificated a A&P/radio shop will not
install some old junker 360 channel radio. The radios that replaced
the old 360 channel radios have 720 channel/25 KHz spacing. That is
what most of us fly with now.

However this does raise potential confusion since there is another
change kicking around in VHF radio specifications to 8.33 KHz channel
spacing. With changes in Europe and elsewhere to this 8KHz spacing
(required above certain flight levels) you are starting to see
affordable radios appear with this spacing capability. The upcoming
Becker AR 6201 that replaces the 4201 is an example of that, with
selectable 8/25kHz spacing. But no we relay don't need to worry about
this in the USA. Still if I was in the market I'd be trying to wait
for the AR 6201 (for other reasons than 8kHz capability, like dual
frequency monitoring, compact size, etc.).

As for FCC "equipment authorization" go to
http://www.fcc.gov/oet/ea/fccid/ and for example type in B54, the code
for Becker avionics, to see all the FCC approved devices.

Darryl

[sky[_2_]]

On Mar 22, 11:30*am, "noel.wade" > wrote:
> Here are some questions that help clarify the answers to this issue:
> (as annoying as this can be)
>
> 1) Is a radio "required" equipment for a day-VFR flight?
> (which covers 99.99% of all Glider flying; at least in the USA)
>
> 2) How is the glider in question certified (standard vs.
> experimental)?
>
> What do the FARs say about items #1 and #2 above? *More importantly,
> what do they _not_ say about radios?
> (Hint: see 91.205, the sections of Part 91 that apply to the airspace
> you expect to fly in/through, and Part 43).
>
> --Noel
> P.S. *Don't forget this "gotcha": *Your weight and balance is
> technically affected by instrument changes in the cockpit. *See the
> FARs about how you can re-calculate your W&B based on an "equipment
> list" and the instrument location (i.e. Arm or Datum point).
> Insurance companies or FAA inspectors may not look kindly on an
> incorrect equipment list or a W&B that doesn't take new items - like
> radios - into account.

All,

Thanks for the responses. To be clear, the radio would be a new 760
channel aircraft like the Microair 760 -approved by the FCC but not
TSOed.. The glider is certified standard. I know handhelds do not
require FAA approval but do require FCC approval and no one has ever
suggested that using them for communications during flight is not
legal. I understand the need that the installation be signed off by a
FAA licensed mechanic to insure it is wired safely, mounted securely,
and W&B updated but otherwise I do not understand why TSO
certification should be required as the radio is not part of a minimum
equipment list.

[Bruce]

Why wait? - you can get an ATR833 from Funkwerk (Filser)with 8khz
spacing right now. Dual channel works well - not overly expensive - been
on the market a year already.

For 25khz spacing the ATR500 is affordable (40% less than an 833), and
has pretty much the same features. Very low current draw, works to low
voltage etc. Very popular radio in this part of the world.

Bruce



Darryl Ramm wrote:
> On Mar 22, 1:03 pm, "HL Falbaum" > wrote:
>> "noel.wade" > wrote in message
>>
>> ...
>>
>>
>>
>>> Here are some questions that help clarify the answers to this issue:
>>> (as annoying as this can be)
>>> 1) Is a radio "required" equipment for a day-VFR flight?
>>> (which covers 99.99% of all Glider flying; at least in the USA)
>>> 2) How is the glider in question certified (standard vs.
>>> experimental)?
>>> What do the FARs say about items #1 and #2 above? More importantly,
>>> what do they _not_ say about radios?
>>> (Hint: see 91.205, the sections of Part 91 that apply to the airspace
>>> you expect to fly in/through, and Part 43).
>>> --Noel
>>> P.S. Don't forget this "gotcha": Your weight and balance is
>>> technically affected by instrument changes in the cockpit. See the
>>> FARs about how you can re-calculate your W&B based on an "equipment
>>> list" and the instrument location (i.e. Arm or Datum point).
>>> Insurance companies or FAA inspectors may not look kindly on an
>>> incorrect equipment list or a W&B that doesn't take new items - like
>>> radios - into account.
>> Just a reminder---
>> The FAA and the FCC have someting to say about this. Many radios that were
>> found in gliders a few years ago are no longer legal for the FCC. Has to do
>> with channel separation and stability. I don't recall the details anymore,
>> but be wary of 360 channel radios and old radios.
>>
>> Hartley Falbaum
>
> The 360 channel radio issue is very old news and since the aircraft
> under discussion is type certificated a A&P/radio shop will not
> install some old junker 360 channel radio. The radios that replaced
> the old 360 channel radios have 720 channel/25 KHz spacing. That is
> what most of us fly with now.
>
> However this does raise potential confusion since there is another
> change kicking around in VHF radio specifications to 8.33 KHz channel
> spacing. With changes in Europe and elsewhere to this 8KHz spacing
> (required above certain flight levels) you are starting to see
> affordable radios appear with this spacing capability. The upcoming
> Becker AR 6201 that replaces the 4201 is an example of that, with
> selectable 8/25kHz spacing. But no we relay don't need to worry about
> this in the USA. Still if I was in the market I'd be trying to wait
> for the AR 6201 (for other reasons than 8kHz capability, like dual
> frequency monitoring, compact size, etc.).
>
> As for FCC "equipment authorization" go to
> http://www.fcc.gov/oet/ea/fccid/ and for example type in B54, the code
> for Becker avionics, to see all the FCC approved devices.
>
> Darryl
>

--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: ---

[lanebush]

I installed one of Tim's factory refurbished Microairs last month. I
am loving it. Like you, I did all of this research and as an A & P I
said why not? The microair beats my might fine Vertex handheld all
day long. I especially enjoy the remote frequency select button on
the control stick and the dual frequency monitor features.

XF

[Brian[_1_]]

TSO requirements have been discussed at length in previous threads,
Admittedly I don't recall them specifically talking about radios. But
the short version is there is no requirement to install TSO anything
in most gliders.

big HOWEVER, there are operations that require TSO equipment and the
FAR's will specifically say that TSO'ed equipment is required. This is
usually for Transponders or IFR operations, I am sure there are
others.
It is possible also that your particular aircraft manufacter has
required TSO equipment in the aircraft as well and that will be
spelled out in the aircraft documentation.

Many people, including some FAA inspectors, have the false notion that
all instruments need to be TSO'ed. When you find one of these ask them
where you can find the TSO'ed G-meter to install. Hint, there is no
TSO for G-Meters.

So unless someone can find a specific requirement for the equipment to
be TSO'ed, Then it does not need to be TSO'ed. Best bet might be to
look up the TSO number for Radio's and then search the FAR's to see
where this TSO is required.

Brian

[Andy[_1_]]

On Mar 22, 9:54*pm, sky > wrote:
> On Mar 22, 11:30*am, "noel.wade" > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > Here are some questions that help clarify the answers to this issue:
> > (as annoying as this can be)
>
> > 1) Is a radio "required" equipment for a day-VFR flight?
> > (which covers 99.99% of all Glider flying; at least in the USA)
>
> > 2) How is the glider in question certified (standard vs.
> > experimental)?
>
> > What do the FARs say about items #1 and #2 above? *More importantly,
> > what do they _not_ say about radios?
> > (Hint: see 91.205, the sections of Part 91 that apply to the airspace
> > you expect to fly in/through, and Part 43).
>
> > --Noel
> > P.S. *Don't forget this "gotcha": *Your weight and balance is
> > technically affected by instrument changes in the cockpit. *See the
> > FARs about how you can re-calculate your W&B based on an "equipment
> > list" and the instrument location (i.e. Arm or Datum point).
> > Insurance companies or FAA inspectors may not look kindly on an
> > incorrect equipment list or a W&B that doesn't take new items - like
> > radios - into account.
>
> All,
>
> Thanks for the responses. *To be clear, the radio would be a new 760
> channel aircraft like the Microair 760 -approved by the FCC but not
> TSOed.. *The glider is certified standard. *I know handhelds do not
> require FAA approval but do require FCC approval and no one has ever
> suggested that using them for communications during flight is not
> legal. *I understand the need that the installation be signed off by a
> FAA licensed mechanic to insure it is wired safely, mounted securely,
> and W&B updated but otherwise I do not understand why TSO
> certification should be required as the radio is not part of a minimum
> equipment list.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

I think you are worrying far too much, maybe because you either
cannot, or don't wish to, do the installation yourself.

Many glider pilots would buy the radio of their choice, build the
wiring harness, do the installation, update the w/b and then get the
IA that does the next inspection to sign it off. Of course you need
to check that your IA is willing to do that.

The more people you get involved with the radio selection,
installation, and approval the more problems you will bring on
yourself.


Andy (GY)

[[email protected]]

On Mar 23, 1:18*pm, Andy > wrote:
> On Mar 22, 9:54*pm, sky > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Mar 22, 11:30*am, "noel.wade" > wrote:
>
> > > Here are some questions that help clarify the answers to this issue:
> > > (as annoying as this can be)
>
> > > 1) Is a radio "required" equipment for a day-VFR flight?
> > > (which covers 99.99% of all Glider flying; at least in the USA)
>
> > > 2) How is the glider in question certified (standard vs.
> > > experimental)?
>
> > > What do the FARs say about items #1 and #2 above? *More importantly,
> > > what do they _not_ say about radios?
> > > (Hint: see 91.205, the sections of Part 91 that apply to the airspace
> > > you expect to fly in/through, and Part 43).
>
> > > --Noel
> > > P.S. *Don't forget this "gotcha": *Your weight and balance is
> > > technically affected by instrument changes in the cockpit. *See the
> > > FARs about how you can re-calculate your W&B based on an "equipment
> > > list" and the instrument location (i.e. Arm or Datum point).
> > > Insurance companies or FAA inspectors may not look kindly on an
> > > incorrect equipment list or a W&B that doesn't take new items - like
> > > radios - into account.
>
> > All,
>
> > Thanks for the responses. *To be clear, the radio would be a new 760
> > channel aircraft like the Microair 760 -approved by the FCC but not
> > TSOed.. *The glider is certified standard. *I know handhelds do not
> > require FAA approval but do require FCC approval and no one has ever
> > suggested that using them for communications during flight is not
> > legal. *I understand the need that the installation be signed off by a
> > FAA licensed mechanic to insure it is wired safely, mounted securely,
> > and W&B updated but otherwise I do not understand why TSO
> > certification should be required as the radio is not part of a minimum
> > equipment list.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> I think you are worrying far too much, maybe because you either
> cannot, or don't wish to, do the installation yourself.
>
> Many glider pilots would buy the radio of their choice, build the
> wiring harness, do the installation, update the w/b and then get the
> IA that does the next inspection to sign it off. *Of course you need
> to check that your IA is willing to do that.
>
> The more people you get involved with the radio selection,
> installation, and approval the more problems you will bring on
> yourself.
>
> Andy (GY)- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Technically you can't install a panel mount radio yourself. If you
get an AI to sign off your work, then HE did the install. At least he
takes full responsibility for the job. You would be considered to be
"working under his direct supervision."

I know some AI's who might do this, and others who would not (for good
reason).

BUT.........if it is a non TSO'd radio........you need a form 337 and
a "field approval". Easy to get, if you "know the right people".

I know there a lots of "pilot installed" radios installed in gliders
without paperwork, or improper paperwork..........nobody seems to ever
check.

Cookie

[[email protected]]

On Mar 23, 10:31*am, Brian > wrote:
> TSO requirements have been discussed at length in previous threads,
> Admittedly I don't recall them specifically talking about radios. But
> the short version is there is no requirement to install TSO anything
> in most gliders.
>
> big HOWEVER, there are operations that require TSO equipment and the
> FAR's will specifically say that TSO'ed equipment is required. This is
> usually for Transponders or IFR operations, I am sure there are
> others.
> It is possible also that your particular aircraft manufacter has
> required TSO equipment in the aircraft as well and that will be
> spelled out in the aircraft documentation.
>
> Many people, including some FAA inspectors, have the false notion that
> all instruments need to be TSO'ed. When you find one of these ask them
> where you can find the TSO'ed G-meter to install. Hint, there is no
> TSO for G-Meters.
>
> So unless someone can find a specific requirement for the equipment to
> be TSO'ed, Then it does not need to be TSO'ed. Best bet might be to
> look up the TSO number for Radio's and then search the FAR's to see
> where this TSO is required.
>
> Brian

It is my belief that non TSO'd equipment CAN be installed, provided
the FAA accepts the paperwork. (Maybe in certain instances the FAA
will not accept non TSO install)


Cookie

[noel.wade]

On Mar 23, 7:05*pm, "
> wrote:
> Technically you can't install a panel mount radio yourself. *If you
> get an AI to sign off your work, then HE did the install. *At least he
> takes full responsibility for the job. *You would be considered to be
> "working under his direct supervision."
>
> I know some AI's who might do this, and others who would not (for good
> reason).
>
> BUT.........if it is a non TSO'd radio........you need a form 337 and
> a "field approval". *Easy to get, if you "know the right people".

Your answer is inaccurate (or at least incomplete). Check part 43 and
its applicability to Experimental (or other-than-standard) aircraft.
A lot of gliders are registered in this way and it changes a lot of
the limits and requirements on what requires an A&P, an IA, a
"repairman's certificate", or a Form 337.

I know the FARs aren't _fun_ reading; but they _are_ readable. An
hour or two with a FAR/AIM manual is easier than several days of
reading opinions on RAS!

--Noel

[150flivver]

On Mar 23, 9:05*pm, "
> wrote:
> On Mar 23, 1:18*pm, Andy > wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Mar 22, 9:54*pm, sky > wrote:
>
> > > On Mar 22, 11:30*am, "noel.wade" > wrote:
>
> > > > Here are some questions that help clarify the answers to this issue:
> > > > (as annoying as this can be)
>
> > > > 1) Is a radio "required" equipment for a day-VFR flight?
> > > > (which covers 99.99% of all Glider flying; at least in the USA)
>
> > > > 2) How is the glider in question certified (standard vs.
> > > > experimental)?
>
> > > > What do the FARs say about items #1 and #2 above? *More importantly,
> > > > what do they _not_ say about radios?
> > > > (Hint: see 91.205, the sections of Part 91 that apply to the airspace
> > > > you expect to fly in/through, and Part 43).
>
> > > > --Noel
> > > > P.S. *Don't forget this "gotcha": *Your weight and balance is
> > > > technically affected by instrument changes in the cockpit. *See the
> > > > FARs about how you can re-calculate your W&B based on an "equipment
> > > > list" and the instrument location (i.e. Arm or Datum point).
> > > > Insurance companies or FAA inspectors may not look kindly on an
> > > > incorrect equipment list or a W&B that doesn't take new items - like
> > > > radios - into account.
>
> > > All,
>
> > > Thanks for the responses. *To be clear, the radio would be a new 760
> > > channel aircraft like the Microair 760 -approved by the FCC but not
> > > TSOed.. *The glider is certified standard. *I know handhelds do not
> > > require FAA approval but do require FCC approval and no one has ever
> > > suggested that using them for communications during flight is not
> > > legal. *I understand the need that the installation be signed off by a
> > > FAA licensed mechanic to insure it is wired safely, mounted securely,
> > > and W&B updated but otherwise I do not understand why TSO
> > > certification should be required as the radio is not part of a minimum
> > > equipment list.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > I think you are worrying far too much, maybe because you either
> > cannot, or don't wish to, do the installation yourself.
>
> > Many glider pilots would buy the radio of their choice, build the
> > wiring harness, do the installation, update the w/b and then get the
> > IA that does the next inspection to sign it off. *Of course you need
> > to check that your IA is willing to do that.
>
> > The more people you get involved with the radio selection,
> > installation, and approval the more problems you will bring on
> > yourself.
>
> > Andy (GY)- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> Technically you can't install a panel mount radio yourself. *If you
> get an AI to sign off your work, then HE did the install. *At least he
> takes full responsibility for the job. *You would be considered to be
> "working under his direct supervision."
>
> I know some AI's who might do this, and others who would not (for good
> reason).
>
> BUT.........if it is a non TSO'd radio........you need a form 337 and
> a "field approval". *Easy to get, if you "know the right people".
>
> I know there a lots of "pilot installed" radios installed in gliders
> without paperwork, or improper paperwork..........nobody seems to ever
> check.
>
> Cookie

The need for a 337 has nothing to do with a piece of equipment meeting
a TSO or not. If the installation is a major alteration, it needs a
337. Many radio installations are not major alterations.
Transponders need to meet their applicable TSO because the regulation
specifically says they do. Comm radios for part 91 ops do not need to
meet any TSO.

[Brian[_1_]]

On Mar 23, 8:05*pm, "
> wrote:
> On Mar 23, 1:18*pm, Andy > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Mar 22, 9:54*pm, sky > wrote:
>
> > > On Mar 22, 11:30*am, "noel.wade" > wrote:
>
> > > > Here are some questions that help clarify the answers to this issue:
> > > > (as annoying as this can be)
>
> > > > 1) Is a radio "required" equipment for a day-VFR flight?
> > > > (which covers 99.99% of all Glider flying; at least in the USA)
>
> > > > 2) How is the glider in question certified (standard vs.
> > > > experimental)?
>
> > > > What do the FARs say about items #1 and #2 above? *More importantly,
> > > > what do they _not_ say about radios?
> > > > (Hint: see 91.205, the sections of Part 91 that apply to the airspace
> > > > you expect to fly in/through, and Part 43).
>
> > > > --Noel
> > > > P.S. *Don't forget this "gotcha": *Your weight and balance is
> > > > technically affected by instrument changes in the cockpit. *See the
> > > > FARs about how you can re-calculate your W&B based on an "equipment
> > > > list" and the instrument location (i.e. Arm or Datum point).
> > > > Insurance companies or FAA inspectors may not look kindly on an
> > > > incorrect equipment list or a W&B that doesn't take new items - like
> > > > radios - into account.
>
> > > All,
>
> > > Thanks for the responses. *To be clear, the radio would be a new 760
> > > channel aircraft like the Microair 760 -approved by the FCC but not
> > > TSOed.. *The glider is certified standard. *I know handhelds do not
> > > require FAA approval but do require FCC approval and no one has ever
> > > suggested that using them for communications during flight is not
> > > legal. *I understand the need that the installation be signed off by a
> > > FAA licensed mechanic to insure it is wired safely, mounted securely,
> > > and W&B updated but otherwise I do not understand why TSO
> > > certification should be required as the radio is not part of a minimum
> > > equipment list.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > I think you are worrying far too much, maybe because you either
> > cannot, or don't wish to, do the installation yourself.
>
> > Many glider pilots would buy the radio of their choice, build the
> > wiring harness, do the installation, update the w/b and then get the
> > IA that does the next inspection to sign it off. *Of course you need
> > to check that your IA is willing to do that.
>
> > The more people you get involved with the radio selection,
> > installation, and approval the more problems you will bring on
> > yourself.
>
> > Andy (GY)- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> Technically you can't install a panel mount radio yourself. *If you
> get an AI to sign off your work, then HE did the install. *At least he
> takes full responsibility for the job. *You would be considered to be
> "working under his direct supervision."
>
> I know some AI's who might do this, and others who would not (for good
> reason).
>
> BUT.........if it is a non TSO'd radio........you need a form 337 and
> a "field approval". *Easy to get, if you "know the right people".
>
> I know there a lots of "pilot installed" radios installed in gliders
> without paperwork, or improper paperwork..........nobody seems to ever
> check.
>
> Cookie- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Is there ever a situation where a TSO'ed radio can be installed
without a 337 and the same/similar non-TSO'ed radio would required a
337? Why?

Brian

[Darryl Ramm]

On Mar 23, 9:02*pm, Brian > wrote:
> On Mar 23, 8:05*pm, "
>
>
>
> > wrote:
> > On Mar 23, 1:18*pm, Andy > wrote:
>
> > > On Mar 22, 9:54*pm, sky > wrote:
>
> > > > On Mar 22, 11:30*am, "noel.wade" > wrote:
>
> > > > > Here are some questions that help clarify the answers to this issue:
> > > > > (as annoying as this can be)
>
> > > > > 1) Is a radio "required" equipment for a day-VFR flight?
> > > > > (which covers 99.99% of all Glider flying; at least in the USA)
>
> > > > > 2) How is the glider in question certified (standard vs.
> > > > > experimental)?
>
> > > > > What do the FARs say about items #1 and #2 above? *More importantly,
> > > > > what do they _not_ say about radios?
> > > > > (Hint: see 91.205, the sections of Part 91 that apply to the airspace
> > > > > you expect to fly in/through, and Part 43).
>
> > > > > --Noel
> > > > > P.S. *Don't forget this "gotcha": *Your weight and balance is
> > > > > technically affected by instrument changes in the cockpit. *See the
> > > > > FARs about how you can re-calculate your W&B based on an "equipment
> > > > > list" and the instrument location (i.e. Arm or Datum point).
> > > > > Insurance companies or FAA inspectors may not look kindly on an
> > > > > incorrect equipment list or a W&B that doesn't take new items - like
> > > > > radios - into account.
>
> > > > All,
>
> > > > Thanks for the responses. *To be clear, the radio would be a new 760
> > > > channel aircraft like the Microair 760 -approved by the FCC but not
> > > > TSOed.. *The glider is certified standard. *I know handhelds do not
> > > > require FAA approval but do require FCC approval and no one has ever
> > > > suggested that using them for communications during flight is not
> > > > legal. *I understand the need that the installation be signed off by a
> > > > FAA licensed mechanic to insure it is wired safely, mounted securely,
> > > > and W&B updated but otherwise I do not understand why TSO
> > > > certification should be required as the radio is not part of a minimum
> > > > equipment list.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > I think you are worrying far too much, maybe because you either
> > > cannot, or don't wish to, do the installation yourself.
>
> > > Many glider pilots would buy the radio of their choice, build the
> > > wiring harness, do the installation, update the w/b and then get the
> > > IA that does the next inspection to sign it off. *Of course you need
> > > to check that your IA is willing to do that.
>
> > > The more people you get involved with the radio selection,
> > > installation, and approval the more problems you will bring on
> > > yourself.
>
> > > Andy (GY)- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > Technically you can't install a panel mount radio yourself. *If you
> > get an AI to sign off your work, then HE did the install. *At least he
> > takes full responsibility for the job. *You would be considered to be
> > "working under his direct supervision."
>
> > I know some AI's who might do this, and others who would not (for good
> > reason).
>
> > BUT.........if it is a non TSO'd radio........you need a form 337 and
> > a "field approval". *Easy to get, if you "know the right people".
>
> > I know there a lots of "pilot installed" radios installed in gliders
> > without paperwork, or improper paperwork..........nobody seems to ever
> > check.
>
> > Cookie- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> Is there ever a situation where a TSO'ed radio can be installed
> without a 337 and the same/similar non-TSO'ed radio would required a
> 337? *Why?
>
> Brian

Why a 337 in either case? Because your A&P/IA decided to file a 337,
maybe because they know they FSDO prefers that. Maybe they know the
FSDO does not want to be bothered with a 337 for a dinky radio install
and they'll sign off on the install without one. A lot of this is
judgment. If a 337 is filed I personally doubt it should have anything
to do with the radio being installed being TSO'ed or not.

We are flogging a dead horse here. Again, this was a question about a
certificated (not experimental) glider -- so find an A&P/IA you trust
and just do what they say. They will know what the FSDO wants with a
337 (or not). And you can talk to them about doing the work under
their supervision if you want to try that route.


Darryl

[[email protected]]

On Mar 23, 10:28*pm, "noel.wade" > wrote:
> On Mar 23, 7:05*pm, "
>
> > wrote:
> > Technically you can't install a panel mount radio yourself. *If you
> > get an AI to sign off your work, then HE did the install. *At least he
> > takes full responsibility for the job. *You would be considered to be
> > "working under his direct supervision."
>
> > I know some AI's who might do this, and others who would not (for good
> > reason).
>
> > BUT.........if it is a non TSO'd radio........you need a form 337 and
> > a "field approval". *Easy to get, if you "know the right people".
>
> Your answer is inaccurate (or at least incomplete). *Check part 43 and
> its applicability to Experimental (or other-than-standard) aircraft.
> A lot of gliders are registered in this way and it changes a lot of
> the limits and requirements on what requires an A&P, an IA, a
> "repairman's certificate", or a Form 337.
>
> I know the FARs aren't _fun_ reading; but they _are_ readable. *An
> hour or two with a FAR/AIM manual is easier than several days of
> reading opinions on RAS!
>
> --Noel

I thought we were talking about non tso'd comm radio installed into a
certificated aircraft. Some people are under the misconception that
non tso'ed can't be used. (Check out Cumulus soaring for instance).

Yes, experimental is different.

Bottom line, I don't think there is any sailplane where as non tso'd
radio can't be used. Same for transponder.

Cookie

[150flivver]

On Mar 24, 6:20*am, "
> wrote:
>
> Bottom line, I don't think there is any sailplane where as non tso'd
> radio can't be used. *Same for transponder.
>
> Cookie

Transponders do need to meet TSO requirements as per 91.215:

(a) All airspace: U.S.-registered civil aircraft. For operations not
conducted under part 121 or 135 of this chapter, ATC transponder
equipment installed must meet the performance and environmental
requirements of any class of TSO-C74b (Mode A) or any class of TSO-
C74c (Mode A with altitude reporting capability) as appropriate, or
the appropriate class of TSO-C112 (Mode S).

[Andy[_1_]]

On Mar 23, 7:05*pm, "
> wrote:

>I know some AI's who might do this, and others who would not (for good
>reason).

It may take a while to build a relationship of trust with an A&P/IA
but it is well worth the effort for anyone who is competent to do
their own maintenance, particularly for airplanes.

Andy

[[email protected]]

On Mar 24, 10:29*am, 150flivver > wrote:
> On Mar 24, 6:20*am, "
>
> > wrote:
>
> > Bottom line, I don't think there is any sailplane where as non tso'd
> > radio can't be used. *Same for transponder.
>
> > Cookie
>
> Transponders do need to meet TSO requirements as per 91.215:
>
> (a) All airspace: U.S.-registered civil aircraft. For operations not
> conducted under part 121 or 135 of this chapter, ATC transponder
> equipment installed must meet the performance and environmental
> requirements of any class of TSO-C74b (Mode A) or any class of TSO-
> C74c (Mode A with altitude reporting capability) as appropriate, or
> the appropriate class of TSO-C112 (Mode S).

Interesting. Up until recently the TRIG transponder was not TSO.
They were offered for sale in the USA through various dealers. So
where did they get installed if they can't be used in US registered
civil aircraft?

I'll have to ask my boss again, but I believe the first TRIG we
installed was not TSO.

Cookie

[Darryl Ramm]

On Mar 24, 3:30*pm, "
> wrote:
> On Mar 24, 10:29*am, 150flivver > wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Mar 24, 6:20*am, "
>
> > > wrote:
>
> > > Bottom line, I don't think there is any sailplane where as non tso'd
> > > radio can't be used. *Same for transponder.
>
> > > Cookie
>
> > Transponders do need to meet TSO requirements as per 91.215:
>
> > (a) All airspace: U.S.-registered civil aircraft. For operations not
> > conducted under part 121 or 135 of this chapter, ATC transponder
> > equipment installed must meet the performance and environmental
> > requirements of any class of TSO-C74b (Mode A) or any class of TSO-
> > C74c (Mode A with altitude reporting capability) as appropriate, or
> > the appropriate class of TSO-C112 (Mode S).
>
> Interesting. *Up until recently the TRIG transponder was not TSO.
> They were offered for sale in the USA through various dealers. *So
> where did they get installed if they can't be used in US registered
> civil aircraft?
>
> I'll have to ask my boss again, but I believe the first TRIG we
> installed was not TSO.
>
> Cookie

The issue is just the "must meet the performance...." part.

That does not say must be a TSO approved part. It says it must meet
the performance requirement of a TSO.

My interpretation of this is if the A&P/IA signing off can determine
though other specifications/tests etc. that the device meets those TSO
requirements and they are comfortable signing off on the install then
you have yourself a valid install. Of course those people do so at
risk to their certificate, so not taken lightly. Again find yourself
an A&P/IA you trust and follow their advice.


Darryl

[[email protected]]

On Mar 25, 12:36*am, Darryl Ramm > wrote:
> On Mar 24, 3:30*pm, "
>
>
>
>
>
> > wrote:
> > On Mar 24, 10:29*am, 150flivver > wrote:
>
> > > On Mar 24, 6:20*am, "
>
> > > > wrote:
>
> > > > Bottom line, I don't think there is any sailplane where as non tso'd
> > > > radio can't be used. *Same for transponder.
>
> > > > Cookie
>
> > > Transponders do need to meet TSO requirements as per 91.215:
>
> > > (a) All airspace: U.S.-registered civil aircraft. For operations not
> > > conducted under part 121 or 135 of this chapter, ATC transponder
> > > equipment installed must meet the performance and environmental
> > > requirements of any class of TSO-C74b (Mode A) or any class of TSO-
> > > C74c (Mode A with altitude reporting capability) as appropriate, or
> > > the appropriate class of TSO-C112 (Mode S).
>
> > Interesting. *Up until recently the TRIG transponder was not TSO.
> > They were offered for sale in the USA through various dealers. *So
> > where did they get installed if they can't be used in US registered
> > civil aircraft?
>
> > I'll have to ask my boss again, but I believe the first TRIG we
> > installed was not TSO.
>
> > Cookie
>
> The issue is just the "must meet the performance...." part.
>
> That does not say must be a TSO approved part. It says it must meet
> the performance requirement of a TSO.
>
> My interpretation of this is if the A&P/IA signing off can determine
> though other specifications/tests etc. that the device meets those TSO
> requirements and they are comfortable signing off on the install then
> you have yourself a valid install. Of course those people do so at
> risk to their certificate, so not taken lightly. Again find yourself
> an A&P/IA you trust and follow their advice.
>
> Darryl- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Yes, that is also how I interpret the FAR.........it's a "performance
spec."

But I don't think it is up to the IA (only) to decide if the device
meets the spec. This is why my boss provides "aproved data" to the
FAA and they issue a "field approval". The approved data could be as
simple as the install manual. This manual would contain the mfr's
info which would show that the device performs to the FAR required
TSO .

My boss has a long standing relationship with the FAA. These
paperwork issues pose no problem. We usually have the paperwork
returned to us in 24 hours! (I've heard of guys doing "do it yourself
jobs" geting caught up in months of paperwork. One reason to pay the
extra $$ an hire a pro)

It's all paperwork......that way everyone involved has their butt
covered.

Bottom line, non TSO equipment CAN be installed, even
transponders...........

Cookie

[150flivver]

On Mar 25, 6:18*am, "
> wrote:
> On Mar 25, 12:36*am, Darryl Ramm > wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Mar 24, 3:30*pm, "
>
> > > wrote:
> > > On Mar 24, 10:29*am, 150flivver > wrote:
>
> > > > On Mar 24, 6:20*am, "
>
> > > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > Bottom line, I don't think there is any sailplane where as non tso'd
> > > > > radio can't be used. *Same for transponder.
>
> > > > > Cookie
>
> > > > Transponders do need to meet TSO requirements as per 91.215:
>
> > > > (a) All airspace: U.S.-registered civil aircraft. For operations not
> > > > conducted under part 121 or 135 of this chapter, ATC transponder
> > > > equipment installed must meet the performance and environmental
> > > > requirements of any class of TSO-C74b (Mode A) or any class of TSO-
> > > > C74c (Mode A with altitude reporting capability) as appropriate, or
> > > > the appropriate class of TSO-C112 (Mode S).
>
> > > Interesting. *Up until recently the TRIG transponder was not TSO.
> > > They were offered for sale in the USA through various dealers. *So
> > > where did they get installed if they can't be used in US registered
> > > civil aircraft?
>
> > > I'll have to ask my boss again, but I believe the first TRIG we
> > > installed was not TSO.
>
> > > Cookie
>
> > The issue is just the "must meet the performance...." part.
>
> > That does not say must be a TSO approved part. It says it must meet
> > the performance requirement of a TSO.
>
> > My interpretation of this is if the A&P/IA signing off can determine
> > though other specifications/tests etc. that the device meets those TSO
> > requirements and they are comfortable signing off on the install then
> > you have yourself a valid install. Of course those people do so at
> > risk to their certificate, so not taken lightly. Again find yourself
> > an A&P/IA you trust and follow their advice.
>
> > Darryl- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> Yes, that is also how I interpret the FAR.........it's a "performance
> spec."
>
> But I don't think it is up to the IA (only) to decide if the device
> meets the spec. *This is why my boss provides "aproved data" to the
> FAA and they issue a "field approval". * The approved data could be as
> simple as the install manual. *This manual would contain the mfr's
> info which would show that the device performs to the FAR required
> TSO .
>
> My boss has a long standing relationship with the FAA. *These
> paperwork issues pose no problem. *We usually have the paperwork
> returned to us in 24 hours! *(I've heard of guys doing "do it yourself
> jobs" geting caught up in months of paperwork. One reason to pay the
> extra $$ an hire a pro)
>
> It's all paperwork......that way everyone involved has their butt
> covered.
>
> Bottom line, non TSO equipment CAN be installed, even
> transponders...........
>
> Cookie

I disagree about the transponder. I'd be interested in seeing a
single Avionics Shop that would certify a non-TSOd transponder as
meeting all the specifications of the applicable TSO and certifying
their installation of that transponder as complying with 91.215. This
is not to say that some individual A&P or small shop might not pencil
whip the paperwork and install it. Again, this applies to
transponders, not comm radios, as the regs for Part 91 ops do not
require comm radios to meet a TSO. You need to review what "approved
data" is. It is not any manufacturer's specifications that you send
in to the FAA and call it approved. When you apply for a field
approval you are submitting data (unapproved) that the FAA looks at
and either approves for that single installation or disapproves.

[[email protected]]

On Mar 25, 10:58*am, 150flivver > wrote:
> On Mar 25, 6:18*am, "
>
>
>
>
>
> > wrote:
> > On Mar 25, 12:36*am, Darryl Ramm > wrote:
>
> > > On Mar 24, 3:30*pm, "
>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > On Mar 24, 10:29*am, 150flivver > wrote:
>
> > > > > On Mar 24, 6:20*am, "
>
> > > > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > > Bottom line, I don't think there is any sailplane where as non tso'd
> > > > > > radio can't be used. *Same for transponder.
>
> > > > > > Cookie
>
> > > > > Transponders do need to meet TSO requirements as per 91.215:
>
> > > > > (a) All airspace: U.S.-registered civil aircraft. For operations not
> > > > > conducted under part 121 or 135 of this chapter, ATC transponder
> > > > > equipment installed must meet the performance and environmental
> > > > > requirements of any class of TSO-C74b (Mode A) or any class of TSO-
> > > > > C74c (Mode A with altitude reporting capability) as appropriate, or
> > > > > the appropriate class of TSO-C112 (Mode S).
>
> > > > Interesting. *Up until recently the TRIG transponder was not TSO.
> > > > They were offered for sale in the USA through various dealers. *So
> > > > where did they get installed if they can't be used in US registered
> > > > civil aircraft?
>
> > > > I'll have to ask my boss again, but I believe the first TRIG we
> > > > installed was not TSO.
>
> > > > Cookie
>
> > > The issue is just the "must meet the performance...." part.
>
> > > That does not say must be a TSO approved part. It says it must meet
> > > the performance requirement of a TSO.
>
> > > My interpretation of this is if the A&P/IA signing off can determine
> > > though other specifications/tests etc. that the device meets those TSO
> > > requirements and they are comfortable signing off on the install then
> > > you have yourself a valid install. Of course those people do so at
> > > risk to their certificate, so not taken lightly. Again find yourself
> > > an A&P/IA you trust and follow their advice.
>
> > > Darryl- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > Yes, that is also how I interpret the FAR.........it's a "performance
> > spec."
>
> > But I don't think it is up to the IA (only) to decide if the device
> > meets the spec. *This is why my boss provides "aproved data" to the
> > FAA and they issue a "field approval". * The approved data could be as
> > simple as the install manual. *This manual would contain the mfr's
> > info which would show that the device performs to the FAR required
> > TSO .
>
> > My boss has a long standing relationship with the FAA. *These
> > paperwork issues pose no problem. *We usually have the paperwork
> > returned to us in 24 hours! *(I've heard of guys doing "do it yourself
> > jobs" geting caught up in months of paperwork. One reason to pay the
> > extra $$ an hire a pro)
>
> > It's all paperwork......that way everyone involved has their butt
> > covered.
>
> > Bottom line, non TSO equipment CAN be installed, even
> > transponders...........
>
> > Cookie
>
> I disagree about the transponder. *I'd be interested in seeing a
> single Avionics Shop that would certify a non-TSOd transponder as
> meeting all the specifications of the applicable TSO and certifying
> their installation of that transponder as complying with 91.215. *This
> is not to say that some individual A&P or small shop might not pencil
> whip the paperwork and install it. *Again, this applies to
> transponders, not comm radios, as the regs for Part 91 ops do not
> require comm radios to meet a TSO. *You need *to review what "approved
> data" is. *It is not any manufacturer's specifications that you send
> in to the FAA and call it approved. *When you apply for a field
> approval you are submitting data (unapproved) that the FAA looks at
> and either approves for that single installation or disapproves.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Ok so you disagree. BUT...... It is not the avionics shop which
"certifies" the (non tso) transponder, it is the FAA. That is why we
get a field approval. The shop does not decide what is "approved
data" the FAA decides that. We provide the data, the FAA evaluates
it. We are not talking about "pencil wipping" anything here.

Bottom line, a non- TSO transponder CAN be legally installed in a
glider, if you do the paperwork, (and the transponder can be shown to
comply with the TSO "standard".)

This is all a moot point now since TRIG is now TSO.............

Cookie