How to complete a 337?

[Michael Horowitz]

Can someone point me to a reference describing how to complete the
"Description of Work Accomplished" section of a 337? I have seen maybe
a dozen completed 337s and they appear to be all over the map!

What I'm trying to do is draft a planning document describing what and
how I'm going to do my repairs to my fuselage and show not that my IA
has approved the work, but has OKed my approach. The same wording
woujld appear in the 337 when the work is accomplished.

I'm having to do this because there are large time spans between when
my IA OKs my approach and when the work is done and when a 337 is
generated. I think it would be a good idea to document that my IA had
approved my approach. - Mike

[Michael Horowitz]

Found it - AC 43-9-1e


On Sat, 22 Aug 2009 06:53:20 -0400, Michael Horowitz
> wrote:

>Can someone point me to a reference describing how to complete the
>"Description of Work Accomplished" section of a 337? I have seen maybe
>a dozen completed 337s and they appear to be all over the map!
>
>What I'm trying to do is draft a planning document describing what and
>how I'm going to do my repairs to my fuselage and show not that my IA
>has approved the work, but has OKed my approach. The same wording
>woujld appear in the 337 when the work is accomplished.
>
>I'm having to do this because there are large time spans between when
>my IA OKs my approach and when the work is done and when a 337 is
>generated. I think it would be a good idea to document that my IA had
>approved my approach. - Mike

[Ron]

>
> >I'm having to do this because there are large time spans between when
> >my IA OKs my approach and when the work is done and when a 337 is
> >generated. I think itwould be a good idea to document that my IA had
> >approved my approach. - Mike

Is this a homebuilt? No 337 required, No IA necessary. You do
have
to note substantial changes to the FAA however.

[Peter Dohm]

"Ron" > wrote in message
...
>
>>
>> >I'm having to do this because there are large time spans between when
>> >my IA OKs my approach and when the work is done and when a 337 is
>> >generated. I think itwould be a good idea to document that my IA had
>> >approved my approach. - Mike
>
> Is this a homebuilt? No 337 required, No IA necessary. You do
> have
> to note substantial changes to the FAA however.

I was thinking of that as well and you are right--with the addition that a
certified mechanic, who need not also hold an IA, is requered to sign of the
work if the owner is not the original builderof record.

[Bob Kuykendall]

On Aug 22, 3:04*pm, Ron > wrote:

> Is this a homebuilt? *

I think Michael is working on a Taylorcraft.

Thanks, Bob K.

[Peter Dohm]

"Bryan Martin" > wrote in message
...
> In article >,
> "Peter Dohm" > wrote:
>
>> "Ron" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> >
>> >>
>> >> >I'm having to do this because there are large time spans between when
>> >> >my IA OKs my approach and when the work is done and when a 337 is
>> >> >generated. I think itwould be a good idea to document that my IA had
>> >> >approved my approach. - Mike
>> >
>> > Is this a homebuilt? No 337 required, No IA necessary. You do
>> > have
>> > to note substantial changes to the FAA however.
>>
>> I was thinking of that as well and you are right--with the addition that
>> a
>> certified mechanic, who need not also hold an IA, is requered to sign of
>> the
>> work if the owner is not the original builderof record.
>
> You don't need an A & P to sign off any changes or repairs to a
> homebuilt, even if you are not the original builder. Anyone can work on
> a homebuilt airplane. An A & P is only needed to sign off the annual
> condition inspection.
>
> --
> Bryan Martin
> N61BM, CH 601 XL, Ram Subaru, Stratus redrive.

In this case, I am glad to stand corrected.

Peter

[jan olieslagers[_2_]]

Michael Horowitz schreef:
> Found it - AC 43-9-1e
>
>
> On Sat, 22 Aug 2009 06:53:20 -0400, Michael Horowitz
> > wrote:
>
>> Can someone point me to a reference describing how to complete the
>> "Description of Work Accomplished" section of a 337? I have seen maybe
>> a dozen completed 337s and they appear to be all over the map!

You meaning a Cessna Skymaster or what? I never knew that to be
homebuilt, neither from plans or kits?

[Morgans[_7_]]

"jan olieslagers" > wrote in message
...
> Michael Horowitz schreef:
>> Found it - AC 43-9-1e
>>
>>
>> On Sat, 22 Aug 2009 06:53:20 -0400, Michael Horowitz
>> > wrote:
>>
>>> Can someone point me to a reference describing how to complete the
>>> "Description of Work Accomplished" section of a 337? I have seen maybe
>>> a dozen completed 337s and they appear to be all over the map!
>
> You meaning a Cessna Skymaster or what? I never knew that to be homebuilt,
> neither from plans or kits?

In case you are serious about this question, I will attempt to shed light on
the subject. If you are joking, sorry; it went over my head! <g>

I recall you are not from the United States, and may be unaware of the FAA
forms system.

A form number 337 is what you are required to fill out when certain types of
changes are made to any certified aircraft. There are particular ways the
form must be completed and submitted, so the change is registered and found
to be an acceptable change.

The point was made in a previous post that the form 337 does not apply to a
homebuilt aircraft, since they are not certified.

I hope that help clear the muddy water. ;-)
--
Jim in NC

[Stu Fields]

"Morgans" > wrote in message
...
>
> "jan olieslagers" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Michael Horowitz schreef:
>>> Found it - AC 43-9-1e
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, 22 Aug 2009 06:53:20 -0400, Michael Horowitz
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>> Can someone point me to a reference describing how to complete the
>>>> "Description of Work Accomplished" section of a 337? I have seen maybe
>>>> a dozen completed 337s and they appear to be all over the map!
>>
>> You meaning a Cessna Skymaster or what? I never knew that to be
>> homebuilt, neither from plans or kits?
>
> In case you are serious about this question, I will attempt to shed light
> on the subject. If you are joking, sorry; it went over my head! <g>
>
> I recall you are not from the United States, and may be unaware of the FAA
> forms system.
>
> A form number 337 is what you are required to fill out when certain types
> of changes are made to any certified aircraft. There are particular ways
> the form must be completed and submitted, so the change is registered and
> found to be an acceptable change.
>
> The point was made in a previous post that the form 337 does not apply to
> a homebuilt aircraft, since they are not certified.
>
> I hope that help clear the muddy water. ;-)
> --
> Jim in NC

The best way to deal with a 337, is to immediately put your certified ship
up for sale and build an experimental homebuilt aircraft. A lot of your
expensive problems go away. By building it you become the manufacturer and
all inspections can be performed by you. No one is out there telling you to
fill out a form for modifications thay you deem needed or to make you craft
better.

Stu Fields

[Peter Dohm]

"Morgans" > wrote in message
...
>
> "jan olieslagers" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Michael Horowitz schreef:
>>> Found it - AC 43-9-1e
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, 22 Aug 2009 06:53:20 -0400, Michael Horowitz
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>> Can someone point me to a reference describing how to complete the
>>>> "Description of Work Accomplished" section of a 337? I have seen maybe
>>>> a dozen completed 337s and they appear to be all over the map!
>>
>> You meaning a Cessna Skymaster or what? I never knew that to be
>> homebuilt, neither from plans or kits?
>
> In case you are serious about this question, I will attempt to shed light
> on the subject. If you are joking, sorry; it went over my head! <g>
>
> I recall you are not from the United States, and may be unaware of the FAA
> forms system.
>
> A form number 337 is what you are required to fill out when certain types
> of changes are made to any certified aircraft. There are particular ways
> the form must be completed and submitted, so the change is registered and
> found to be an acceptable change.
>
> The point was made in a previous post that the form 337 does not apply to
> a homebuilt aircraft, since they are not certified.
>
> I hope that help clear the muddy water. ;-)
> --
> Jim in NC

To add just a little more, and with the understanding that I am a former
avionics technician and have never been a mechanic--much less an IA--my
understanding is that a form 337 is a return to service following a major
repair or a modification that was not sufficient to require an STC. In
effect, the modification or repair should not alter the original operating
limitations of the aircraft, which would require that issuance of an STC;
but may alter the weight and balance calculations for the specific aircraft.

I hope this helps.

Peter

[Ron]

On Aug 23, 8:53*pm, "Peter Dohm" > wrote:

> To add just a little more, and with the understanding that I am a former
> avionics technician and have never been a mechanic--much less an IA--my
> understanding is that a form 337 is a return to service following a major
> repair or a modification that was not sufficient to require an STC.

A 337 is required even if there is an STC. If the change is a major
modification/alteration, effectively that it's not in compliance with
the original certificated design, then you need the 337. Now the
approved data may be a STC or it could be some other "data
acceptable to the administrator."

> *In
> effect, the modification or repair should not alter the original operating
> limitations of the aircraft, which would require that issuance of an STC;
> but may alter the weight and balance calculations for the specific aircraft.

A change in the empty weight / balance isn't a major modification
by the way. Only, those things that alter the envelope limits.

You might want to peruse Part 43 appendix A as to what
is considered "major."

[jan olieslagers[_2_]]

Morgans schreef:

> "jan olieslagers" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Michael Horowitz schreef:

>>>> Can someone point me to a reference describing how to complete the
>>>> "Description of Work Accomplished" section of a 337? I have seen maybe
>>>> a dozen completed 337s and they appear to be all over the map!
>>
>> You meaning a Cessna Skymaster or what? I never knew that to be
>> homebuilt, neither from plans or kits?
>
> In case you are serious about this question, I will attempt to shed
> light on the subject. If you are joking, sorry; it went over my head! <g>
>
> I recall you are not from the United States, and may be unaware of the
> FAA forms system.
>

Not only am I a non-US-an indeed, and thus not aware of whatever
document/procedure issued/required by whatever US administation; on top
of being non-aware I am not interested, and should be grateful for being
informed if posts are not about homebuilding in general but just limited
to one particular country.

There seems a general tendency for all the rec.aviation groups to be
considered US-only by US-ans ; somewhat frustrating to people who like
to consider the US of A just one country (though a big and mighty and
beautiful one *) in one big world.

And yes I know the vast majority of participants ARE from the US - that
other great country of homebuilding, France, doesn't much like using
foreign languages but then neither do the US-ns themselves...

Please let's not start any political discussions, may I only request
clear postings. Thanks to all.

KA

*and one to which we are deeply indebted: in the 20th century, we needed
the USA to get us out of deep ****. Plus the Marshall plan plus the cold
war, both helped us to avoid communist revolutions. Thank you indeed,
Uncle Sam!