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.