Pawnee Tost 337 completed after the fall of 2003?

CUT-
It appears the FAA is going to stop field approvals
for tow hooks.
Their latest statement,' there must be an STC or be
listed in the Type
Certification Data Sheet for the aircraft'
CUT-

Our mechanic has just encountered this situation, specifically
a US registered Pawnee that has not towed before.
He has been told he needs a STC. Has anyone come up
with a work-around for this?

Earlier, Stewart Kissel wrote:

...Our mechanic has just encountered this
situation, specifically a US registered Pawnee
that has not towed before. He has been told
he needs a STC. Has anyone come up with
a work-around for this?

Air Sailing has recently managed to certify their Pawnee
for towing, and indeed it wasn't easy. You might contact
Jim Hayes of Air Sailing for some guidance.

Bob K.

At 01:18 13 May 2004, Bob Kuykendall wrote:
Earlier, Stewart Kissel wrote:

...Our mechanic has just encountered this
situation, specifically a US registered Pawnee
that has not towed before. He has been told
he needs a STC. Has anyone come up with
a work-around for this?

Air Sailing has recently managed to certify their Pawnee
for towing, and indeed it wasn't easy. You might contact
Jim Hayes of Air Sailing for some guidance.

Bob K.

Thanks for the HU Bob, I sent an email to Jim and Rick
W. to glean information. I see from reading their
newsletter it took them 5 months to get through the
approval process. I suppose I could make some snide
comment at this point about our tax dollars at work,
but that would be counter-productive

not true...........at least it is not an official FAA policy.....
FSDO's can and most still will do field approvals......however, some FSDO's
won't, that's a local decision.....if your local FSDO won't you can check
with other FSDO's nearby who might.the Local FSDO won't necessarily like
this and then might agree to do the approval.....use some diplomacy and you
should get cooperation....
tim
"Stewart Kissel" wrote in
message ...
CUT-
It appears the FAA is going to stop field approvals
for tow hooks.
Their latest statement,' there must be an STC or be
listed in the Type
Certification Data Sheet for the aircraft'
CUT-

Our mechanic has just encountered this situation, specifically
a US registered Pawnee that has not towed before.
He has been told he needs a STC. Has anyone come up
with a work-around for this?

I am currently working this problem in Massachusetts and have some =
thoughts to share with anyone doing the same. If the aircraft has never =
towed before - I strongly recomend starting out with the standard =
Schweizer hook and not the Tost unit. This is essential if it's a =
Restricted Pawnee. The Tost unit requires the FAA ASI (the guy who OKs =
the 337) to contact "FAA Engineering" - and that creates a host of =
problems that you don't want to complicate the change in use.=20

Pleae feel free to contact me off net.

roy

Yep, we got a Restricted Pawnee that has never towed.
And I talked the owner into the safer and more expensive
Tost unit. And the FSDO says no field approval, period.
I got some good information from the AirSailing group
who have had two Pawneess approved recently, and waiting
to hear back from Stephen Northcraft in regards to
the SSA liaison to the FAA on this subject.





At 16:30 13 May 2004, Roy Bourgeois wrote:
I am currently working this problem in Massachusetts
and have some =
thoughts to share with anyone doing the same. If the
aircraft has never =
towed before - I strongly recomend starting out with
the standard =
Schweizer hook and not the Tost unit. This is essential
if it's a =
Restricted Pawnee. The Tost unit requires the FAA
ASI (the guy who OKs =
the 337) to contact 'FAA Engineering' - and that creates
a host of =
problems that you don't want to complicate the change
in use.=20

Pleae feel free to contact me off net.

roy

Roy B.-

I sent you a couple of emails using my hotmail account,
you might check your spam filter if they don't show
up in your inbox.




At 19:30 13 May 2004, Stewart Kissel wrote:
Yep, we got a Restricted Pawnee that has never towed.
And I talked the owner into the safer and more expensive
Tost unit. And the FSDO says no field approval, period.
I got some good information from the AirSailing group
who have had two Pawneess approved recently, and waiting
to hear back from Stephen Northcraft in regards to
the SSA liaison to the FAA on this subject.





At 16:30 13 May 2004, Roy Bourgeois wrote:
I am currently working this problem in Massachusetts
and have some =
thoughts to share with anyone doing the same. If the
aircraft has never =
towed before - I strongly recomend starting out with
the standard =
Schweizer hook and not the Tost unit. This is essential
if it's a =
Restricted Pawnee. The Tost unit requires the FAA
ASI (the guy who OKs =
the 337) to contact 'FAA Engineering' - and that creates
a host of =
problems that you don't want to complicate the change
in use.=20

Pleae feel free to contact me off net.

roy

Very simple. Write your congressman. Be tactful,
but explain that there are hundreds of Pawnees around
the country safely towing gliders. Also explain that
the FAA is hindering commerce. It's much easier to
start at the top than to try to slug your way up the
chain of command. Just my $.02 worth, but it does
work.



At 19:30 13 May 2004, Stewart Kissel wrote:
Yep, we got a Restricted Pawnee that has never towed.
And I talked the owner into the safer and more expensive
Tost unit. And the FSDO says no field approval, period.
I got some good information from the AirSailing group
who have had two Pawneess approved recently, and waiting
to hear back from Stephen Northcraft in regards to
the SSA liaison to the FAA on this subject.





At 16:30 13 May 2004, Roy Bourgeois wrote:
I am currently working this problem in Massachusetts
and have some =
thoughts to share with anyone doing the same. If the
aircraft has never =
towed before - I strongly recomend starting out with
the standard =
Schweizer hook and not the Tost unit. This is essential
if it's a =
Restricted Pawnee. The Tost unit requires the FAA
ASI (the guy who OKs =
the 337) to contact 'FAA Engineering' - and that creates
a host of =
problems that you don't want to complicate the change
in use.=20

Pleae feel free to contact me off net.

roy

Bob C wrote in message ...
Very simple. Write your congressman.


I would bet good money it's much faster just to hire a structures DER
and get an 8110-3 form that FAA approves the data for the
installation. Then pay your local A&P to install it and then pay your
local IA to inspect the installation and approve the 337 and it's
done.

No need to bother the local FSDO at all.

FAA approved (upside-down, right side up, Tost, Schweizer,
whatever)for the cost of a DER, A&P and IA. If you want only to save
money and have lots of time to wait while new policy is written and
approved, maybe you could call your congressman.

Also, a DER-approved 8110-3 should pave the way for approval for our
friends across the various ponds that have bi-laterals with the US
FAA, and there are many of those.

DER list is available on the web:

http://www.faa.gov/certification/air...RDirectory.pdf

Lots of other guidance and policy is on the web as well, the 8300.10,
Volume 1 has a chart that shows exactly what alterations the local
FSDO can approve and what they cannot. STC process sounds exciting,
but is merely time-consuming and expensive, and eventually profitable
if you sell your STC'd (e.g. Pawnee mirror installation) to other
clubs or operators.

Jim

Update-

Jim Hays was a huge help to us, he is providing the
documents needed to take a Restricted Pawnee back to
Standard. In theory once this has occured, some FSDO's
may approve the TOST 337. There is a little more to
it then that, but that is the basic concept. Jim has
put a huge amount of time in pioneering this road.