G-Meters

Legal and correct is good but that does not imply TSO. The "Landings"
site has a good FAR search engine. Go to

http://www.landings.com/evird.acgi$pass*76615480!_h-www.landings.com/_landings/pages/search/search_fars.html

and enter TSO for search and 91 for the part to search. Unless your
customer plans to operate other than under part 91.

I think you'll find that the only TSO requirements related to gliders
operating under CFR part 91 in US relate to transponders and ELTs.

Andy

This 16 September 1996 rec.aviation.owning post by Rod Farlee is the
best summary of 14 CFR 91 and TSO issues I know of:

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.a...cf7fe9b9e52da3

...The FCC specifies operational requirements for most
avionics. FAA TSO specs are environmental (temperature,
humidity, vibration, shock), and in some cases, such as
IFR GPS, are operational. A TSO has nothing to do with
the manufacturing process (this is the concern of the
FAA PMA, parts manufacturing approval, process).

Try to buy a TSO'd DME, VFR GPS, GPS/COM or intercom and
you'll find there are no TSOs for these items. Also
there is no requirement for TSOs for anything used for
FAR Part 91 operations except the transponder and ELT.

To install non-TSO'd equipment, there is no requirement
for an STC. A 377 "Major Alteration" form is needed
only if the installation requires structural
modifications to the airplane or fabrication of a
mounting tray. Otherwise, it requires only a logbook
entry by a radio shop or A&P with avionics inspection
authorization that the physical installation conforms
to AC 43 standard practices, and noting any change in
aircraft weight and balance.

There are some requirements for TSO'd equipment on
airliners in FAR 121, but there are many exceptions
(DME, entertainment, etc).

There is enough confusion among FAA FSDO inspectors
over the new PMA requirements that some of them seem
to be making up there own rules in this area, but
let's not make up our own!

- Rod Farlee

Thanks, and best regards to all

Bob K.

Earlier, Tim Mara wrote:

...glider pilots tend to be their own mechanics....
and are not allowed to be their own mechanics.....
and should (Should) at the very least have a
mechanic sign off any and all installations....even
in "experimental" aircraft.....unless to owner is
the builder.......

That's mostly true, but it suggests a falsehood:

In the vast majority of cases, the operating limitations of
amateur-built experimental aircraft are so written that anybeing can
repair or maintain them - not just the builder. Anyone. And not just
persons - the rules are so written so that your pet squirrel could also
do it. They just often have trouble remembering which way to turn the
nuts.

The only advantage of the repaircreature certificate conferred upon the
builder is that of being allowed to conduct the yearly Condition
Inspection. And that is a priviledge that I have argued has negative
value - but again, that's fodder for another thread.

And, yeah, not all of the OpLims for Racing or Exhibition Experimentals
are so written. So some of you racers and exhibitionists have to engage
the services of A&Ps (though one hopes not necessarily exhibitionist
A&Ps) for maintenance tasks. However, most such OpLims are written so
that you don't need an IA to do the inspection, so you don't have to go
searching for an exhibitionist IA, and don't need to cooperate if they
find you first.

In any case, the list of Operating Limitations that goes with the
Special Airworthiness certificate that allows the operation of your
Amateur-Built, Racing, or Exhibition Experimental will probably clearly
state what maintenance has to be done, and who has to do it. No mystery
there.

Thanks, and best regards to all

Bob K.
http://www.hpaircraft.com

Nice thread. I have no interest in G meters (have a built in one), but
found the information quite useful.

Keep up the questions.

Colin

I think one of the points Tim was refering to, but didn't quite make
was that unless a specific FAR (or possibly a TC Data Sheet) requires a
TSO'd instrument you are not required to install only TSO'd instruments
in certified aircraft.

I believe the FAR's require TSO'd Transponders and ELT and for certain
IFR Operatations TSO'd instruments are required.

However the G-meter is a great example. If anyone ever finds a TSO'd
G-meter please let me know. In fact if you can even find the TSO for
G-meters please let me know. As best as I can tell the FAA has never
bothered to write a TSO for G-meters. Why should they as there is no
FAR that requires TSO'd G-meters. Again please prove me wrong if you
can.

If only TSO'd instruments can be installed in certified aircraft then I
don't think it is possible to put legally put a G-meter in a certified
aircraft unless it is listed on the TC data sheet. But I can find no
FAR that says non-TSO'd instruments can not be installed.

Tim is right in that many FAA inspectors do not seem to understand
this anymore, and it is easy to find FAA inspectors will argue the
above with you.

Brian

BTW: I didn't get into who can install such equipment and what is the
required for paperwork to do so. This can be almost, if not a longer
discussion.

over the years the FAA has appeared to side step and change positions on
what is allowed by owners/builders of "experimental" and "amateur built"
aircraft and has to a large part even left some of these subjects in a
rather gray area, I suspect to limit their liability and their employees
liability...it appears they can and sometimes do seem to change positions
and read into or outside their publications as needed to suit.. I was quite
surprised when I asked the local FSDO a few years back a question of who
could do their own work and what they could do and got an "unofficial"
comment back that basically was "anyone with an experimental aircraft could
do their own work" (aside from conditional inspections) which did require
and A&P (not A&I) in all except when the owner was the builder an had the
authority for his own inspections as well...... This was quite a leap from
past conversations that required an A&P at least to do
installations/alterations .... I'm not so sure I'd bank on this answer even
today..or use in a court of law should that come ...In my own case, I always
suggest at least getting an A&P to make an entry in the logs and inspect any
changes as necessary and make wt/bal calculation entries in the logs...this
is my own CYA policy...as to what your local fed's may require....since they
all seem to work on a local policy......this I'll leave up to you....with my
normal disclaimers...
tim
Wings & Wheels
www.wingsandwheels.com


"Bob Kuykendall" wrote in message
oups.com...
Earlier, Tim Mara wrote:

...glider pilots tend to be their own mechanics....
and are not allowed to be their own mechanics.....
and should (Should) at the very least have a
mechanic sign off any and all installations....even
in "experimental" aircraft.....unless to owner is
the builder.......

That's mostly true, but it suggests a falsehood:

In the vast majority of cases, the operating limitations of
amateur-built experimental aircraft are so written that anybeing can
repair or maintain them - not just the builder. Anyone. And not just
persons - the rules are so written so that your pet squirrel could also
do it. They just often have trouble remembering which way to turn the
nuts.

The only advantage of the repaircreature certificate conferred upon the
builder is that of being allowed to conduct the yearly Condition
Inspection. And that is a priviledge that I have argued has negative
value - but again, that's fodder for another thread.

And, yeah, not all of the OpLims for Racing or Exhibition Experimentals
are so written. So some of you racers and exhibitionists have to engage
the services of A&Ps (though one hopes not necessarily exhibitionist
A&Ps) for maintenance tasks. However, most such OpLims are written so
that you don't need an IA to do the inspection, so you don't have to go
searching for an exhibitionist IA, and don't need to cooperate if they
find you first.

In any case, the list of Operating Limitations that goes with the
Special Airworthiness certificate that allows the operation of your
Amateur-Built, Racing, or Exhibition Experimental will probably clearly
state what maintenance has to be done, and who has to do it. No mystery
there.

Thanks, and best regards to all

Bob K.
http://www.hpaircraft.com

I would respectfully reply to this forum that we should not ask
questions that we really don't want to hear the answer for.



Larry





"Nyal Williams" wrote in
message :

We need a comprehensive article on this subject by
a qualified expert.

What about all flight computers and loggers?
What about GPS?
What about clocks -- those stick-on timers, etc?
What about gear warning systems?
What about our batteries?

Can there be any instrument on board, attached to the
panel or not, associated with flight for which a TSO
is unnecessary? And does it matter whether the glider
is experimental or standard?

This IS a can of worms, but is ignorance an excuse?

I'd not care if the instrument is certified, legal, or not.
I'd care if it works, if it suits my needs. I'd rather not mess legal issues
in it. What does a lawer knows about what works in a glider?
Hi Todd,

Good point. Many soaring instruments are not TSO'd. But I have a
customer who wants to install a G meter in his certificated Grob 103 and
wants an instruments that would be "legal" and correct. I think that
makes sense. I would want to do things "correctly" with my glider as
well - if possible.

Paul Remde