If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
You know you own an airplane when...
...you're actually glad to get the news that a battery box will cost you
ONLY $700. I remember getting the estimate for a stall indicator switch for my old Warrior, and just about dying when I heard it was $1300! We took it apart and discovered that it was a simple five dollar Rat Shack switch. We ended up finding a "serviceable" used certified part for "only" $375. I thought I'd won the lottery! :-) Seriously, though, you need to find an A&P with some sheet metal skills. (Preferably a grand champion home builder, like mine, but that's not really necessary to build a battery box.) He could craft you a replacement part that would better than original for far less than $700. And it would be perfectly legal. -- Jay Honeck Iowa City, IA Pathfinder N56993 www.AlexisParkInn.com "Your Aviation Destination" |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
You know you own an airplane when...
Get yourself one of those sealed batteries. No more mess, no more
labor, no box replacement. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
You know you own an airplane when...
Seriously, though, you need to find an A&P with some sheet metal
skills. (Preferably a grand champion home builder, like mine, but that's not really necessary to build a battery box.) He could craft you a replacement part that would better than original for far less than $700. And it would be perfectly legal. -- Jay Honeck Iowa City, IA Pathfinder N56993www.AlexisParkInn.com "Your Aviation Destination" Technically, an A&P cannot manufacture a replacement part such as an entire battery box. He could "repair" the original box. The owner, however, can manufacture a part for his airplane only and the A&P could install it provided he vouches for its airworthiness. What is meant by "manufacture" doesn't necessarily mean the owner has to design and fabricate the part, but he has to be significantly involved in some manner with its production whether that means supplying the design to a fabrication shop or actually bending and riveting the metal is not spelled out. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
You know you own an airplane when...
150flivver wrote:
Technically, an A&P cannot manufacture a replacement part such as an entire battery box. He could "repair" the original box. The owner, however, can manufacture a part for his airplane only and the A&P could install it provided he vouches for its airworthiness. What is meant by "manufacture" doesn't necessarily mean the owner has to design and fabricate the part, but he has to be significantly involved in some manner with its production whether that means supplying the design to a fabrication shop or actually bending and riveting the metal is not spelled out. Even if it's legally possible for me to manufacture a part and have my mechanic sign off on it, it's very likely he wouldn't do it due to the liability. GARA has been great for GA in general, but it has had the effect of redirecting the attention of ambulance-chasing attorneys to the guys who work on airplanes. You don't want to know how much my A&P pays for insurance now. In the mid 90's (not long ago, really) his rate was $30/hr. It's now $70, and he doesn't live any better. Personally, if I were an A&P, I wouldn't sign off on any hand-made parts if I knew I could get one from Cessna, et. al. Just too much risk. -Doug -- -------------------- Doug Vetter, ATP/CFI http://www.dvatp.com -------------------- |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
You know you own an airplane when...
Personally, if I were an A&P, I wouldn't sign off on any hand-made parts
if I knew I could get one from Cessna, et. al. Just too much risk. Thank goodness there are still A&Ps who don't think this way, or GA would be dead already. It's a friggin' battery box, Doug! My A&P/IA would take a 1-square- inch piece of your old battery box, use it as a starting point, and whip out a "repaired" version from parts laying around his shop in about an hour. Cost: *maybe* $100, probably less. An A&P who charges you $700 for a battery box, after telling you he can't "repair" it anymore, is no friend of GA. -- Jay Honeck Iowa City, IA Pathfinder N56993 www.AlexisParkInn.com "Your Aviation Destination" |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
You know you own an airplane when...
"Doug Vetter" wrote in message ... : Well, my Cessna was type certificated under CAR 3, so I doubt part 21 : applies (probably would to the "new" Cessnas). : : A few years back I went over this when we were refurbishing the airbox. : My mechanic told me that we weren't allowed to fabricate parts IF : there was an approved part available (presumably from any : manufacturer...PMA or OE). I remember this because he said an airbox : cost $1100 so we should make every attempt to save it (and we did). : : -Doug : That is 100% not true... |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
You know you own an airplane when...
"Doug Vetter" wrote in message ... We'd known for some time that our A&P/IA has been cleaning & repairing our 172's battery box every year. Usually it's just amounted to pulling the battery, rinsing the box to neutralize the acid and sanding / painting any areas where corrosion has gotten the better of it. The last few years, however, the aluminum has been getting thinner, the holes and cracks larger. snip All my partner (increasingly the miser) could say was "I could have built it myself and welded the seams, etc. Would have been 10X better looking & stronger than anything Cessna would build...and it would have cost me maybe $50. I mean, it's a BOX for crying out loud!" I agreed, but quickly pointed out that when I last checked we don't have any "EXPERIMENTAL" stickers on the airplane and the feds wouldn't take kindly to our "playing Cessna". snip -Doug If *any* part of the original box was re-usable (I think a platenut would qualify), your partner could have built a new box, included the single salvagable part, and gotten your IA to sign it off as a repair. That's how the repair game works for exhaust systems or mufflers. If they save a single slip joint or flange, it's a repair. Otherwise, you need to replace the entire unit. "Repairs" are far cheaper than new units, because the repair shop doesn't have to ammortize the cost of their STC, PMA, or whatever other overhead the manufacturer has. KB |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
You know you own an airplane when...
.stuff snipped That was a couple weeks ago. Just got the call. A new battery box for a 1971 Cessna 172L retails for (drumroll....) $1500. .other stuff snipped Doug, An increasing number of owners don't often go for new factory parts. With a wrench who knows the rules (and hence will sign off on things) there is an alternative approach. Many of us scour e-bay and the Internet searching out used parts. There are MANY after market PMA parts sources, however, it may take a bit of searching to find some things. Finally, you can fabricate your own parts. The rub is that you have to get a wrench to sign off on them. There are some rules around what you MAY need to provide as far as documentation. I saw your wrench's reply about the CAR3 cert. I don't believe that is true, however, it is HIS ticket. He can refuse to sign off if he believes that the tooth fairy has something to do with it (in other words, for any reason). The boneyards also are great sources. However, they can at times be wildly "optimistic" with their prices. That all said, I have been pleasantly shocked about a few factory parts I have purchased. For example, I purchased NEW wheel fairing bracket plates for $40 from a Piper parts distributor. I figured these would be $300 easy. I have also purchased NEW Piper electrical switches and other bits of stuff for what I would call "reasonable" prices. So, it is generally a good idea to check before making life difficult chasing alternative sources. The metal ram's horn yokes that replace my original plastic ones were $1290 each from Piper (and that does not include labor to swap them). I found ones with the plastic coating peeling off and bent control shafts for $150 (for the pair). After refinishing them, replacing their bent shafts with my straight ones, installing them (under my wrench's eye), and adding pre made leather wraps, I have them both installed. Total cost was about $500 (the leather wraps were $300 and completely optional - they looked great painted). BUT, I have about 25 hours of my labor in the deal. So, if you have the tools and skills to do the work, you have a cooperative wrench, and you are willing to do the research, this can all be quite affordable. Remember, your wrench has got to make a living. He/she cannot do so by waiting for you to source parts. In addition, they need to make some money on parts too. So, I have absolutely no problem paying the wrench for inspection, research, repair, overhaul, signoff, and even some profit money on parts that I bring in (insurance, rent, supplies, heat, etc. ain't free). I usually try to make their lives a bit easier by bringing in all the necessary paperwork (Work Orders, shop invoices, ADs, Service Bulletins and Letters, engineering/manufacturing data, installation sheets and guides, etc.). I also do the shipping and /or running around to get outside inspections/repairs/overhauls done that the wrench may not want to fool with. The trouble is, many wrenches have been soured by goofball owners who want to buy critical parts at a fly in swap meet (read: Oshkosh) and have their wrench put them in at $0 with no questions asked. They want to bring in a beat up prop that they bought for $200 and get it put on for an hour's labor. When the wrench says he would feel more comfortable sending it out to the prop shop for inspection and overhaul, the owner flips out at the additional cost. Go figure. Hope this helps, Mike |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
You know you own an airplane when...
("Vaughn Simon" wrote)
All my partner (increasingly the miser) could say was "I could have built it myself and welded the seams, etc. Would have been 10X better looking & stronger than anything Cessna would build...and it would have cost me maybe $50. I mean, it's a BOX for crying out loud!" I agreed, but quickly pointed out that when I last checked we don't have any "EXPERIMENTAL" stickers on the airplane and the feds wouldn't take kindly to our "playing Cessna". Actually, under one of the exceptions to Part 21, section 21.303 is seems that you (as the owner or operator) could have produced the part yourself WITHOUT slapping that "experimental" sticker on your plane. Here is a good discussion of that: http://150cessna.tripod.com/obrienonownermadeparts.html http://150cessna.tripod.com/obrienonownermadeparts.html VERY GOOD info he http://150cessna.tripod.com/parts.html (From the link) Let’s examine the rules governing the general privileges and limitations of a maintenance technician (or certificated mechanic as stated in FAR §65.81), and the rule governing a repair station’s privileges of certificates (FAR §145.51). Under both rules a technician or repair station may perform maintenance, preventative maintenance, and alterations on an aircraft, or appliances for which he is rated. Nowhere in either rule does it say that the maintenance technician or repair station can produce new parts! However, the maintenance regulations allow the manufacture of parts for repair (see number 11 in next question. A maintenance tech or repair station can make patch plates, reinforcement splices, and incorporate them into the repair of a part. But again, a, maintenance technician cannot make a brand new part for sale. Here are some answers to those earlier questions. Question: who can make a brand new part? Answer: FAA Advisory Circular 21-29, Detecting And Reporting Suspected Unapproved Parts, states that there are eleven ways that a new part can be made. They a 1. Parts Manufacturer Approval (PMA) 2. Technical Standard Order (TSO) 3. Type Certificate (TC) or Supplemental Type Certificate (STC) 4. TC with an Approved Production Inspection System (APIS) 5. Production Certificate (PC) 6. Bilateral Agreement 7. Any method acceptable to the Administrator. 8. Standard Parts (nuts and bolts) 9. Owner Produced Parts 10. Parts produced per STC instructions as part of an STC modification. 11. Fabricated by a qualified person in the course of a repair for the purpose of returning a TC product to service (which is not for sale as a separate part) under part 43. All this sounds like bureaucratic alphabet soup, but, of all the ways listed, "Owner Produced Parts" is the one most misunderstood. FAR §21.303(b)2 makes a provision for an aircraft owner or operator to produce parts for maintaining or altering his or her own product. Under this provision, the Owner Produced Part can only be installed in an aircraft owned or operated by that person and the Owner Produced Part cannot be produced for sale to others. Question: How is it that an aircraft owner can produce a part, but a skilled maintenance technician can’t? Answer: The responsibility follows the money. Most rules are written so the responsibility for an action is placed with the person who has the economic authority to make it happen. (The Golden Rule) Question: How does this owner-produced rule work? Does the owner have to make the part himself? Answer: The answers can be found in a FAA Memorandum dated August 5, 1993, in which the assistant Chief Counsel for Regulation makes the following interpretation: A part does not have to be solely produced by the owner to be considered an Owner Produced Part. The aircraft owner must participate in the manufacture of the part in at least one of five ways for it to be considered an Owner Produced Part. 1. The owner provides the manufacturer of the part with the design or performance data. 2. The owner provides the manufacturer of the part with the materials. 3. The owner provides the manufacturer with fabrication processes or assembly methods. 4. The owner provides the manufacturer of the part with quality control procedures. 5. The owner personally supervises the manufacture of the new part. As anyone can see, the discriminators for determining owner participation in a new part’s manufacture are very specific in the interpretation. Attachment (A) to the 1993 Memorandum clearly stipulates that the FAA would not construe the ordering of a part as participating in controlling the design, manufacture, or quality of a part. The key point is that the aircraft owner must participate in the part’s manufacture. Question: If the part is owner produced, is it also a FAA approved part? Can I install it in the owner’s aircraft? Answer: If the Owner Produced Part has all the characteristics of an approved part, is only installed on the owner’s aircraft, and is not for sale, it would be considered a FAA approved part. There are eleven ways (as listed earlier) to produce an FAA approved part. It doesn’t matter if a part is produced under the authority of a PMA, TC, or owner produced, it must have all the characteristics of an approved part. The four characteristics of an approved part a 1. The part must be properly designed. A properly designed part means that the part’s design is FAA approved. Depending on the complexity of the part, a FAA approved design will have the following elements: Drawings, specifications to define the part’s configuration and design features. Information on dimensions, materials, and processes necessary to define the structural strength of the product. Airworthiness limitations and instructions for continued airworthiness. Any other data necessary to allow by comparison, the determination of airworthiness of later products of the same type. 2. The part must be produced to conform to the design. A properly produced part means the part conforms to the FAA approved design. Usually a properly produced part will have the following characteristics: The part complies with all applicable structural requirements of its design. The materials and products conform to the specifications in the design. The part conforms to the drawings in the design. The manufacturing processes, construction, and assembly of the part conform to those specified in the design. 3. The part’s production should be properly documented. A properly documented part provides evidence that the part was produced under an FAA approval and memorializes the production of the part. 4. The part must be properly maintained. A properly maintained part means that the part is maintained in accordance with the rules prescribed under FAR Part 43. It is relatively easy for a part to meet the requirements of the August 5, 1993, Memorandum and qualify as an Owner Produced Part. The four characteristics of an approved part are like the four legs of a table with all four legs "equally sharing" the burden of an approved part. If one leg is missing, the table will fall over. In the same way, if any of the four characteristics of an approved part is missing, then the part may not be FAA approved. A good example is the case of the Cherokee 140 with the collapsed nose gear, mentioned and shown in the beginning of this article. The investigation determined the following: The original factory nose strut lower tube was pitted. The aircraft owner had a strut tube locally manufactured. A technician who knew of the part’s origin installed the strut tube. The strut tube failed during the first operation, resulting in $7,000+ in damages. Question: Was the strut-tube an Owner Produced Part? Answer: Yes, legally it was an Owner Produced Part. The aircraft owner did participate in the manufacture of the part. The owner supplied the manufacturer a design for the part. He did this by giving the manufacturer the old lower strut tube and told him to duplicate it. (Reverse engineer) Question: Was this a FAA approved part? Answer: No, the part was not approved because the owner did not provide the manufacturer with an approved design or its equivalent. The part was not approved because it did not conform to the material specifications prescribed in the approved design. The part failed during its first operation and didn’t last long enough for maintenance to be a factor. Question: Did the part producer (aircraft owner) or the maintenance technician who installed the strut-tube violate the FAR? Who should be held accountable? Answer: The answer is both! The maintenance technician violated the rule the moment that he signed the maintenance records and approved the aircraft to return to service with the knowledge the part he installed was unapproved, that is he apparently understood that the part was produced by the owner. The question he should have asked the owner was "how the part was produced so as to meet the performance rules of part 43.13 of the Federal Aviation Regulations." The aircraft owner violated the rule when he knowingly operated the aircraft with an unapproved and undocumented part installed. Question: This incident with the Cherokee 140 was wasteful, tragic, and dangerous. If the aircraft owner wanted to make an Owner Produced Part, what should he have done? Answer: The owner should have used the original manufacture’s prints and specifications (FAA approved design). It would have saved him time, money, and maybe his life. Reverse engineer to develop a design if you must, but do your research and submit the resulting design to the FAA for approval. Depending on the complexity of the part, reverse engineering may result in a new design. This design is the aircraft owner’s, not the original manufacturer’s, and is not automatically FAA approved. The finished part must still meet the requirements of the performance rules of section 43.13. Always contact your local FSDO for guidance. Produce the new part to conform to the approved design. Nothing more, nothing less. Stronger is not always better. The aircraft owner (part’s producer) or the technician who installs the part should document or memorialize the production of the part in the aircraft records. It would be wise if the installing technician requires the part producer (aircraft owner) to memorialize the parts production in the aircraft records with a statement worded in a similar form as the one below, on this page. After the part producer memorializes its production. The installing technician must make a maintenance record entry indicating that he or she installed the part. After all, installing the Owner Produced Part is a maintenance function. Aircraft owners can perform preventative maintenance, but not maintenance. Eliminating the Confusion: A maintenance technician can repair a part, but sometimes the distinction between repairing a part and producing a brand new part is hard to determine. The circumstances surrounding the repair, the part’s complexity, availability of manufacturer’s data, and industry practices all are determining factors. For a lack of a better term I call making this determination the "Test of Reasonableness." Example Scenario: An aircraft wing is damaged. The damaged parts include a wing rib, a 24-inch stringer, and wing skin. The aircraft Structural Repair Manual provides material specifications for the skin and stringer. A new wing rib is purchased from the aircraft manufacturer and the technician fabricates a stringer and wing skin using the damaged parts as a template. The technician installs these parts and repairs the wing in accordance with the manufacturer’s instructions. Is this a repair or did the technician produce a new part? The stringer and wing skin do have a part number in the parts catalog for that aircraft, so let’s consider the following facts: The material specifications were published and readily available. The parts were simple and the fabrication processes for the parts involved common tools, skills, and standard industry practices. Templates for the reliable reproduction of the parts were available (Design). The parts were incorporated into a repair in accordance with the manufacturer’s instructions. In this case, the "Test of Reasonableness" would determine this to be considered a repair, even though the technician did fabricate a stringer and skin. Reality Check: Maintenance technicians must face a cold hard fact. Aircraft owners can make parts, but they cannot install them. Installing Owner Produced Parts is a maintenance function and only technicians can do that. That makes technicians the "gatekeepers" for parts and guardians against the introduction of substandard and unapproved parts into the fleet. Under this rule the responsibility is the technician’s to determine airworthiness before returning the product to service. There is no one else to shift the burden of blame to. The technician’s name is on the blame line. Owner Produced Parts can be summarized as follows: Under the Federal aviation regulations, aircraft owners can produce a brand new part for their aircraft; technicians and repair stations can’t. For a part to be considered "owner produced," the owner must have participated in its manufacture in at least one of the five ways prescribed in the 1993, Memorandum. An Owner Produced Part must have all four characteristics of an approved part before it is considered a FAA approved part and eligible for installation. Sometimes the distinction between producing a new part and making a repair is hard to determine. When in doubt call the local FSDO and ask for guidance. Maintenance technicians are the gatekeepers for parts entering service in the fleet. Technicians bear the lion’s share of the responsibility. The technician’s name is on the blame line. The availability of parts is a constant problem with our aging general aviation fleet. As time passes, Owner Produced Parts may be the only alternative available for maintaining some of it. With the passage of time, technicians are going to be increasingly forced to face the challenge of determining the airworthiness of Owner Produced Parts. There are five points summarized here. Remember the five and stay alive! (Montblack here) After much reading, my take is: 1. Look at another similar Cessna battery box 2. Measure it 3. Research the part 4. Supply the proper dimensions & material to the builder 5. Inspect their work 6. Once completed, hand it to your wrench 7. Ask him/her to install the Owner Produced Part 8. Note the "maintenance" in your logbook $150 to get the part made - and installed? Montblack |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
You know you own an airplane when...
Jay Honeck wrote:
An A&P who charges you $700 for a battery box, after telling you he can't "repair" it anymore, is no friend of GA. I saw the old battery box today, and its condition really surprised me. I'm amazed the battery stayed with the airplane, as two corners were nearly completely rotted out and several cracks were forming between the weak spots. It definitely needed to be replaced. Say what you want about my A&P, but I've been flying behind his work for almost 20 years now and have come to appreciate his attention to detail and safety. While it may be legally possible to bend the rules and fabricate a new box using a "1-square-inch piece" to represent the existing box, that's certainly in violation of the spirit of the rule and does represent a significant liability risk to the mechanic. -Doug -- -------------------- Doug Vetter, ATP/CFI http://www.dvatp.com -------------------- |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
What Airplane Is This? | John A. Weeks III | General Aviation | 18 | July 10th 06 04:07 AM |
Why Buy and Airplane? | Jim Burns | Owning | 7 | April 12th 06 05:30 PM |
My airplane - NO MY airplane.... | Casey Wilson | Piloting | 5 | September 30th 05 06:41 PM |
Which airplane? | Ghazan Haider | Owning | 18 | September 2nd 05 03:25 AM |
What was that airplane? | [email protected] | Piloting | 22 | May 3rd 04 02:07 PM |