![]() |
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 |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I was always under the impression that an engine related STC had to be
approved for both the engine and the airframe on which it was mounted. I've seen this in applications like autogas STCs and STCs that bump a 150 hp O-320 to 160 hp. At a recent Cessna fly-in a saw something that made me look twice. It was a Powerflow exhaust system on a Cessna 170. I know that the Powerflow is STCed only for the Lycoming powered Cessnas (later model 172 & 177s). Even assuming that the 170 owner had an STC for the 180 hp Lycoming, wouldn't it be illegal to mount that exhaust on the 170 airframe? I can't find any sign that the Powerflow STC covers a 170. I've heard of people sneaking in a "not-quite-fully-approved" STC here and there, but this one sticks out like a sore thumb (literally!). Notes : I didn't see any "experimental" signs on the plane. I'm sure it wasn't a 172 taildragger conversion (obvious by the tail). Unfortunately, the owner wasn't around to ask. So, whaddya think? Can this be legal? John Galban=====N4BQ (PA28-180) |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]() |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
VOR/DME Approach Question | Chip Jones | Instrument Flight Rules | 47 | August 29th 04 05:03 AM |
A question on Airworthiness Inspection | Dave S | Home Built | 1 | August 10th 04 05:07 AM |
Phoenix AIM-54A (QUESTION) | Krztalizer | Naval Aviation | 10 | February 23rd 04 07:22 AM |
Question about Question 4488 | [email protected] | Instrument Flight Rules | 3 | October 27th 03 01:26 AM |
T Tail question | Paul Austin | Military Aviation | 7 | September 23rd 03 06:05 PM |