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
|
|||
|
|||
PMA Questions
Mike Granby wrote:
Indeed. But is there such a thing as an STC for a minor modification? Unless I'm misunderstanding something, you're talking about two different things. A 337 is for a major repair or alteration as defined in 43 Appendix A. An STC is issued for a *design* modification. So yes, you can be issued an STC for a minor design modification. 337's and STC's aren't necessarily tied together, although they often are. Is there any situation in which a vendor might choose to use an STC to get a part on to his PMA, but where the existance of the STC does not per se render the change major and thus in need of a 337? I don't think it works that way. An STC isn't something you choose to use, it's either required or not. PMA parts, as far as I can think, have nothing to do with it. Just the uneducated opinion of an non-experienced A&P who lets other people worry about this stuff. Actually, I went to a conference on aircraft certification last year and can't remember any of it. Should have taken notes. |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
PMA Questions
Unless I'm misunderstanding something, you're talking about two different things. A 337 is for a major repair or alteration as defined in 43 Appendix A. An STC is issued for a *design* modification. So yes, you can be issued an STC for a minor design modification. 337's and STC's aren't necessarily tied together, although they often are.
Well, as a for-instance, suppose I got tired of paying $700 for a five dollar microswitch, and decided that Cessna's slit-in-the-wing was a perfectly adequate stall warning. When my Archer's stall warning switch goes TU, I want to replace it ("augment it") with the slit-in-the-wing (and while I'm at it, put in a five dollar microswitch from Radio Shack in the original place as a backup. 3777? STC? Jose -- You can choose whom to befriend, but you cannot choose whom to love. for Email, make the obvious change in the address. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
PMA Questions
Yes, the SOROS Cessna replacement vent tubes are an example of this.
This is a minor alteration not needing a 337 form (Major Alteration or Repair), but incorporating an STC in constrast to a PMA to get parts manufacturing approval. On 6 Dec 2005 15:18:23 -0800, "Mike Granby" wrote: Indeed. But is there such a thing as an STC for a minor modification? Is there any situation in which a vendor might choose to use an STC to get a part on to his PMA, but where the existance of the STC does not per se render the change major and thus in need of a 337? |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
PMA Questions
"Jose" wrote in message ... Unless I'm misunderstanding something, you're talking about two different things. A 337 is for a major repair or alteration as defined in 43 Appendix A. An STC is issued for a *design* modification. So yes, you can be issued an STC for a minor design modification. 337's and STC's aren't necessarily tied together, although they often are. Well, as a for-instance, suppose I got tired of paying $700 for a five dollar microswitch, and decided that Cessna's slit-in-the-wing was a perfectly adequate stall warning. When my Archer's stall warning switch goes TU, I want to replace it ("augment it") with the slit-in-the-wing (and while I'm at it, put in a five dollar microswitch from Radio Shack in the original place as a backup. 3777? STC? Jose -- You can choose whom to befriend, but you cannot choose whom to love. for Email, make the obvious change in the address. You could engineer up a repair and submit it to a DER for approval... |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
PMA Questions
PMA parts, as far as I can think, have nothing to do with it. The FAA document on PMAs says there are two ways of getting a installation included on the PMA's eligibility list. One is to make the part identical to an original part, and the other is to have an STC for the installation of that part. Hence, I was wondering if this PMA requirement resulted in people getting STCs for changes that would not otherwise require them. |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
PMA Questions
This is a minor alteration not needing a 337 form (Major Alteration or Repair), but incorporating an STC Interesting! I'll dig into that. I did notice that AC21-40, which is only an advisory circular and thus not regulation per se, says that "STC's are not issued for minor changes or for approval of replacement and modification parts meeting the provisions of 14 CFR part 21, section 21.303", though, so where does that leave us??? |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
PMA Questions
From Soros website... Q. How is the Ventube installation recorded? A. If installed by an AI, they can make the appropriate aircraft log book entry and complete the FAA Form 337. If the owner installs the Ventube, he can make the entry in the aircraft log book and have his AI sign off and complete the FAA Form 337 at the next annual." Quite where they're getting this from, I'm not sure! I thought 337's were due 48 hours from return-to-service? |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
PMA Questions
"Why, that was there when I bought the airplane..."
Jim "Jose" wrote in message ... Unless I'm misunderstanding something, you're talking about two different things. A 337 is for a major repair or alteration as defined in 43 Appendix A. An STC is issued for a *design* modification. So yes, you can be issued an STC for a minor design modification. 337's and STC's aren't necessarily tied together, although they often are. Well, as a for-instance, suppose I got tired of paying $700 for a five dollar microswitch, and decided that Cessna's slit-in-the-wing was a perfectly adequate stall warning. When my Archer's stall warning switch goes TU, I want to replace it ("augment it") with the slit-in-the-wing (and while I'm at it, put in a five dollar microswitch from Radio Shack in the original place as a backup. 3777? STC? |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
PMA Questions
He's out of his tree. There are now a couple of different companies
that make replacement blades for the more popular Bell helicopters - completely PMA'd parts. But you are still going to need a heck of an STC in order to mount one on your Cessna 172. G If I just had to guess, I would say that where he got confused is that if you are replacing a part on your aircraft with a part that is a PMA'd *replacement*, then you don't need an STC. But that's because it's already covered by the TC (or by a previous STC). The PMA says, in effect, you can treat these parts as APPROVED parts (including approved replacement parts). Doesn't necessarily mean you can stick it on your plane anywhere you feel like. |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
PMA Questions
RST Engineering wrote: "Why, that was there when I bought the airplane..." Now get that **** out of there and put in the right part. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Homebuilt Aircraft Frequently Asked Questions List (FAQ) | Ron Wanttaja | Home Built | 0 | December 2nd 04 07:00 AM |
Homebuilt Aircraft Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) | Ron Wanttaja | Home Built | 0 | October 1st 04 02:31 PM |
Homebuilt Aircraft Frequently Asked Questions List (FAQ) | Ron Wanttaja | Home Built | 0 | September 2nd 04 05:15 AM |
Homebuilt Aircraft Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) | Ron Wanttaja | Home Built | 0 | June 2nd 04 07:17 AM |
Homebuilt Aircraft Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) | Ron Wanttaja | Home Built | 0 | April 5th 04 03:04 PM |