Waiting on STC to be shipped

drjcustis said:
Forgive me if I’m wrong, I’m sure those with greater understanding will weigh in.

The part of this story that struck me is that the mechanic is holding the plane hostage. A mechanic cannot hold a plane hostage. If he has completed the annual, he needs to sign it off with a list of discrepancies. The missing STC in this case. It is then up to the POC to decide if the plane is airworthy or do what is necessary to resolve the issue.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
..... You're joking, right?

Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk
 
ircphoenix said:
..... You're joking, right?

Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Again, humble PP and owner.

That’s how I understand it.

Let the experts weigh in. I’m following.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Owner of a certificated airplane? Read the log entry your IA signs after an annual.
 
Lots of responses- thank you!
The battery was relocated before I bought it. Who knows who did it (well I do, and it wasnt me or anyone directed by me), but there is no paperwork and it was never documented. I believe someone looked at what needed to be done, built a box out of AL, and did it and moved on with their life. The previous mechanics, pre-buy and me (I am the biggest idiot out of those 3), either didnt check or didnt know or didnt care. This shop I am using, whom I will never ever use again even at great pain to me, found the modification and no supporting documentation. Their story is that they are waiting on the kit from the STC holder. I had a flap rib repaired, which including removal shipping repair shipping back and putting it back on, in less time than a damn box.
I am just livid that my plane is sitting there 99.5% done for 6 extra weeks because one guy somewhere in the line is either lying to me or incompetent. This doesnt include the 6 weeks it took to do the annual.

I will call the STC holder and see if I can feel out where the issue is. I dont believe the shop is stalling, I am sure they want their new Kia sized check from me now, but right now I dont know.
 
charheep said:
Lots of responses- thank you!
The battery was relocated before I bought it. Who knows who did it (well I do, and it wasnt me or anyone directed by me), but there is no paperwork and it was never documented. I believe someone looked at what needed to be done, built a box out of AL, and did it and moved on with their life. The previous mechanics, pre-buy and me (I am the biggest idiot out of those 3), either didnt check or didnt know or didnt care. This shop I am using, whom I will never ever use again even at great pain to me, found the modification and no supporting documentation. Their story is that they are waiting on the kit from the STC holder. I had a flap rib repaired, which including removal shipping repair shipping back and putting it back on, in less time than a damn box.
I am just livid that my plane is sitting there 99.5% done for 6 extra weeks because one guy somewhere in the line is either lying to me or incompetent. This doesnt include the 6 weeks it took to do the annual.

I will call the STC holder and see if I can feel out where the issue is. I dont believe the shop is stalling, I am sure they want their new Kia sized check from me now, but right now I dont know.
Click to expand...
As the STC calls for a stainless steel box, and yours is aluminium, buying the STC won't get you anywhere. You'll still have to replace the box, and follow all of the STC mandates for installation.
 
Kenny Phillips said:
As the STC calls for a stainless steel box, and yours is aluminium, buying the STC won't get you anywhere. You'll still have to replace the box, and follow all of the STC mandates for installation.
Click to expand...

Ah, man. That's not the kind of news you just drop on the poor guy. It's like leaving him a voice mail that he's got terminal cancer. Horrible bed side manner!
 
Depending on wiring and previous box availability, I'm with the earlier poster who recommended moving back to the original location. Obviuously there would be a cost but your plane would be flyable and allow you to work with another AP.

I would be worried that all the work obtaining the STC, perhaps having to convert to Stainless Steel, etc might cost more than putting it back, even just temporarily.

You do have to admit, after this annual if your AC logs were reviewed at the FSDO for a pilot deviation (and they would be)...they would hold up quite well. And it seems the AP is doing his job to make sure you fly it away in the safest condition possible.

Have you asked the mechanic what he recommends: how much longer to pursue? His suggested alternatives, etc.
 

Attachments

  • 2A6412F0-1227-4DBD-A21C-83CBBDA2A914.jpeg
    2A6412F0-1227-4DBD-A21C-83CBBDA2A914.jpeg
    217.1 KB · Views: 17
charheep said:
Their story is that they are waiting on the kit from the STC holder.
Click to expand...
If the installed box was not part of the STC then why does the shop want to install the STC? They could have more easily reviewed the current installation, changed what they wanted, completed a 337 per 43.13-2B as Stewartb suggested and been done. There's something missing here.
 
Last edited:
Bell206 said:
If the installed box was not part of the STC then why does the shop want to install the STC? They could have more easily reviewed the current installation, changed what they wanted, completed a 337 per 43-2B as Stewartb suggested, and been done. There's something missing here.
Click to expand...
Yes; it's obviously not the STC'd modification in the first place. The repair shop is in the wrong about that.
 
Stewartb said:
Since many of you hold onto incorrect ideas about batteries and battery relocation options? Here’s a link. Read Chapter 10. Then go back and read the opening paragraph. You do not need an STC to change or relocate a battery in a certificated airplane.

https://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Advisory_Circular/AC 43.13-2B.pdf
Click to expand...


I'm confused. That chapter says for both lead acid and NiCad batteries "Each aircraft storage battery, whether approved to a Technical Standards Order (TSO) or not, must be designed as required by regulation and installed as prescribed by the manufacturer." Isn't installed as prescribed code word for "leave it where it's at"?

Or are we talking about the 1006 section?
 
ircphoenix said:
I'm confused. That chapter says for both lead acid and NiCad batteries "Each aircraft storage battery, whether approved to a Technical Standards Order (TSO) or not, must be designed as required by regulation and installed as prescribed by the manufacturer." Isn't installed as prescribed code word for "leave it where it's at"?

Or are we talking about the 1006 section?
Click to expand...

They’re talking about the battery manufacturer. No TSO. Odyssey batteries come to mind. The chapter discusses relocation if that’s what you want to do.
 
Grum.Man said:
While you don't need an STC you will need a 337. Depending on your FSDO this could be easy or a pain in the rear.
Click to expand...

Any time your mechanic does a major repair or major alteration he is required to describe it on a 337 form. If he uses approved data and methods for the repair or alteration an IA signs the 337 and puts in it the aircraft logs. No FAA participation is required. Read paragraph 1 of the AC. Approved data for major alterations. That’s what they’re talking about. You guys who think a 337 is synonymous with a field approval are incorrect. Field approvals also use a 337 but the FAA is asked to sign it off in the absense of approved data.
 
Stewartb said:
Any time your mechanic does a major repair or major alteration he is required to describe it on a 337 form. If he uses approved data and methods for the repair or alteration an IA signs the 337 and puts in it the aircraft logs. No FAA participation is required. Read paragraph 1 of the AC. Approved data for major alterations. That’s what they’re talking about. You guys who think a 337 is synonymous with a field approval are incorrect. Field approvals also use a 337 but the FAA is asked to sign it off in the absense of approved data.
Click to expand...

What approved data does the OP have? If he had the data he wouldn't be in this situation and it would just be completed under the stc.
 
All his mechanic needs to do is follow the AC. The AC can be used as approved data.... as stated in plain english in the opening paragraph of the AC!
 
Stewartb said:
All his mechanic needs to do is follow the AC. The AC can be used as approved data.... as stated in plain english in the opening paragraph of the AC!
Click to expand...

You are correct but a copy of the 337 is still sent to the FSDO and will be reviewed and approved or not approved. They may come back wanting to see all the calculations done as shown in the AC or they may not. They may come and inspect the modification or they may not. It's not always as simple as filling the form out and walking away. With that said, it's certainly worth a shot to do so provided the mechanic will do it. If he/she isn't willing then you will need to get a ferry permit and take it somewhere else.
 
It is as simple as filling out the form properly (as described in the AC.) You send the 337 to OKC to become part of the aircraft records, not for review.
 
Stewartb said:
No FAA participation is required. Read paragraph 1 of the AC. Approved data for major alterations.
Click to expand...
FYI: the data provided in the AC only becomes approved after the local ASI signs in block 3 of the 337. Hence the term "field approval." The AC data is not approved data on its own standing--it states quite clearly in the AC "may be used as approved data" because the AC only qualifies as "acceptable" data. Someone needs to approve the AC data.

One should never alter an aircraft using AC data, or any other non-approved data, without first completing the 337 and having the ASI sign block 3 to approve that data prior to the start of physical work.
 
Call FSDO and ask. “May” in this case is permission. Ask your fed for a battery FA and they’ll probably refer you to the AC. Been that way for years.

I’m finished here. The OP has all the info he needs to fix the problem. If he chooses not to use it? His choice.

Merry Christmas!
 
Last edited:
Ok, off topic a bit but still in the ball park.

I found a Kit put together by Beechcraft. The kit is the installation of a 180hp into the Beech Sport, normally 150hp engine plane. All documents and drawings of the kit are from Beech.

Here is my question. If I install this kit from Beech and follow the kits installation instructions, is it a log book entry or is a 337 needed. No harm filing a 337 but is it required?

180hp will not give me much of an increase in speed, but the climb performance would be better and safety would be inhanced IMHO.

edit: the kit is listed in the TCDS
 
AKBill said:
Ok, off topic a bit but still in the ball park.

I found a Kit put together by Beechcraft. The kit is the installation of a 180hp into the Beech Sport, normally 150hp engine plane. All documents and drawings of the kit are from Beech.

Here is my question. If I install this kit from Beech and follow the kits installation instructions, is it a log book entry or is a 337 needed. No harm filing a 337 but is it required?

180hp will not give me much of an increase in speed, but the climb performance would be better and safety would be inhanced IMHO.

edit: the kit is listed in the TCDS
Click to expand...

Can you provide a link to the TCDS? The only one I found online calls out only the 150hp engine
 
If yours is a B19 the TCDS says you can only use 150 hp. If you have a B23 or C23 you can use the 180
 
Grum.Man said:
If yours is a B19 the TCDS says you can only use 150 hp. If you have a B23 or C23 you can use the 180
Click to expand...
Sorry for the crude way I posted the TCDS. The Kit 23-9016-1s is for a B-19. MB-635 thru MB-654 except MB-649 had the kit installed and ref sec VII for operational limits
 
AKBill said:
Sorry for the crude way I posted the TCDS. The Kit 23-9016-1s is for a B-19. MB-635 thru MB-654 except MB-649 had the kit installed and ref sec VII for operational limits
Click to expand...

Seems to me that it would have to be done under an STC since it's not listed in the TCDS for a B-19.
 
Grum.Man said:
Seems to me that it would have to be done under an STC since it's not listed in the TCDS for a B-19.
Click to expand...
But it is listed in the TCDS. Kit 23-9016-1-S was installed on B-19's by Beech serial numbers MB-635 thru MB-654 excerpt MB-649. My plane is MB-722. So the kit should be able to be installed per Beech.
 
AKBill said:
But it is listed in the TCDS. Kit 23-9016-1-S was installed on B-19's by Beech serial numbers MB-635 thru MB-654 excerpt MB-649. My plane is MB-722. So the kit should be able to be installed per Beech.
Click to expand...

On the images you provided I am not seeing what you are talking about. The only approved engine for the B-19 seems to be the 150 hp on the TCDS unless I am overlooking it. Can you highlight what you are seeing?
 
Grum.Man said:
On the images you provided I am not seeing what you are talking about. The only approved engine for the B-19 seems to be the 150 hp on the TCDS unless I am overlooking it. Can you highlight what you are seeing?
Click to expand...
The kit 23-9016-1 was installed on MB-635 thru MB-654 except MB-649. It states to use operational limits in section VII. My point is if it was installed under this TCDS I should be able to install as long as it is installed per kit 23-9016-1 by Beech
upload_2018-12-21_11-3-23.png
 
What I’m seeing is it was installed on C and B 23 models not b19. If yours is a B19 this doesn’t apply. But maybe someone better versed than I will chime in.
 
AKBill said:
The kit 23-9016-1 was installed on MB-635 thru MB-654 except MB-649. My point is if it was installed under this TCDS I should be able to install as long as it is installed per kit 23-9016-1 by Beech
Click to expand...
Not quite. The S/N eligibility section you reference means this TCDS applies to those S/Ns previously modified by kit 23-9016-1. It does not mean you can use that kit to modify your S/N MB-722. Maybe locate a 9016 kit if still out there and see what the paperwork states. A quick check on the Beech Tech site didn't recognize the number.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top