Reusing tail numbers and SN??

Pedals2Paddles

Cleared for Takeoff
Joined
Jul 23, 2014
Messages
1,212
Location
FDK
Display Name

Display name:
Pedals2Paddles
How does this happen? Cessna 172K, N78235. How does an airframe get destroyed and still manage to fly?? Is the data plate just getting shuffled around from airframe to airframe??

1970: Substantial damage, poor ground handling in wind
http://www.ntsb.gov/aviationquery/brief.aspx?ev_id=42549&key=0

1972: Destroyed in crash, VFR into IMC
http://www.ntsb.gov/aviationquery/brief.aspx?ev_id=64004&key=0

Allegedly, a new engine was installed in this airframe 2 weeks later, and it flies again. How???

1978: Substantial damage, botched short takeoff into bush
http://www.ntsb.gov/aviationquery/brief.aspx?ev_id=42549&key=0

1979: Apparently repaired and registration changed to a new number. Still flies today.
 
Last edited:
Tail numbers get reused all the time. If you look at the first two, they are listed as 172K with a substantial damage and then destroyed. The third one is listed as a generic 172. Where do you see the serial number in these links?
 
It is still a 172K today. I know the SN today, but no SN listed in the reports from back then. And the FAA lookup on that old tail number doesn't come up with anything.
 
Last edited:
Log books and data plates from a totaled aircraft are sold every day.

I see....

This is something the FAA frowns upon. Some will argue that it's completely legal. Whatever. There are a few people sitting in a federal penitentiary right now after getting caught.

While some A&P's will argue all is OK, ask them "Would you be willing to sign the logbook that the data plate was removed from one airframe and installed on the new airframe?"

The answers will be amusing, to say the least. :rolleyes:
 
I'm sure. Some would be be like "sure I just did that for cleatus yesterday!" Others might ask you to leave.
 
This is something the FAA frowns upon. Some will argue that it's completely legal. Whatever. There are a few people sitting in a federal penitentiary right now after getting caught.

While some A&P's will argue all is OK, ask them "Would you be willing to sign the logbook that the data plate was removed from one airframe and installed on the new airframe?"

The answers will be amusing, to say the least. :rolleyes:

What's the difference between doing this on a 172 versus how the guys do it when rebuilding a WWII bird, such as a P51? If it's legal on one end, it's got to be on both.
 
Define "Legal". I know what I will, and will not sign my name to in a logbook.

Of course. But it's no secret that the WWII birds are rebuilt this way and the FAA hasn't put an end to it. So its not like they are saying its illegal.
 
Of course. But it's no secret that the WWII birds are rebuilt this way and the FAA hasn't put an end to it. So its not like they are saying its illegal.

I just go by the regulations, various Orders and Notices, AC's, etc. I know what I'm comfortable in signing. I'm also aware a few will push the limits, that's their business and so be it.

The devil is in the details and how it's written up and signed off. When a 172 is crashed and totaled beyond all repair and then it "reappears" a few years later in perfect flying condition.....:rolleyes2:
 
This is something the FAA frowns upon. Some will argue that it's completely legal. Whatever. There are a few people sitting in a federal penitentiary right now after getting caught.

While some A&P's will argue all is OK, ask them "Would you be willing to sign the logbook that the data plate was removed from one airframe and installed on the new airframe?"

The answers will be amusing, to say the least. :rolleyes:

While I understand and agree with what you're saying, where would you draw the line? At what point has too much of the original airplane that the data plate was attached to been replaced? :dunno:
 
While I understand and agree with what you're saying, where would you draw the line? At what point has too much of the original airplane that the data plate was attached to been replaced? :dunno:

Start digging into the regulations, Orders, Notices, AC's, etc.

I've always used the idea that if I was questioned on something I had done I could provide adequate references to back up my work.

FWIW, I do know of two individuals that are guest of the government for the next few years that were involved in a data plate remove and reinstall scheme that went bad.
 
Believe it or not, totaled planes used to get bought up cheap and rebuilt by shops that specialized in that stuff (I worked for a guy who would often get them against the recovery fee, I'd go out and recover, then it went in the rebuild pile, and there were always 2 in production) as side projects when things got slow. I imagine that the current market has curtailed that business a bunch.
 
Believe it or not, totaled planes used to get bought up cheap and rebuilt by shops that specialized in that stuff (I worked for a guy who would often get them against the recovery fee, I'd go out and recover, then it went in the rebuild pile, and there were always 2 in production) as side projects when things got slow. I imagine that the current market has curtailed that business a bunch.

Big difference between rebuilding an insurance total over drilling out a data plate from a wreck that is totaled beyond repair or fire damaged and transferring the data plate over to another airframe.
 
When I started flying the guy I rented from was a corporate pilot. When the company sold one of the jets he flew he got the N number and put it on the 172.

I was the first lucky guy :rolleyes2: to fly into the class C that plane flew out of with that new tail number. The controller asked me if I was sure about the number since that was a very familiar number to the and was a Gulfstream. I had to give a quick explanation. Worse yet the number was put on the plane with colored tape temporarily. Lucky I didn't get ramp checked. :hairraise:
 
My tail number N747JB has been on 7 airplanes now, dating back to 1972 when my dad bought his new 182! It's a pain to change it, but it's part of the family. :D None of them were totaled. ;)

When I started flying the guy I rented from was a corporate pilot. When the company sold one of the jets he flew he got the N number and put it on the 172.

I was the first lucky guy :rolleyes2: to fly into the class C that plane flew out of with that new tail number. The controller asked me if I was sure about the number since that was a very familiar number to the and was a Gulfstream. I had to give a quick explanation. Worse yet the number was put on the plane with colored tape temporarily. Lucky I didn't get ramp checked. :hairraise:
 
Depends on the FSDO. Some actively support data plate rebuilds.
In the car business, we call them chop shops, but it's different! :lol:
If you take the serial number off one plane and put it on another one, that seems to open the door to stealing a plane and swapping data plates with a wreck, or does it? :dunno:
 
As with many things, it is probably all about three things:
1) What you know vs what you can prove.
2) How you word what you can prove.
3) Your conscience.
 
In the car business, we call them chop shops,

Not in aviation. A HUGE number of Super Cubs, for instance, have only one part made in Lock Haven (data plate). Major Super Cub manufacturers have used this for decades, with FSDOs blessings.

There is a cottage industry that buys and sells Super Cub data plates just like stocks on the New York Stock Exchange.
 
I used to fly a mooney 2011v. Check it out today. The CIA is notorious for changing n numbers, sometimes four or five times on a single aircraft. Rendition aircraft were changed often for instance. T crafts , cub, etc. rebuilt often times from the ground up, have missing data plate that are obtained legally several ways.
 
Big difference between rebuilding an insurance total over drilling out a data plate from a wreck that is totaled beyond repair or fire damaged and transferring the data plate over to another airframe.

Why do some folks put such value in the data plate? I've seen a lot of vintage airplanes that are most definitely original, but for whatever reason, the original data plate was lost and they have had a new one made.

What is to stop a someone from making a whole new airplane and getting a 're-issued' data plate made to go with it?
 
Why do some folks put such value in the data plate? I've seen a lot of vintage airplanes that are most definitely original, but for whatever reason, the original data plate was lost and they have had a new one made.

What is to stop a someone from making a whole new airplane and getting a 're-issued' data plate made to go with it?

Many years ago the FAA did an audit on the aircraft registry. They found out there were several more Bell 47 helicopters flying than were actually built by the manufacturer. :eek:

Never underestimate what someone will do. There was a group in the PNW that was taking Bell 205 data plates and attaching them to surplus military UH-1 fuselages and selling them as 205's. (The Bell 205 is certified version of the UH-1, the UH-1 was never certified). It ended badly, very bad.

Another sad story was about a Hiller Fairchild FH-1100 helicopter . There was some data plate swapping going on here.
 
Many years ago the FAA did an audit on the aircraft registry. They found out there were several more Bell 47 helicopters flying than were actually built by the manufacturer. :eek:

Never underestimate what someone will do. There was a group in the PNW that was taking Bell 205 data plates and attaching them to surplus military UH-1 fuselages and selling them as 205's. (The Bell 205 is certified version of the UH-1, the UH-1 was never certified). It ended badly, very bad.

Another sad story was about a Hiller Fairchild FH-1100 helicopter . There was some data plate swapping going on here.

I guess the part I don't understand is, if you are going to do that, why go through the trouble to acquire an original data plate when you can have a new one made and claim the original was lost?
 
I guess the part I don't understand is, if you are going to do that, why go through the trouble to acquire an original data plate when you can have a new one made and claim the original was lost?

From Order 8130.2G

207. Original and Replacement Aircraft Identification Plates.
a. Original Data Plates. Each aircraft presented for airworthiness certification must meet
the requirements of 14 CFR § 21.182. Each aircraft, aircraft engine, propeller, propeller blade,
and propeller hub manufactured under a TC or PC, or an aircraft to be certificated as an
amateur-built, primary kit-built, or LSA, must be identified with the information specified in
14 CFR § 45.13. Manned free balloons are required to comply with 14 CFR § 45.11(d).
b. Replacement Data Plates.
(1) When FAA personnel receive inquiries regarding replacement, removal, or
destruction of identification (ID) plates, the sample letter in figure 2-2 of this order may be used
as a guide for responding.
(2) When a new ID plate is required, the owner or the owner’s authorized representative
will contact their local FAA office. The FAA determines whether the request is valid and
provides a letter to the applicant with the FAA’s finding. If the FAA determines that the request
is valid, the applicant includes the FAA letter with his or her request for the replacement data
plate from the appropriate manufacturer.
(3) Upon notification by the applicant, which must include the FAA’s letter, the product
manufacturer may then issue the replacement ID plate.
(4) The old ID plate, when available, must be voluntarily surrendered by the owner with
a written statement to the FAA office who authorized the replacement. The FAA office must
make a copy of the plate and then physically destroy it. The FAA office must then submit a
letter to AFS-750 stating that the surrendered plate has been destroyed. AFS-750 will include
the letter in the permanent aircraft records file.
c. Removal of Data Plates. 14 CFR § 45.13 permits persons performing maintenance
operations under 14 CFR part 43, Maintenance, Preventive Maintenance, Rebuilding, and
Alteration, to remove an aircraft data plate. The removal must be done in accordance with the
methods, techniques, and practices acceptable to the FAA. The ID plate removed may be
reinstalled only on the product from which it was removed.

d. Misuse of Data Plates.
(1) ASIs should be on alert for any indication of ID plate misuse or suspicious activity,
such as the building of a complete aircraft by a person performing work under 14 CFR part 43.
Installation of an ID plate by a person performing work under 14 CFR part 43, where the
ID plate has been purchased or salvaged from another aircraft, is not approved unless written
approval is obtained from the FAA.
(2) Before issuing an airworthiness certificate for an aircraft that appears to be a repair
or restoration of an aircraft that previously has been destroyed or demolished, the ASI should
seek the assistance of the manager of AFS-750. That office can assist the ASI in determining
whether the serial number of the aircraft on which certification is sought is the serial number of
an aircraft previously classified as destroyed or demolished by the FAA or the National
Transportation Safety Board (NTSB ). If the ASI determines that the ID plate comes from a
previously destroyed or demolished aircraft, the ASI must initiate an investigation to determine
whether a violation of 14 CFR § 45.13(c) or (e) has occurred before the airworthiness certificate
may be issued. If a violation of 14 CFR § 45.13(c) or (e) is found, the ASI must deny the
airworthiness certificate and initiate an enforcement action.
Note: When the ID plate is surrendered, the ID plate is no longer
considered personal property.
e. New Data Plates. The appropriate local MIDO, Manufacturing Inspection Satellite
Office (MISO), or FSDO may authorize a builder of an aircraft authorized to be assembled from
spare and/or surplus articles in accordance with AC 21-13, Standard Airworthiness Certification
of Surplus Military Aircraft and Aircraft Built From Spare Parts, to make a new data plate for
that aircraft upon a satisfactory showing that the aircraft conforms to its type design and is in a
condition for safe operation. However, ensure aircraft is eligible for an airworthiness certificate
as built from spare and/or surplus articles in accordance with 14 CFR § 21.6, § 21.183, and
paragraph 317 of this order before authorizing the builder to make a data plate. The data plate
will be made in accordance with 14 CFR part 45 and affixed to the aircraft prior to the issuance
of any airworthiness certificate.
 
I know it's a different situation, but in some ways it's the same, the difference is one is legal and one, not so much. :rolleyes: Actually, some restored cars are a compilation of several vehicles and an assortment of parts from various places. :D


Not in aviation. A HUGE number of Super Cubs, for instance, have only one part made in Lock Haven (data plate). Major Super Cub manufacturers have used this for decades, with FSDOs blessings.

There is a cottage industry that buys and sells Super Cub data plates just like stocks on the New York Stock Exchange.
 
Big difference between rebuilding an insurance total over drilling out a data plate from a wreck that is totaled beyond repair or fire damaged and transferring the data plate over to another airframe.

:confused: Not particularly, it's the same basic thing. Assemble a bunch of mostly new metal into an airplane. Sure, there is some salvage, but it is usually at the individual part level rather than component. At least 3/4rs of the planes we did were new material, and sometimes salvage bits came from another airframe.
 
I walked around with Bob Munro in his Beaver junk yard. He advised that if I ever wanted a Beaver from that pile, to pick the very worst, shot up, crushed one.

They would then build one with the most new parts.
 
:confused: Not particularly, it's the same basic thing.

BS.gif
 
Back
Top