3934V

N801BH said:
I think that question needs to be answered by a licenced A&P / IA...:rolleyes:..:D..

Ps.. Does the plane really have a 172 spinner on it ??:dunno:...
Click to expand...

IT has a 172 engine and prop on it why wouldn't it have a 172 spinner on it?

Is this a 172 spinner or a 1948 170 spinner ?
 

Attachments

  • 20140224_115504.jpg
    20140224_115504.jpg
    439.3 KB · Views: 49
  • 20140224_115517.jpg
    20140224_115517.jpg
    448.4 KB · Views: 39
Last edited:
Tom-D said:
Prop shops must comply to different set of instructions than the A&P in the field.

So they will tell you their rules that come from the overhaul manual.
Click to expand...

You should know about this reg. it should not be news to you. Been this way a good while. The rule is the same for everyone, not just the prop shop. Better brush up on it. They are not allowed anymore. Now if you want to be a die hard then insist on doing it the wrong way.
 
Jimmy cooper said:
You should know about this reg. it should not be news to you. Been this way a good while. The rule is the same for everyone, not just the prop shop. Better brush up on it. They are not allowed anymore. Now if you want to be a die hard then insist on doing it the wrong way.
Click to expand...

What reg? show it to us.

You seem to not know what any A&P can do to a prop in the field.
 
Last edited:
Tom-D said:
IT has a 172 engine and prop on it why wouldn't it have a 172 spinner on it?

Is this a 172 spinner or a 1948 170 spinner ?
Click to expand...

The little roundy one in the picture is a "skull cap" and was stock on the 170 series. The pointy one is a "witch's hat" and is used on the 172

Jim
 
Jimmy cooper said:
You should know about this reg. it should not be news to you. Been this way a good while. The rule is the same for everyone, not just the prop shop. Better brush up on it. They are not allowed anymore. Now if you want to be a die hard then insist on doing it the wrong way.
Click to expand...

Quel jerk.

Jim
 
Jimmy cooper said:
It needs the prop polished, illegal but I had two and never had problems until two years ago when the AI refused to pass it. The spinner would be good if you hit a Canada goose head on. Why are Hamilton standard props ok as they are polished.
Click to expand...

Polishing a prop is illegal? This should be news to the 5-6 people around here running them...as long as the dimensions are within spec and there is no corrosion present the prop is just a prop.
Prop shops won't "do" polishing because the prop must be returned to manufactures specs to be tagged for return to service. Including the mfg paint specs.

There is an AC advising against prop polishing for reasons of possible loss of corrosion protection but I've never seen anything forbiding it.



As for the spinner vs. Canadian Goose comment...Really?

Chris
 
All Prop shops are certified repair shops, they are bound to the manufacturers overhaul manuals for repairs they do.

the props in the field are maintained by their Instructions for continued airworthiness, ( the owners manual) the A&P in the field can only do minor repairs to the installed prop.
there are no instructions to keep the paint or anodizing in place, other wise any paint or abrasion on the leading edge is an unairworthy prop.
we all know that is not correct.

There is no regulation or maintenance routine that says the paint or anodizing can't be removed and the prop polished in the field.
 
Tom-D said:
IT has a 172 engine and prop on it why wouldn't it have a 172 spinner on it?

Is this a 172 spinner or a 1948 170 spinner ?
Click to expand...

Huh......

Where is the pointy, painted one shown in post 211...:dunno::dunno:..

I liked it ALOT better..
 
Last edited:
It looks great Tom. I suspect it will be making you and the next owners very happy. Maybe, just maybe the drivers license medical will apply some day and you'll be able to fly the thing till you croak lol.

:lol:
 
N801BH said:
Huh......

Where is the pointy, painted one shown in post 211...:dunno::dunno:..

I liked it ALOT better..
Click to expand...

It's now located on a shelf in my hangar.

the 170 guys and gals in the club really didn't like the pointy one, because it didn't look right for the 48.
 
Hiperbiper said:
Polishing a prop is illegal? This should be news to the 5-6 people around here running them...as long as the dimensions are within spec and there is no corrosion present the prop is just a prop.
Prop shops won't "do" polishing because the prop must be returned to manufactures specs to be tagged for return to service. Including the mfg paint specs.

There is an AC advising against prop polishing for reasons of possible loss of corrosion protection but I've never seen anything forbiding it.



As for the spinner vs. Canadian Goose comment...Really?

Chris
Click to expand...

The spinner is incorrect for the airplane which is why it drew comment and looks weird. As for the polished prop, I was forced to remove them twice on antique aircraft for the reason I stated. I think they look much better but two AI's would not annual the airplanes with them on it. They had contacted the local Feds to check on this. Otherwise I surely would have kept them. I really don't give a good f$&@ what tom does. I merely mentioned my experience.
 
Jimmy cooper said:
The spinner is incorrect for the airplane which is why it drew comment and looks weird. As for the polished prop, I was forced to remove them twice on antique aircraft for the reason I stated. I think they look much better but two AI's would not annual the airplanes with them on it.

Time to get your IA and do it your way.


They had contacted the local Feds to check on this. Otherwise I surely would have kept them.

What would you expect them to say, when they have already said it in a AC? ACs are not regulatory, and there is no regulations forbidding polishing the prop.


I really don't give a good f$&@ what tom does.

this is a good thing.

I merely mentioned my experience.
Click to expand...

I do not advise owners to polish their props, simply because of the rogue inspectors that believe these ACs are regulatory in nature. and IAs that do not know the rules as they should.
 
Jimmy cooper said:
As for the polished prop, I was forced to remove them twice on antique aircraft for the reason I stated. I think they look much better but two AI's would not annual the airplanes with them on it.

Nobody ever said that there weren't two stupid IAs back to back in the world.

They had contacted the local Feds to check on this.

That should have given you a clue. Anytime an IA has to contact the Feds for a simple question like this it should give you reason to suspect their competence.

Otherwise I surely would have kept them. I really don't give a good f$&@ what tom does.

At the risk of repeating myself, "quel jerk".

Jim
Click to expand...
.....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top