Landing lights

Skylane81E said:
If it were minor no STC would be needed as you could just install with a log book entry
Click to expand...


That's true. But there are still minor alterations that have been STC'ed, for marketing reasons.
 
bnt83 said:
I'm missing something and I haven't found it yet.
Click to expand...

To Simplify. The Whelen LEDs come with a very lengthy STC that explicitly calls out manufacturer and model. If your airplane is on it, you can install the LED landing/taxi light with the A&P signoff.

Go look for STC #SA02212AK on Whelen's website which is the installation eligibility. It answers ALL your questions.
 
murphey said:
You drop it, you spend another $235 with Spruce. Makes perfect sense to me.
Click to expand...

Oh, they're pretty tough. Dropping didn't hurt it. Neither did reversing polarity...
 
bnt83 said:
Order 8110.42 PMA approval procedures

​
3. Basis for Design Approval. ​
These methods are: ​
a. Identicality by Showing Evidence of a Licensing Agreement. ​
(1) The applicant sends the appropriate MIDO document from the TC, STC, or TSO authorization holder authorizing use of their data package. Evidence of a licensing agreement is ​
6 6/23/08 8110.42C

not a separate approval method, but is a way to show identicality. The applicant uses this evidence to show that the data submitted are FAA-approved and identical to the original part. For FAA purposes, the licensing agreement (in any form) only needs to authorize the applicant to use the specified type design data. See FAA Order 8120.2, Section 5, for more information.
(2) Following the current industry practice, TC holders prepare "assist letters" for applicants to send to the MIDO. This practice meets the requirements of showing evidence of a licensing agreement under 14 CFR § 21.303(c)(4). Find a sample assist letter in FAA Order 8120.2, Figure 10.
(3) PMA Assist Letter. In the assist letter, the licenser (usually a TC holder or a PAH) may identify critical parts to aid MIDO processing of the PMA application. ​
b. Identicality without a Licensing Agreement. ​
The applicant sends the appropriate ACO a statement certifying that the design is identical in all respects to an approved design (for example, TC, STC or TSO authorization). The applicant also provides the data supporting the identicality claim for review and approval. These data verify the identicality in dimensional and material characteristics, special processes and coatings, and test and acceptance criteria. Identicality without access to the original design data is nearly impossible for sophisticated parts with proprietary processes or coatings. Identicality to another PMA is unacceptable because 14 CFR § 21.303(c)(4) restricts identicality to only parts covered under type certificates. ​
c. Test and Computation. ​
The applicant sends the ACO a data package for review and approval. This data package describes the part design, which includes materials, processes, test specifications, system compatibility, maintenance instructions, and part interchangeability. The package also includes a test and substantiation plan to show compliance with applicable airworthiness standards. See chapter 2, paragraph 5 for more details about the data package. ​
d. Supplemental Type Certificate (STC). ​
The applicant stipulates use of the approved data from the STC and refers to the STC number. ​
4. Draft PMA Supplements. ​
[FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman][FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman]After approving the PMA, we will assign a PMA and supplement number. Use the following samples as guides for preparing FAA-PMA supplements:
• Appendix F, Sample FAA-PMA Supplement for Identicality (Non-Licensing Agreement) or Test and Computation, is a supplement based on either identicality without a license agreement or test and computation.
• Figure 11 of Order 8120.2, Sample FAA-PMA Supplement for Licensing Agreement and STC, is a supplement based on either an STC or licensing agreement.


​
5. Verification of Installation Eligibility.
a. A manufacturer’s IPC offers information about installation eligibility, but the IPC is usually not FAA-approved. Consider using the IPC with other data like purchase orders from the PAH, service bulletins, maintenance manuals, a technical publications index, or a master drawing list. We cannot use the IPC to make any engineering finding leading to approval of the applicant’s design data. Also we cannot use the IPC to determine part conformity. Other acceptable documentation is a combination of the following:
• FAA airworthiness approval tag (FAA Form 8130-3),
• Other PMA supplements, and
• “Weight of evidence” evaluations using enough information from various sources to show eligibility.
b. Accept use of the IPC alone as a means for verifying installation eligibility on non-critical parts. When the IPC is the sole means of verifying installation eligibility, confirm the authenticity of that IPC.
c. If the application lacks documentation from the TC or TSO authorization holder (or other FAA-approved data), then the ACO may consider other evidence from the applicant. To verify installation eligibility, check other documents including the type design’s master drawing



​
[/FONT][/FONT]
Click to expand...

If our forefathers saw how we became a country paralyzed in our legal system, they would all have had vasectomies... The irony of this thread is that all we are talking about is "changing a light bulb". Seems that were jokes written around this topic. I've got a headache now, I'm out...


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
murphey said:
To Simplify. The Whelen LEDs come with a very lengthy STC that explicitly calls out manufacturer and model. If your airplane is on it, you can install the LED landing/taxi light with the A&P signoff.

Go look for STC #SA02212AK on Whelen's website which is the installation eligibility. It answers ALL your questions.
Click to expand...


I found the STC listed on the PMA, on the Floats Alaska Site.
 
AC 21-40A
1-6. Key Facts about Supplemental Type Certificates (STC).
a. An STC is the FAA’s approval of a major change in the type design of a previously type certificated product
Click to expand...

I think this sums it up nicely.
 
Skylane81E said:
Indeed,

I know we are arguing semantics but these details can cost a good mechanic his certificate
Click to expand...


Rice Pierce http://www.aea.net/governmentaffairs/pdf/ViewFromWashingtonApr11.pdf

Stopped here and gave a class on determination of major vs minor alterations & repairs

To sum it up, add the word "certificated" to each of the items listed in part 43 apendix D.

Example. Changes to empty weigh or empty weight CG are not a major alteration unless there was a certificated empty weight or certificated empty weight CG. Changes to the certificated CG limits is major, Changes to certificated gross weights is major.

(xi) Changes to the empty weight or empty balance which result in an increase in the maximum certificated weight or center of gravity limits of the aircraft.


Adding or changing the electrical Load is not a major alteration, but changing the certificated voltage or capacity of the electrical system is.

(xii) Changes to the basic design of the fuel, oil, cooling, heating, cabin pressurization, electrical, hydraulic, de-icing, or exhaust systems.


etc.

So start looking through the certificated requirements of old CAR 3 and tell me how putting Rosen Sunvisors in my 1956 Cessna 172 is a major alteration?

Is it a critical part? Are there any strength & deformation requirements to structure we needed to show compliance with? Operating instructions that would require placard changes or Aircraft Flight Manual Supplement? Does it affect compliance with an AD? Does it affect an Approved Inspection Program (AAIP)? Does it affect an airworthiness limitation?
 
Last edited:
bnt83 said:
Rice Pierce http://www.aea.net/governmentaffairs/pdf/ViewFromWashingtonApr11.pdf

Stopped here and gave a class on determination of major vs minor alterations & repairs

To sum it up, add the word "certificated" to each of the items listed in part 43 apendix D.

Example. Changes to empty weigh or empty weight CG are not a major alteration unless there was a certificated empty weight or certificated empty weight CG. Changes to the certificated CG limits is major, Changes to certificated gross weights is major.

(xi) Changes to the empty weight or empty balance which result in an increase in the maximum certificated weight or center of gravity limits of the aircraft.


Adding or changing the electrical Load is not a major alteration, but changing the certificated voltage or capacity of the electrical system is.

(xii) Changes to the basic design of the fuel, oil, cooling, heating, cabin pressurization, electrical, hydraulic, de-icing, or exhaust systems.


etc.
Click to expand...

This is straight from the article you just referenced:

Because the regulations are clear that an STC is higher than a major alteration


Remind me again of an STC that is minor? :)



-VanDy
 
VanDy said:
This is straight from the article you just referenced:

Because the regulations are clear that an STC is higher than a major alteration


Remind me again of an STC that is minor? :)



-VanDy
Click to expand...

So start looking through the certificated requirements of old CAR 3 and tell me how putting Rosen Sunvisors in my 1956 Cessna 172 is a major alteration?

Is it a critical part? Are there any strength & deformation requirements to structure we needed to show compliance with? Operating instructions that would require placard changes or Aircraft Flight Manual Supplement? Does it affect compliance with an AD? Does it affect an Approved Airplane Inspection Program (AAIP)? Does it affect an airworthiness limitation?


They receive STC's on these products so FAST because they jot down all the requirements from CAR 3 and show that the alteration DOESN'T affect ANY of them.
 
Last edited:
This thread has really "Shed some light" on this subject for me. :D













(get it...shined some....ha.....)
 
Last edited:
Tell me how 5 minutes of paper work that covers everyone's butts is a bad thing?
 
VanDy said:
This is straight from the article you just referenced:

Because the regulations are clear that an STC is higher than a major alteration


Remind me again of an STC that is minor? :)



-VanDy
Click to expand...

STCs are by definition a major alteration, the only difference between the STC and a field approval is the STC data is already approved, and can be returned to service by a A&P-IA, it does not require FSDO approval.
 
Skylane81E said:
Tell me how 5 minutes of paper work that covers everyone's butts is a bad thing?
Click to expand...


I’m interested in satisfying the regulations and knowing my options, not just jumping on the “easiest” bandwagon…
 
bnt83 said:
So start looking through the certificated requirements of old CAR 3 and tell me how putting Rosen Sunvisors in my 1956 Cessna 172 is a major alteration?
Click to expand...

Are they the part number given in the production certificate for your make, model, and serial number of the aircraft?

Does Rozen have a PMA as the direct replacement part?

STC= the only way to document the change.
 
Marauder said:
If our forefathers saw how we became a country paralyzed in our legal system, they would all have had vasectomies... The irony of this thread is that all we are talking about is "changing a light bulb". Seems that were jokes written around this topic. I've got a headache now, I'm out...


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Please do not mistake my stance as defense of the required process of installing a new LED landing light
 
Tom-D said:
Are they the part number given in the production certificate for your make, model, and serial number of the aircraft?

Does Rozen have a PMA as the direct replacement part?

STC= the only way to document the change.
Click to expand...

What?

major alteration vs. minor...

So now I need an STC to replace fabric on seats too right? Or paint an aircraft with polyureithane insteal of enamel.
 
Last edited:
bnt83 said:
What?

major alteration vs. minor...

So now I need an STC to replace fabric on seats too right? Or paint an aircraft with polyureithane insteal of enamle.
Click to expand...

If you read 43 B, recovering the seats is approved for the owner to do the work because seats are not structural. However, you do need the flamability cert on the upholstery.
 
murphey said:
If you read 43 B, recovering the seats is approved for the owner to do the work because seats are not structural. However, you do need the flamability cert on the upholstery.
Click to expand...

Appendix A has the list.

(11) Repairing upholstery and decorative furnishings of the cabin, cockpit, or balloon basket interior when the repairing does not require disassembly of any primary structure or operating system or interfere with an operating system or affect the primary structure of the aircraft.


-VanDy
 
murphey said:
If you read 43 B, recovering the seats is approved for the owner to do the work because seats are not structural. However, you do need the flamability cert on the upholstery.
Click to expand...

no you don't.

if you really think that show me the requirement in the regs.
 
murphey said:
If you read 43 B, recovering the seats is approved for the owner to do the work because seats are not structural. However, you do need the flamability cert on the upholstery.
Click to expand...

This isn't always true either. In the case of newer helicopters and newer transport category aircraft, and probably others, the seat foam and even the seat covers are part of dynamic crashworthiness regulations.
 
bnt83 said:
This isn't always true either. In the case of newer helicopters and newer transport category aircraft, and probably others, the seat foam and even the seat covers are part of dynamic crashworthiness regulations.
Click to expand...

I guess it boils down to what your IA will sign off come annual then. At least three have already weighed in with supporting FAR's and regulation.


-VanDy
 
murphey said:
If you read 43 B, recovering the seats is approved for the owner to do the work because seats are not structural. However, you do need the flamability cert on the upholstery.
Click to expand...



Tom-D said:
no you don't.

if you really think that show me the requirement in the regs.
Click to expand...

CAR3

3.388 Fire precautions—

(a) Cabin interiors. Only materials which are flash resistant shall be used. In compartments where smoking is to be permitted, the wall and ceiling linings, the covering of all upholstering, floors, and furnishings shall be flame-resistant. Such compartments shall be equipped with an adequate number of self contained ash trays. All other compartments shall be placarded against smoking.

14 CFR Part 23

23.853 Passenger and crew compartment interiors.

For each compartment to be used by the crew or passengers:
(a) The materials must be at least flame-resistant;
(b) [Reserved]
(c) If smoking is to be prohibited, there must be a placard so stating, and if smoking is to be allowed—
(1) There must be an adequate number of self-contained, removable ashtrays; and

 
Last edited:
RotorAndWing said:
CAR3

3.388 Fire precautions—

(a) Cabin interiors. Only materials which are flash resistant shall be used. In compartments where smoking is to be permitted, the wall and ceiling linings, the covering of all upholstering, floors, and furnishings shall be flame-resistant. Such compartments shall be equipped with an adequate number of self contained ash trays. All other compartments shall be placarded against smoking.

14 CFR Part 23

23.853 Passenger and crew compartment interiors.

For each compartment to be used by the crew or passengers:
(a) The materials must be at least flame-resistant;
(b) [Reserved]
(c) If smoking is to be prohibited, there must be a placard so stating, and if smoking is to be allowed—
(1) There must be an adequate number of self-contained, removable ashtrays; and
Click to expand...


Is there a better link to the CAR's than the this?

http://ntl1.specialcollection.net/scripts/ws.dll?websearch&site=dot_cars
 
bnt83 said:
This isn't always true either. In the case of newer helicopters and newer transport category aircraft, and probably others, the seat foam and even the seat covers are part of dynamic crashworthiness regulations.
Click to expand...

Cirrus...
 
RotorAndWing said:
CAR3

3.388 Fire precautions—

(a) Cabin interiors. Only materials which are flash resistant shall be used. In compartments where smoking is to be permitted, the wall and ceiling linings, the covering of all upholstering, floors, and furnishings shall be flame-resistant. Such compartments shall be equipped with an adequate number of self contained ash trays. All other compartments shall be placarded against smoking.

14 CFR Part 23

23.853 Passenger and crew compartment interiors.

For each compartment to be used by the crew or passengers:
(a) The materials must be at least flame-resistant;
(b) [Reserved]
(c) If smoking is to be prohibited, there must be a placard so stating, and if smoking is to be allowed—
(1) There must be an adequate number of self-contained, removable ashtrays; and
Click to expand...

Yep now go to FAR 1.1 and tell me what "Flame resistant" means.
 
Jump back to the rosen sun visors in the 1956 Cessna 172, how is it a major? If you substitute measurable for appreciable it's easier to read this reg.


§ 1.21
[FONT=LMCBGO+Arial,Italic,Arial][FONT=LMCBGO+Arial,Italic,Arial]Classification of changes. [/FONT][/FONT]Changes shall be classified as minor and major. A minor change shall be one which has no appreciable effect on the weight, balance, structural strength, reliability, operational characteristics, or other characteristics affecting the airworthiness of the product. A major change shall be one not classified as a minor change.
​
 
Tom-D said:
Yep now go to FAR 1.1 and tell me what "Flame resistant" means.
Click to expand...

14 CFR 1.1

Flame resistant means not susceptible to combustion to the point of propagating a flame, beyond safe limits, after the ignition source is removed.


So how does one prove that the material is flame resistant and what method of proof is acceptable to the Administrator?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top