----[Please read http://ercoupers.com/disclaimer.htm before following any advice in this forum.]---- I think any installation is better than nothing! There is too much emphasis on harness being able to withstand more than any other structure, the pilot included. Craig 2623H David wrote: > Whether it's a major alteration, a minor one, or something the pilot may > sign off himself, a safety item like a shoulder harness must work when > you want it to. That's why the FAA required me to present engineering > data before they would let me install it. The "type" of alteration > doesn't lessen the requirement for both a working installation and > appropriate paperwork. > > A former owner installed brackets for harnesses in my plane that were > supposedly in accordance with a "Canadian STC." A casual observer could > clearly see that the several hundred pound load that a 9G crash would > impose them would rip out the five rivets used to install each bracket. > There are a few ways to install 9G capable brackets - I don't think the > removal of a title "major alteration" will affect anything but who can > sign off the installation - basic cost will be the same as should the > methodology. I'll be glad to correspond with anyone privately about > details of my installation and the design package a number of members of > this list have purchased. > > David > N6359V > > > Greg Bullough wrote: > > > > ----[Please read http://ercoupers.com/disclaimer.htm before following > > any advice in this forum.]---- > > This message is to invite speculation on the new EAA/FAA > > initiative which says that shoulder harnesses in vintage aircraft > > are not to be treated as a 'major alteration' any more.
__________________________________________________ To unsubscribe from this list please send mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ___________________________________________________________ T O P I C A The Email You Want. http://www.topica.com/t/16 Newsletters, Tips and Discussions on Your Favorite Topics
<<attachment: winmail.dat>>
