----[Please read http://ercoupers.com/disclaimer.htm before following any advice in this forum.]----
Ed
Burkhead
ed -at- edburkheadQQQ.com (change
-at- and remove QQQ)
-----Original Message-----
From: William R. Bayne [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, February 13, 2005 2:10 PM
To: Ed Burkhead
Subject: [COUPERS-FLYIN] stalls in the Coupe
From: William R. Bayne [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, February 13, 2005 2:10 PM
To: Ed Burkhead
Subject: [COUPERS-FLYIN] stalls in the Coupe
RLYFLYIN
Begin forwarded message:
From: William R. Bayne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: January 10, 2005 11:57:59 PM CST
To: COUPERS-FLYIN <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [COUPERS-FLYIN] stalls in the Coupe
Reply-To: William R. Bayne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Hi Ed,
I happen to have a copy of A-787-1 dated March 24, 2947, and a "Proposed Revision" to it dated August 24, 1948, which states:
"II Model E - 2PCLM (Normal Category) (See Notes B and 8)
Add the following:
NOTE 8. Ercoupe Model E, serial number 4880 and up are similar to Ercoupe Model 415-D except as : Installation of an 85 hp engine, redesigned elevator, addition of low-speed warning cushion to elevator control, and additional equipment and refinements."
By Revision 19, February 17, 1960, the "Serial Nos. eligible" were 4869 and up designated Model E.
By Revision 24, September 6, 1967, the "Serial Nos. eligible were 3779, 4869 and up (same as today).
"II" now reads: "Model E, 2PCLM (Normal Category), approved July 8, 1948" followed by this note:
"Model E is similar to Model 415-D except for engine installation, redesigned elevator, addition of low- speed warning cushion to elevator control, and OTHER CHANGES OF A MINOR NATURE."
(upper case emphasis added)
By using the word "other" over "additional" the FAA clearly views ALL differences between the E Model and the 415-D Model as "minor". It has actually added some airframes modified in accordance with Ercoupe Information Letter No. 1, issued by the type certificate holder on Jan. 1, 1956, to later iterations of ATC 787 by individual serial number (for reasons unknown), and such addition is clearly after they were so modified.
In July of 2003 these active registry Ercoupes were officially listed by the FAA as "E Models":
1248, 1495, 1499, 1590, 2245, 2442, 2708, 2735, 2753, 2953, 3000, 3023, 3152, 3229, 3434, 3672, 3727, 3825, 3929, 4081, 4085, 4265, 4590, 4668, 4707, 4818 and our old friend 4869.
Richard Wilkins probably has later data than this, but the message here won't change.
None of these coupes was manufactured as an "E Model". Your FAA staffer gave you self-serving misinformation. More's the pity, he probably believed what he was saying. It should now be clear that the guy didn't know what he was talking about (not uncommon), and is probably with one of the FAA feifdoms that "doesn't approve" factory engineered and intended field modifications (solely because the FAA drone(s) that word the type certificates aren't very good at it). When such "representatives of the administrator" strut around attempting to "literally" interpret this stuff as if it were one of the Ten Commandments, I think of the saying: "Never argue with an idiot - those walking by will assume you're one too."
I think I'd like a D Model with the split elevator and no "Low speed warning cushion" spring. Don't like the feel or the weight, and if Alons don't need it at fifty pounds more gross why should the "D"? But the Forney installation drawing for the split elevator and Ercoupe Information Letter No. 1 say put it in, so I would.
What would the FAA say? Depends who you get wherever you go and how his day and marriage is going. But there won't be any discrimination...he'll approach every one's inquiry that way! Gives you a warm and fuzzy feeling to know they're in charge, doesn't it?
Prior to 1946, the legislative, judicial and executive branches of our federal government were separate. Congress controlled legislation, Courts held judicial power and executive agencies carried out the functions of government. Each could exercise at its own discretion a veto power against the other two. Our forefathers created this country rebelling against the inevitable despotism of any single repository of total power.
Passage of the Administrative Procedures Act all but destroyed our constitutionally mandated system of checks and balances. Federal administrative agencies were given the authority to create their own laws (referred to as regulations), to judge those laws within their own administrative tribunals and to enforce those laws through its own administrative police force. This has effectively stripped federal citizens of their First Amendment right to petition the government for redress of grievances and the Fifth Amendment right to due process of law, it's legal, and it's a "done deal". Have a nice life.
Regards,
William R. Bayne
<____|-(o)-|____>
(Copyright 2004)
--
On Jan 10, 2005, at 9:58 PM, Ed Burkhead wrote:
Bill,
I have heard of a Coupe being given a new “E” airworthiness certificate after doing upgrades that included the split elevator.
On the other hand, I’ve been told with NO doubt, by an FAA staffer from the airworthiness department (conversation at Oshkosh) that an aircraft can ONLY be really changed in its model number if that’s explicitly allowed in the type certificate. The change from C or CD to be a D is explicitly spelled out in A-787. No other model changes are listed.
By the FAA person’s statement, glen is simply flying a D with a different elevator approved (I hope) by a form 337. I personally think that the split elevator is a no-downside improvement. The slipstream goes through the split.
Ed Burkhead
============================================================================== To leave this forum go to: http://ercoupers.com/lists.htm Search the archives on http://escribe.com/aviation/coupers/
