It is still very simple to get these changes approved, yes I know we all
have problems with the FSDO, but they are of our own making because we do
not want to spend the money that the FAA would like us to (perhaps what it
really costs to do the job right) to stay with in the process that they
would like us to follow. They want us to go find a DER and have them do
the
required engineering and then provide us with "Approved Data" so that the
poor guy at the FSDO who would not know safe from a disaster has an expert
approving the situation before he must get involved. We do not do this
very
often because we do not like to have to pay the $ 500 or more dollars that
this would cost. So we try to do it cheap and the FSDO does not like to do
it that way. I fall into the same boat and am as cheap as the next guy but
we should not fault the FAA for doing their job just because it costs us
money to do our part correctly.

Yes the brakes that Tom has are just fine and a DER would say so if he is
paid to and the FSDO would be a pleasure to work with (in most cases) if
we
do our part and bring them the "Approved Data". As many can not afford the
price to do it right we will continue to curse the darkness instead of
lighting a candle. If Ercoupes are to continue we will continue to have
many similar problems with parts that should be changed and as we do not
have an effective (in this area) national organization we will continue to
solve these problems one at a time the hard way. These brakes are just one
good example, shoulder harnesses are another and in that case one of our
lot did the right thing and hired a DER but because he is not in the
business he purchased "One Time Data" instead of having a multiple use STC
set of "Approved Data" produced. If we can not have a national group that
will take ownership of some of these problems (where we all pay a small
amount for the engineering) and find the fix for all then we shall all
have
to pay to much and continue to go through much grief with the FAA.

It is up to us to do things right, it is not the FAA's job to just approve
anything some of our list members come up with, some have been very bad
ideas like the Canadian shoulder harness attachments that would do little
or nothing in an incident.

Best regards,
Vern



 

                      Jim Phelps

                      <[EMAIL PROTECTED]        To:       Tom
Laird-McConnell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [email protected]                 
                      n.net>                   cc:

                                               Subject:  Re:
[COUPERS-TECH] Cleveland brakes on a pre-813 serial number 415C (FSDO     
                      05/06/03 07:33 AM         problems)

                      Please respond to

                      Jim Phelps

 

 







----[Please read http://ercoupers.com/disclaimer.htm before following any
advice in this forum.]----

I know the FAA has power, but I really think  they have overstepped what
congress had in mind when they created the  CAA and later the change to
the
FAA. I think it's time we took back our  freedom. We all want safe
airplanes but it's time they let us think for  ourselves. Most of the rule
makers don't know the back end of a horse much less  a Airplane.  HOW do
we
the plane owners and pilots  make any  changes for the better is the
question? Jim Phelps 2739H-----  Original Message -----
From:  Tom  Laird-McConnell
To: [email protected]
Sent: Monday, May 05, 2003 4:16 PM
Subject: [COUPERS-TECH] Cleveland brakes  on a pre-813 serial number 415C
(FSDO problems)

----[Please read http://ercoupers.com/disclaimer.htm before following any
advice in this forum.]----

My coupe is in annual, and at my request the shop  is doing a thorough
overview of the paper-work (which wasn't done very well  when it was
restored 5 years ago.)

The problem we have run into is that it has  cleveland brakes on it.
Aparantely, the STC for clevelands is for post  817 serial number coupes
(because the landing gear axle is smaller on the  earlier coupes).  The
size of the axles on the earlier coupes is the same  size as the piper
cub...and so up until this year it has been trivial to get a  337 done for
it.

But now my local FSDO is refusing to do a 337 for  _anything_ having to do
with landing gear.  They don't care that the  brakes are better.  They
don't care that the installation is exactly the  same as the approved
piper
J-3 installation.  They don't care that nearly  all coupes have
clevelands.  They don't care that the axle is not  changed, that the wheel
is the same, and it's just the braking system which is  different. They
don't care that the brake kit comes from Univair.

They have stated that a new handbook that came  out 9 months ago
specifically prohibits them from approving any 377s  modifications to the
landing gear.  So the options they have given me  is:

a. go through the paperwork for an STC for this  (!yikes!)
b. replace my brakes with the original  brakes.

My mechanic is beside himself in anger with the  FSDO (he says 9 months
ago
they would have approved this no-problem.)   I'm beside myself in anger
with the FSDO.  My mechanic also says he can't  sign the annual as is in
that he just can't afford the liability of it not  being approved.

So my questions are:

a. Has anyone out there had a 337 for clevelands  on early model coupes
done in the last 9 months?
b. has anyone else had this problem.
c. Is there *anyone* we can appeal to to get  the FAA to lighten up?  How
on earth are we going to keep our old planes  flying if they won't allow
us
to make needed safety enhancements to our  planes.

I'm so angry I could spit.

-Tom


==========================================================================
====
To leave this forum go to: http://ercoupers.com/lists.htm
Search the archives on http://escribe.com/aviation/coupers-tech/



<<attachment: winmail.dat>>

Reply via email to