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


Gang,

Most of the information in question is available through the FAA's website
www.faa.gov

AC23-21 is a good reference to have handy (although it is only one of
several pieces of information needed/available).

Tom



> ----[Please read http://ercoupers.com/disclaimer.htm before following any
> advice in this forum.]----
>
>
> Lynn,
> I believe that the information you are looking for was summarized by
> Linda Abrams in the post I pasted below.
>
> John Roach
> N 2427 H
>
>
>   [COUPERS-TECH] Answers Re: TSO/Non-TSO
>
> Linda Abrams
> Fri, 12 Jan 2007 00:07:28 -0800
>
> ----[Please read http://ercoupers.com/disclaimer.htm before following any
> advice in this forum.]----
>
>
>
> Ed and All,
>
> Here's what I've learned from several reliable sources on non-TSO'd
> radios;
> nice that it's all starting to converge, finally.
>
> I remain surprised that to date there doesn't seem to be an authoritative
> --
> much less a comprehensive -- article addressing this subject.  I suggested
> such an article to Mary of the EAA magazine, and she said she will
> consider
> doing a published article, clarifying all this.  Ditto when I talked with
> Rodney, the A&P in AOPA's Aviation Dept., that AOPA will consider it, too.
>
> All of the next 6 points below are per Joe Norris at EAA: [NOTE WELL: ALL
> of
> the discussion below applies ONLY to radios; he said there are different
> rules for transponders, encoders & ELTs.  N.B. further:  it assumes you
> are
> flying only VFR; there are different rules for IFR aircraft.  Mix these up
> to your sorrow. I'm not addressing IFR below, it is beyond my needs to
> figure that one out. ]
>
>    The pecking order to check whether your VFR aircraft needs a TSO'd
> radio
> is:
> 1) Check its certification basis.  For Ercoupes, this is CAR4a.  See
> whether
> it HAS ANY radio requirements. (For Ercoupes, probably not, ergo N/A ?
> Though I haven't looked yet...)
> 2) Check its Type Certificate. (For Ercoupes, probably ditto, though I
> haven't looked yet...)
> [Ed, I think you said you'd read through one or both of these; perhaps you
> could insert a comment here?]
> 3) Check the general FAA & FCC Regs.  Joe Norris says NOTHING in FAA regs
> says a radio needs to be TSO'd, or even "meet requirements of TSO'd", so
> long as it is legal per FCC to operate as an aviation radio, then it's
> legal
> to install in any aircraft, even certificated aircraft.  Repeating:  there
> ARE NO requirements in the FARs for RADIOs for VFR use to be TSO'd.  Joe
> says he has read the regs thoroughly and says if someone tells you to the
> contrary, get them to state where in FARs it says so.
> 4) Caveat:  some radio installation shops may THINK you need to have TSO'd
> radios because their own internal repair station manual may only allow the
> shop to put in TSO'd radios, so the shop folks assume it's because there's
> FAA regs requiring it, when it's only their own shop internal
> requirements.
> [I did talk to a shop today that appears to recognize this, and says they
> have no problem installing non-TSO'd radios.]
> 5)  You may not even need a 337.  Those forms address the installation
> process, NOT the radio itself, and are only needed at all IF the
> installation involves a "major structural change."  Putting the radio into
> an existing hole, or hanging it beneath the panel does NOT need a 337.
> Similarly, if you're putting a new antenna into an existing antenna mount
> location, its not a "major structural change," therefore no 337 needed.
> 6) If your installation does not involve a "major structural change," all
> you need is a logbook entry by the A&P who did it, plus (if necessary) a
> weight & balance adjustment & equipment list adjustment (if your plane has
> an equipment list).
>
> I have also asked the AOPA legal services attorney who was so VERY
> knowledgeable and helpful to me last summer, with all the Qs I had
> surrounding acquisition of my 'Coupe.  He is currently swamped, but will
> look into the issue.  I did read him my report of Joe Norris's remarks,
> above, so he'll be on the same page we are whenever he gets back to me.
> One
> caution he did have for us:  even though a 337 may not be legally
> necessary
> if all you're doing is putting a radio into an existing hole in the panel,
> or hanging it underneath, without making any major alterations, you may
> well
> run into people who THINK it is legally necessary, and so filing a 337
> anyway, just as a precaution to have it in your files, may prevent a bump
> in
> the road later on (for example, when you sell and your buyer has a
> pre-purchase inspection).
>
> Then "Rodney," an A&P in AOPA's Aviation Dept., also looked into this for
> us.  He called back today, saying he had checked with the:Aircraft
> Electronics Association  he said they confirmed to him that there is NO
> requirement for a COM-only radio to be TSO'd.  The Federal Communications
> Commission does get into the act regarding frequency tolerances, and as we
> already know,  one can check the Bad Radios list on the FCC website.  But
> using a non-TSO'd radio in a certificated aircraft is not an FAA
> violation.
>
> And lastly, one of our own sent an answer on that issue from a former
> A&P/IA
> who is now a FSDO inspector. Since his answer agrees with what I got from
> EAA & AOPA, I feel no need to seek his name, rank or serial number:
> "If the radio is installed for a VFR application, it is a logbook entry
> and
> doesn't have to be TSO'd. The ICOM A-200 is a good example. ICOM makes 2
> flavors, TSO and non-TSO. For an IFR installation, where the radio is
> required for IFR purposes, it will generally need to be TSO'd. In an
> Ercoupe
> with a non-TSO, a logbook entry by an A&P is all you would need. No
> Airworthiness Inspector would hammer an Ercoupe owner over a non-TSO'd
> radio
> installation if it was installed correctly and documented...it would
> actually be a step up from what we normally see in Part 91 airplanes, with
> owners installing electrical stuff without the first idea of what they're
> doing. If the owner ever has a pilot deviation and radio communications is
> determined to be a factor, they would check the installation closely...but
> TSO would not be an issue. "
>
> And so, following all of this, Linda went out and bought a new XCOM radio
> (not TSO'd).   I hope to have someone install it next week, and I'll tell
> you how it does.  I think I'm now done with this issue...unless the AOPA
> Legal Services guy gets back to me with anything different (but I don't
> expect it will be).  If he does, I'll post an update, but otherwise, no
> news
> is good news.
>
> Linda
>
>
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> ----[Please read http://ercoupers.com/disclaimer.htm before following
>> any advice in this forum.]----
>>
>>
>>
>> Hey Gang: Some time ago we had a discussion about TSO'd and non TSO'd
>> instrument requirements. As I remember, one of our group came up with
>> the FAA paragraph's that specifically spelled out the use of those
>> items. I saved the message, but unfortunately for me, my computer
>> bombed last fall, and I lost all of the saved messages before then.
>>     I have reviewed most of last years Tech messages, and did not find
>> what I was looking for. Does anyone have the answer? I know there was
>> considerable discussion about radios. but I am specifically concerned
>> about instruments.
>> Lynn
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free
>> from AOL at *AOL.com* <http://www.aol.com?ncid=AOLAOF00020000000339>.
>> ==============================================================================
>> To leave this forum go to: http://ercoupers.com/lists.htm
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> ==============================================================================
> To leave this forum go to: http://ercoupers.com/lists.htm
>
>
>
>


==============================================================================
To leave this forum go to: http://ercoupers.com/lists.htm



Reply via email to