Thomas,

Start by saying that I’m not a mechanic of any kind, nor am I an A&P, AI nor
expert in this subject.  These are my observations as an observer.

As I understand it, the FAA won’t allow a certificated airplane to be moved
permanently into the experimental category.  Plus, the only category
available to you would be Experimental Exhibition and you don’t want to go
there.  I think you can forget this option.

The FAA seems to be only approving modifications approved by an FAA
Designated Engineering Representative.  You have to spend money to have the
DER do a full evaluation and write-up of your proposed mod.  That doesn’t
guarantee the FAA will then permit the mod, but, if you pick a DER with a
good relationship with the FAA it should fly.

The FAA may require you to put the plane in experimental status for a short
time as you do flight testing on the modification.  I saw a Coupe with a
3-blade composite prop at a national flyin a few years ago.  It had to go
through the experimental flight test (and I think it required specific tests
and records kept) phase before approval.

 

Does the Forney seat mod require any drilling in the spar?  At this moment,
I don’t think the FAA will approve any spar drilling under any
circumstances.

I’ll agree with Bill that moving the gascolator to the firewall is not an
improvement.  I’ve never heard of a gascolator failing when the appropriate
(easy to meet) ADs have been applied with the braces and, I think, brass
fitting.  The factory mounting location eliminates low spots and high spots
and makes for a pretty unlikely-to-fail installation.

The split elevator SHOULD be a no-brainer approval for the FAA.  The FAA did
**extensive** testing of the configuration when it was certificated.  (Only
God and *maybe* the FAA knows where those records are.)

The split elevator is an obviously better installation with no downside.
All it does is minimize trim changes when changing power, even from idle to
full and visa versa.  It doesn’t change flying characteristics at all and
only changes landing characteristics by returning planes with the 1320 pound
STC (or D models) to the same landing speed as the 415-C.  (The split
elevator is often, however, an expensive modification. I flew 800 hours with
the 9° limitation and had no fuss.  This change never got near the top of my
wish list.)

Again, this is a non-expert opinion.  It’s what I’ve seen and understood in
trying to keep track of the modification process.

Ed

Reply via email to