Frankly that is just not a very intelligent comment and it has already been stated. Obviously there are a lot of things not listed on the TCDS that are required for flight. That is not what the TCDS is for. Here is some text from Aviation Glossary.com. These are not my words so the comments under Configuration Variations is interesting. There are just some things that an A&P knows is part of the TCDS and a spinner is one of them. Wings are not but we do know not to take them off. As far as the wing fillets go, they are part of the airframe on the Ercoupe and are required but I can list two aircraft off the top of my head that I can remove them from and be perfectly legal.
>>Type Certificate Data Sheets- Type Certificate Data Sheets (TCDS) are a part >>of the Type Certification Process and contain information relevant to the >>certification of particular aircraft. TCDS contain information that is >>useful, not only at the time the aircraft undergoes certification, but as an >>ongoing resource for the life of an aircraft. Any time a Certificate of >>Airworthiness requires renewal or re-issue, aircraft configuration or >>aircraft performance information is required or some particular limitations >>are being considered, the TCDS may provide crucial information. Following are >>examples of what might be found on the data sheets, although the information >>does vary from aircraft to aircraft. ¡Engines and propellers that can be installed and their limitations ¡Fuels and oils that are approved for use in the engine Airspeed limitations Weight and balance limits, including the centre of gravity range and the datum ¡The means for leveling the aircraft ¡Fuel and oil capacities and amounts that are unusable ¡Control surface movements Operating ceiling ¡The certification basis for the aircraft ¡Equivalent safety items ¡Special conditions The flight manual that is applicable to particular models ¡Placarding requirements ¡Configuration variations (e.g. Whether the aircraft may operate without a prop spinner) ¡Variations between aircraft models Kevin1 --- In [email protected], Glenn Putnam <putp...@...> wrote: > > cant find the wings in the tcds try flying without them Glenn > On Jun 7, 2010, at 10:48 PM, BRIAN BARAGWANATH wrote: > > > You are obviously not an AP, so you must be a Lawyer !!! With that > > said, I REST MY CASE !!! > > > > Brian Baragwanath > > N3085H > > Cranland-28M > > > > --- On Sun, 6/6/10, William R. Bayne <ercog...@...> > > wrote: > > > > From: William R. Bayne <ercog...@...> > > Subject: Re: [ercoupe-tech] Re: Prop Back Plate > > To: [email protected] > > Date: Sunday, June 6, 2010, 11:24 PM > > > > > > Sometimes on questions that have only one right answer it is > > necessary to climb into the "can of worms" containing myths and > > speculations and facts because examining each closely and > > separating them is necessary before the truth can illuminate. If > > it were easy it would have been done long ago. > > > > Truth is not something established democratically. It is what it > > is. The spinner may be considered part of the engine, as opposed > > to the airframe (and respective Logs); but, either way it was part > > of each Ercoupe as it was officially signed off as airworthy before > > ERCO could sell it. > > > > I don't want a mechanic that believes the four or eight pages of > > text (the TCDS) lists all specific requirements of a safe and > > airworthy Ercoupe. This is the comfort of ostriches with heads in > > sand (if they really do that). Similarly, it is aircraft owners > > and operators who "pay the price" when their certified mechanics > > take such "shortcuts" and they a ramp check grounds them on a trip > > or metal is bent and records reviewed with a 20-20 hindsight > > microscope. > > > > As an example, appropriate torques that are Ercoupe-specific are > > scattered throughout the Service Manuals for the whole series. > > These manuals are not part of or referenced by the TCDS. They are > > not CAA-FAA approved. Torques and other specific information in > > them as well as the Bulletins and Memoranda are ignored by > > mechanics at the owner's peril. The FARs are clear that the > > operator of an aircraft bears primary responsibility that it be > > airworthy before operation whether he/she understands that or not. > > This issue is, therefore, independent of being or not being a > > mechanic. > > > > Sensenich props, original on the Ercoupe did not come with a > > spinner. McCauley props, original on Forneys, Alons and M10s did > > not come with a spinner. Ercoupe spinners were manufactured by > > ERCO. Their part number is ERCO's. Whenever cooling tests were > > performed by ERCO for the CAA/FAA, a spinner was fitted. > > Accordingly, associated approvals remain contingent on the presence > > of the same type of spinner. > > > > There is no record whatsoever that appearance was ever a factor in > > Fred Weick's incorporation of a spinner into the Ercoupe design. > > Once he did, and an Ercoupe was certificated with that spinner it > > ceases to be in compliance with it's type certificate when the > > spinner is removed (presuming removal to be a "major modification"). > > > > While I agree that "standard equipment" and "optional equipment" > > are different, the obvious implication is that "standard equipment" > > is synonymous with "required equipment". Even "optional equipment" > > placed on the aircraft Equipment List requires appropriate > > notations in pertinent Logs and Weight and Balance records when > > removed, relocated or replaced. > > > > To the best of my knowledge I have never stated or implied to > > anyone on these lists at any time that I am an A&P or certificated > > mechanic of any kind. I'm not. That said, if I see a certificated > > mechanic attempting to taxi an aircraft that is still tied down, I > > will warn him. I will also steadfastly defend until hell freezes > > over a mechanic's right to ignore my warning ;<) > > > > Regards, > > > > William R. Bayne > > .____|-(o)-|____. > > (Copyright 2010) > > > > -- > > On Jun 6, 2010, at 20:29, Kevin wrote: > > > > > Here goes another can of worms but.. the fact is that the spinner > > is not listed in the TCDS for any prop/engine combination so it is > > not required. The spinner is not a fairing that is part of the > > airframe. It is part of the cooling system and on some aircraft > > with some combinations of props and engines it is required but none > > of those combinations apply to the Ercoupe. The spinner came with > > most Ercoupes from the factory because it was standard equipment > > with most props. It was standard equipment because Fred liked the > > looks of the Ercoupe better with the spinner so Erco made it > > standard. Standard equipment is different than required equipment. > > > > > > This is my opinion as an A&P, this is also the opinion of every > > other A&P/IA I know except John Cooper. It is also the opinion of > > the FSDO here in Cincinnati so I feel OK expressing it. It is not > > Williams opinion who is not an A&P and I will not participate in a > > long rat hole again over it so I this is all I will say. > > > > > > > > > Kevin1 > > > > >
