Just for the record I am not inferring that Glenn is not intelligent as I am sure he is. I was just saying that that comparison has been made before and is still not applicable.
Kevin1 --- In [email protected], "Kevin" <kgass...@...> wrote: > > 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 <putput1@> 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 <ercoguru@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > From: William R. Bayne <ercoguru@> > > > 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 > > > > > > > > >
