Where is everyone getting the 15 gallon fuel tanks to perform this STC? I was not aware they are still being made or any available.
How could performing this STC that requires a leading edge mod on the wings be cheaper than reinstalling a header tank and relocating the radios. With the 15 gal wing tank STC, I thinks this makes wing removal much more involved having to remove the tanks inorder to access the wing bolts.... Eddie Wilson N5625F ________________________________ From: Glenn Putnam <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Mon, August 16, 2010 12:00:52 PM Subject: Re: [ercoupe-tech] Re: Fuel System Problems Yes it removes header and replaces the wing tanks with twin 15 gal tanks with elect.. pump Glenn On Aug 15, 2010, at 8:22 PM, Tom & Susan Crocco wrote: > > >Thanks Dan. > >Do you happen to know if the 30Gal conversion removes the nose tank? > >Tom > > >From: Caliendo Dan >Sent: Sunday, August 15, 2010 4:37 PM >To: [email protected] >Subject: Re: [ercoupe-tech] Re: Fuel System Problems > > >The other option you alluded to that may be the cheaper/easier way to go is to >convert the wing > >tanks to fit the STC for 30 gal. tanks. ? >Dan C > > > > >On Aug 15, 2010, at 10:42 AM, Ed Burkhead wrote: > > >>Tom wrote: >>> Is it possible to prepare and submit 337's for work past >>> completed, AND is there an STC that covers the work >>> that was done to my plane? >> >>Tom, >> >>I'm not an A&P or AI and just have a pilot's level knowledge of this >>subject. >>Nevertheless, let me take a swing at answering your question. >> >>A standard STC is researched, engineered and approved by the FAA. It's a >>market >>commodity the use of which can be sold. There is no STC for removing the >>header >>tank on an Ercoupe that I know of. >> >>Not to worry too much. >> >>Yes, you can document and get approval for a previously performed >>modification - >>subject to the information below. >> >>The form 337 is often called a one-time-STC. It is a supplement covering >>changes to the type certificate for one plane - approved by the FAA. It is >>possible to use another pilot's form 337 as justification for a change to >>your >>airplane. Form 337s signed off before a certain date are considered >>"approved >>data" because all the FAA people back then who did such sign-offs were >>engineers. Form 337s signed off since that time may be accepted as "approved >>data" or maybe not. It'll depend on how much the current FAA wienie feels >>that >>approving your change might threaten his/her career. >> >>In the last few years, the FAA has been reluctant to approve major changes to >>aircraft without some "approved data." "Approved data" lets the blame fall >>on >>the person who created the "approved data" rather than on the FAA wienie who >>signs off on your form 337. >> >>In the absence of "approved data" in the form of an old form 337, an approved >>STC, the FAA staffer may require an engineering analysis from a Designated >>Engineering Representative (DER) who is a non-FAA person authorized to make >>such >>analysis and charge money for the service. With a favorable analysis from a >>DER, some pretty major changes can be made. >> >>Many people have bought planes and found changes for which there is no >>documentation on file with the FAA. (See that document CD.) If it is a >>"major" >>change, then the plane is not legally airworthy until a form 337 is submitted >>and approved. You may be required to include an engineering analysis from a >>DER. >> >>For your fuel tank removal and fuel system restructuring, you may well need >>to >>have "approved data" to use as a reference. Perhaps one of the members here >>can >>fax or scan/e-mail you a copy of prior approval for removal of the header >>tank. >> >>Your fuel system restructuring is similar to that needed for the 30 gallon >>wing >>tank installation and the STC for that modification may constitute adequate >>approved data for your plane's change. I'd urge you to talk to Skyport ( >>http://ercoupeparts.com/ ) and/or watch for a response from John Cooper here >>on >>the forum. >> >>If your current mechanic is unwilling to do the paperwork and get approval >>for >>the mods to your plane, you need to find a mechanic who will. I can't blame >>this guy too much. He's presented with a plane that has a strangely modified >>fuel system AND which is having fuel problems sever enough to cause a forced >>landing. A mechanic with plenty of other work to do may well decline to dive >>into this. But in doing so to me, he would forfeit any further business from >>me >>if I could possibly help it. >> >>Unfortunately, I think you have some work to do and will need to pay for some >>professional paperwork. In addition, some physical work will probably need >>to >>be done to solve your current fuel delivery problems. >> >>Me, I liked to do cross country trips and like having the extra fuel reserve >>in >>the header tank as well as the excellent hard-to-mismanage fuel system. If >>it >>were mine, I'd seriously consider buying a refurbished fuel tank and >>modifying >>the instruments as needed, putting the plane back to the original design. >> >>Sorry, >> >>Ed >> >>Ed Burkhead >>http://edburkhead.com/Ercoupe/index.htm >>ed -at- edburk???head. com change -at- to @ and remove >>question marks and extra space >> > > > > >
