New threads

[3Dreaming]

Re: New threads

In the Resources portion (http://www.taylorcraft.org/resources.html) is a Field Approved 337 to convert a BL to a BC (see: BL to BC Page 1 Page 2) via engine change to Continental. They state on Page 2 TCDS A-696 now applies and factory wing tanks were installed per specifications. Might be handy supporting data at some point.

My BF12-65 was converted in 1982 to a BC12-65 and the FAA GADO issued a new Standard Airworthiness Certificate and signed the airframe logs to that effect. It's reflected in their online records as a BC12-65 today. There's another sleeping snake I'll not waken.

Gary

I think your airplane and the other one you mentioned were incorrectly done. They are not the only ones to have that happen to. There have been many others. My BL that I restored hab been converted to a Continental and the paperwork incorrectly changed. I had to get it changed back when I switched back to the Lycoming. Back before permanent airworthiness certificates it happed more often.

[PA1195]

Re: New threads

I think your airplane and the other one you mentioned were incorrectly done. They are not the only ones to have that happen to. There have been many others. My BL that I restored hab been converted to a Continental and the paperwork incorrectly changed. I had to get it changed back when I switched back to the Lycoming. Back before permanent airworthiness certificates it happed more often.

I agree but that snake next to the Data Plate has fangs. They filled out an Application for Airworthiness Certificate, did a conformity inspection, and signed the paperwork. Even mentions TCDS A-696 Rev. 16. Today not likely to happen.

Then STC SA1-210 was installed and the dual fuel tanks became part of the mod.

Gary

[LostnSpace]

Re: New threads

Boy, this new thread stuff really is active, speaking of the FAA and filled out paperwork, I was looking at some PT-17 paperwork, it started out as N605, but during the years when the airworthiness was renewed each year someone added a 1 to the end of it and ever since it is N6051, then a New Standard i work on shows it as built in 1941, but the company went under at the beginning of the depression, the last was about 1934, gary

[3Dreaming]

Re: New threads

Dad's A model shows the year of manufacture as 1977.

[Hank Jarrett]

Re: New threads

Probably 1937 but the guy at the FAA office didn't think man could fly yet that far back. ;-)

[wmfife]

Re: New threads

Clearly I didn't know what I was getting myself into when I decided to purchase this girl -

[PA1195]

Re: New threads

Chin up Bill it'll get taken care of ok. At least it won't take 14 years like this one did: http://eaavintage.org/wp-content/upl...aylorcraft.pdf

Gary

[Hank Jarrett]

Re: New threads

Bill, look at it this way, at the very worst, you remove the LH wing tank. I don't know about you but my bladder fills up faster than I can empty the main tank!! I have never flown a flight where I didn't need to land way before I needed to transfer fuel!

Hank

[Hank Jarrett]

Re: New threads

Bill, look at it this way, at the very worst, you remove the LH wing tank. I don't know about you but my bladder fills up faster than I can empty the main tank!! I have never flown a flight where I didn't need to land way before I needed to transfer fuel!

Hank

[astjp2]

Re: New threads

I found my wing tank installation drawing, you can use it as acceptable data.

Word it "Installed (side) optional wing tank referenced in TC 696 option (insert number here) IAW Taylorcraft drawing (insert number), this installation is Identical to installation installed in BC12-D (insert N-number) certified IAW TC-696, see Taylorcraft letter dated (reference and attach the Ferris letter) that validates that the installation is the same between aircraft certified on TC 700 and TC 696 for this installation."

If you are going use a different valve than what is called out in the drawing, you need reference it and what spec it is built under. If you change fittings or materials note it also.

I have to go back and get the drawing number for you but that is what you need to get a field approval.

[Hank Jarrett]

Re: New threads

I think that wording would only be correct for stamped rib wings (which is great) but does the Ferris letter apply to the pre war stick rib 13 and 15 rib wings? We need to get the wording just right before we open the wing tank instruction thread.

Hank

[3Dreaming]

Re: New threads

I think that wording would only be correct for stamped rib wings (which is great) but does the Ferris letter apply to the pre war stick rib 13 and 15 rib wings? We need to get the wording just right before we open the wing tank instruction thread.

Hank

The letter addresses BF and BL airplanes being the same as the BC firewall aft. Since they did not build BF and BL airplanes with stamped ribs, it must apply to stick built ribs. The more I think about it I think this is the letter on file with the New York ACO.

[astjp2]

Re: New threads

So the letter states that BC/BL/BF are the same firewall aft, does it say anywhere for what years? if not, then it applies for the purposes of a 337 field approval. Just baffle them with data from the factory and you will be good.

[flylo]

Re: New threads

It covers all the pre-wars no matter how many ribs because they were all the same airframes no matter which engine was installed. There shoud be plenty of copies of Mrs Ferris's letter. They were all on the same type certificate if I recall right. I may still have a copy if no one else does. Let me know if I need to look. Are the Franklins still being made in Poland?

[astjp2]

Re: New threads

No, last I heard, Pratt and Whitney bought PZL to get their turboprop line and scrapped the Franklin line. There are a few listed on Barnstormers for sale, there is someone selling parts out of Texas or somewhere like that. You can call them to find out for sure. Tim