Hi NAA Forum
I am the new owner of 11CC-251 and am starting to refurbish her. I am fortunate that our EAA group has several IA/A&P's to provide guidance. Almost all the local advice is to avoid hand propping the plane which has the C-85-8F engine. The engine is due for an overhaul and the old McDowell starter has been removed though I still have the gear plate that bolted under the prop. A certain part of me wants to hand prop but local advice is that there are times when taking short cross-county flights when a "qualified individual" at the controls is hard to find. I have heard of tie-downs but this does not get rid of the FAR requirement for a qualified individual at the controls.
One obvious way would be to locate the misssing parts of the McDowell starter and replace it. I have heard that more McDowell starters have been removed than installed which makes me wonder why McDowell parts are hard to find and did it really work all that well to begin with?
Another option would be to go with the Buzz Wagner's STC SA57RM. This option worries me in that the larger engine (I would probably use an O-200 rather than the O-235) is moved 2 inches forward with the new mount. It would be expensive (essentially complete firewall forward, lightweight starters etc.) , eat up some of my useful load and would muck with the weight and balance alot.
The last option I wonder about would be the Lasher upgrade from C-85-8F to C-85-12F (would just require a new case and possibly a heavier engine mount) and then add a lightweight SkyTec starter with a Gel Cell after the fact.
I am also looking for a new pair of control yokes. A previous owner cut the top of the yokes out to make them look more modern.
McDowell vs Electric Start
-
skyking3286
- Posts: 256
- Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2007 15:05
- Location: Kirkland, WA
- Contact:
We had a fAA discussion on the solo hand prop FAR and the upshot was that we can't find chapter and verse where that would be located in the FARs, other than that "reckless" operation catch all. Insurance companies usually are the ones who have the non-solo handprop rule. Otherwise, it's legal.
Except at Boeing Field in Seattle where the city government passed a law against handproping. . . I don't think it would hold up in a court challenge (federal law over rules city) as it's a restraint on free access to the airport.
Most of the McDowell parts ended up in landfills after being in the excess parts pile in the back of the hangar for a decade or more. There is some work in producing new parts via cottage industry but that isn't quite there yet.
Except at Boeing Field in Seattle where the city government passed a law against handproping. . . I don't think it would hold up in a court challenge (federal law over rules city) as it's a restraint on free access to the airport.
Most of the McDowell parts ended up in landfills after being in the excess parts pile in the back of the hangar for a decade or more. There is some work in producing new parts via cottage industry but that isn't quite there yet.
-
Captgrumps
- Posts: 790
- Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2006 20:18
- Location: Georgia GA10/OPN
- Contact:
There is no CAA/FAA reg on hand proping--think back before electrical systems and starters. Insurance companies are the ones that put it in their policies.
McDowell starters ended up in the scrap pile because they are not left wrist frilendly to some folks and the maintenance required to keep them working properly.
Doug
McDowell starters ended up in the scrap pile because they are not left wrist frilendly to some folks and the maintenance required to keep them working properly.
Doug
Keep the pointed end forward--
The dirty side down.....
And the blue skies on top....
The dirty side down.....
And the blue skies on top....
-
big chief 48
- Posts: 125
- Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 23:57
- Location: Duluth MN.
- Contact:
engine choice?
Shep, Hi I have an 11CC also. Mine was # 252 I think, so if it is the same year (1948) they would have been back to back on the line!! small world. Take care of that plane, there are not alot of 11cc models out there, and they have all the final improvements on them.
Do you have balanced flight controls?
About hand propping- It is so easy..don't worry about it. One or two flicks of the wrist and they are running.
Two items of extreme importance however, and mind you I have no choice but to prop alone, sometimes not tied down and also on floats and skis. When you shut down make SURE you have 800 rpm dialed in and lock the throttle. When you go to start next time you know the engine will not rev up and you are slightly off idle. The cold engine will idle 150-200 rpm's less then the 800 due to stiffness. You also need magnetos with impulse couplings or starting can be a , well, bitch.
#2. I started out swinging the prop from the front, but soon learned that, that can be awkward. ( long way to run around to the controls.) I now prop it from behind on the right hand side of the airplane. A quick duck and I am back at the controls.
If you are going to re-engine, after all the disscussion I have heard, the way to go is the 85/200 conversion. They use the case of the 85 and stuff it with a 0-200 crank and misc. parts. doesn't change anything about the airplane and gives you close to 15 extra h.p. with no penalty. Then put on a -12 ascessory case and put on the sky tech with the odyissy battery.
I have the -12 and in the middle of losing 20 lbs so the weight change will be a wash. Don't go the wagner route, you'll open up a can of worms and the chief with the 85/200 conversion is all you'll ever need. My c-85 does just fine on floats.2 people, full fuel, and gets off in 30-40 secs in 75 degree weather.
Hope this helps!!!!
Do you have balanced flight controls?
About hand propping- It is so easy..don't worry about it. One or two flicks of the wrist and they are running.
Two items of extreme importance however, and mind you I have no choice but to prop alone, sometimes not tied down and also on floats and skis. When you shut down make SURE you have 800 rpm dialed in and lock the throttle. When you go to start next time you know the engine will not rev up and you are slightly off idle. The cold engine will idle 150-200 rpm's less then the 800 due to stiffness. You also need magnetos with impulse couplings or starting can be a , well, bitch.
#2. I started out swinging the prop from the front, but soon learned that, that can be awkward. ( long way to run around to the controls.) I now prop it from behind on the right hand side of the airplane. A quick duck and I am back at the controls.
If you are going to re-engine, after all the disscussion I have heard, the way to go is the 85/200 conversion. They use the case of the 85 and stuff it with a 0-200 crank and misc. parts. doesn't change anything about the airplane and gives you close to 15 extra h.p. with no penalty. Then put on a -12 ascessory case and put on the sky tech with the odyissy battery.
I have the -12 and in the middle of losing 20 lbs so the weight change will be a wash. Don't go the wagner route, you'll open up a can of worms and the chief with the 85/200 conversion is all you'll ever need. My c-85 does just fine on floats.2 people, full fuel, and gets off in 30-40 secs in 75 degree weather.
Hope this helps!!!!
Biig Chief 48
Yes, it has balanced controls, big dorsal fin,rear auxillary tank and the original C-85-8F. At one time a wind generator hung beneath the forward gear axel legs. It has around 1400 - 1800 TTAF (original logs lost during a repossion).
One of the mentors in my EAA group is very experienced (former Navy Carrier Pilot, A & P on the GI bill, flew for United until age 60 and has restored a 1941 Taylorcraft which he hand props) and he is the one most strongly advising me to install an electric starter. Plus some airports in my area (Washington State) have rules against solo hand propping.
I am leaning toward the C-85-12F case and the skytec starter. Do you know anyone with this combination and were they able to get it signed off? Is there other STC's other than the one held by Lasher?
Yes, it has balanced controls, big dorsal fin,rear auxillary tank and the original C-85-8F. At one time a wind generator hung beneath the forward gear axel legs. It has around 1400 - 1800 TTAF (original logs lost during a repossion).
One of the mentors in my EAA group is very experienced (former Navy Carrier Pilot, A & P on the GI bill, flew for United until age 60 and has restored a 1941 Taylorcraft which he hand props) and he is the one most strongly advising me to install an electric starter. Plus some airports in my area (Washington State) have rules against solo hand propping.
I am leaning toward the C-85-12F case and the skytec starter. Do you know anyone with this combination and were they able to get it signed off? Is there other STC's other than the one held by Lasher?
-
big chief 48
- Posts: 125
- Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 23:57
- Location: Duluth MN.
- Contact:
starter
shep That shouldn't be a problem. I do not know the paperwork trail as I have yet to go this route. Maybe nathan or joea know the paper end for sure. if you want to see a picture of my plane it is in the seaplane section about 7-8 items down under 11CC on floats. I have since painted the floats and struts and it is a real pretty bird now!!
Shep,
The paperwork is not an issue with the starter and electrical system. Fitting the starter to a -12 engine is easy as the STC is included with the starter when you buy it, so your A&P/IA has everything that they need there. As well there are several 337's floating around from for the electrical system installation needed. Have your mechanic discuss this with your local FSDO before starting to get their feelings on it, but its not a problem with my local FAA reps.
Some people go with the "total loss" electrical system, that is a battery that is simply recharged every 3-4 times you go flying as opposed to installing a generator.
Problem is that once you bolt the generator on the plane and record it in the logbooks, you forever from then on have to have a radio and transponder installed in the airplane. The additional cost and bi-yearly inspections on the transponder make this a pricey change, so a battery charger looks better and better in the end.
Now, we need to touch on the -12 installation. My airplane has a C85-12 installed in it. This was done with a field approval way back in 1956, yet I have heard of some FAA offices requiring owners to jump through more hoops even though its already approved. This is another issue that you might discuss with your mechanic as well as get some more input from others on the board here.
Joe
The paperwork is not an issue with the starter and electrical system. Fitting the starter to a -12 engine is easy as the STC is included with the starter when you buy it, so your A&P/IA has everything that they need there. As well there are several 337's floating around from for the electrical system installation needed. Have your mechanic discuss this with your local FSDO before starting to get their feelings on it, but its not a problem with my local FAA reps.
Some people go with the "total loss" electrical system, that is a battery that is simply recharged every 3-4 times you go flying as opposed to installing a generator.
Problem is that once you bolt the generator on the plane and record it in the logbooks, you forever from then on have to have a radio and transponder installed in the airplane. The additional cost and bi-yearly inspections on the transponder make this a pricey change, so a battery charger looks better and better in the end.
Now, we need to touch on the -12 installation. My airplane has a C85-12 installed in it. This was done with a field approval way back in 1956, yet I have heard of some FAA offices requiring owners to jump through more hoops even though its already approved. This is another issue that you might discuss with your mechanic as well as get some more input from others on the board here.
Joe
-
Nathan K. Hammond
- Posts: 2371
- Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2004 00:22
- Location: Danville, KY (DVK)
- Contact:
337's filed in 1956 and before are considered Approved Data. About 9/10th as good as an STC. Including Approved Data GREATLY increases the acceptabillity of current 337's, it almost gurrantees them.
Pitch the engine swap as an improvement in safety; i.e. starter vs. hand propping.
nkh
Pitch the engine swap as an improvement in safety; i.e. starter vs. hand propping.
nkh
7AC-5691
Super 85-12F @ DVK
Super 85-12F @ DVK