TSO'd vs Non-TSO'd

Post by **joea** » Wed Nov 12, 2008 13:52

Not approving a non-TSO radio is your choice if you are the A&P/IA, but legally not sure that you have a leg to stand on.

I would love to see where in the FAR's it states that TSO'ed bits have to be used in our 1946 era airplane.

Anyone else have a comment on this?

Joe

MikeB · Post by **MikeB** » Wed Nov 12, 2008 13:52

I tend to agree with Joe. Somewhere common sense has to come into play. The point is where do you draw the line. I'm not going to use "Home Depot" bolts to hold the wings on but I might be 'tempted' to use Auto Value tie wraps for example. Part of the problem is that many parts are no longer available therefore you either have to manufacture or make do with something substantialy the same. I'm old enough to remember the old gummy gasoline and poor grade engine oil we used to get back in the 50's. Don't want to go back to that. Not to mention Ceconite over irish linen or cotton. Adding a rechargable battery certainly helps with the safety factor when running even a hand held radio or GPS. Whenever I do something to my Champ I always ask myself "Is it safe?". If yes, I don't worry too much about it but I want it to be safe. I think the Brackett air filter is a fine example (not that I'd use one

) of a good 'aftermarket' product.
My two cents worth...........

Mike Berg

Captgrumps · Post by **Captgrumps** » Wed Nov 12, 2008 15:08

I would not worry about no-TSO'd radio's if I wasn't going to file IFR. After all the Garmin GPS 196, 296, etc. along with others used in airplanes aren't TSO'd and ok as long as you only use them for primary VFR.

Unfortunately there is too much read into what is legal and what is not on these old airplanes.

Doug

gusc · Post by **gusc** » Wed Nov 12, 2008 19:20

Joe,

I have 12 new Goodyear clips that were for my Stinson 108-3. You're welcome to them for a very reasonable price if you need them.

I would rather trade for something Champion than sell.

tiav8r · Post by **tiav8r** » Wed Nov 12, 2008 19:58

When I started this thread, I didn't know that it would grow to this! But what you guys are saying makes sense to me. If it's something that relates to the airspace system, and I'm going to be flying my 7BCM up in the flight levels, then I guess I should worry about it. But for basic VFR and talking to the tower and unicom at my local fields, I see nothing wrong with non-TSO'ed com radios. Technically, I could be using nothing but light gun signals, so talking is a step up, and safer (on most days!). I guess I'm lucky to have some "good guys" at the FSDO, because I'm getting ready to install a SkyTech starter, battery, and wiriing for same. I checked with the FSDO guy that I was hooked up with, and he told me that if I mounted my battery in the position behind the rear seat (called for in the original type cert for the electric 7's), and we did all the work according to Advisory Circular 43.13b, the my mechanic and I were fine. His thoughts were that turning the prop with the starter was an advancement in safety, and was a perfectly agreeable mod. Actually, the SkyTech is STC'd, but the installation wiring is NOT. Therefore the question. With the help of a couple of guys on here who have done it, all I had to do was show them previous 337's and they were fine with it. I think that if I approached them about the non-TSO'ed com radio, they'd say the same thing. But I'll wait and do that after getting the starter, battery, and wiring approved...haha!

Terry Irwin

Holcombe · Post by **Holcombe** » Wed Nov 12, 2008 20:39

In the end, on all of this, it is up to the IA.
Three rules.
Know your IA
Talk to your IA
Do what your IA says
And these days, with the age of these plains, and the age of the few IAs who actually know about them, a good lunch every time he shows up and a card at christmass is a good idea too. and maybe something for thwe missus.

Captgrumps · Post by **Captgrumps** » Wed Nov 12, 2008 22:11

Holcombe

You are right on. The current crop of FAA maintenance inspectors that know old airplanes are few and far between. Your old time IA usually knows more about old airplanes than they do and most inspectors will admit it. To them it is paper work.

Doug

Post by **joea** » Wed Nov 12, 2008 23:10

Gus,

Thanks for the offer but pls hold onto them until someone on the list needs them. I have a stash of most parts that I hope I might need in the future but you never know.

Joe A

Roger Anderson · Post by **Roger Anderson** » Thu Nov 13, 2008 12:52

joea wrote:Not approving a non-TSO radio is your choice if you are the A&P/IA, but legally not sure that you have a leg to stand on.

I would love to see where in the FAR's it states that TSO'ed bits have to be used in our 1946 era airplane.

Anyone else have a comment on this?

Joe

Since this question of what needs to be TSOd occurs frequently, not just here, but on other discussion groups, I checked with my FSDO to determine if there is a single document that spells out TSO requirements completely. Unfortunately, the answer is no. However, the FSDO did say the the only two items on a part 91 operated GA aircraft that must be TSOd is the transponder, if one is installed, and the ELT. He said this applies to not only vintage aircraft, before TSO equipment existed, but also current manufactured aircraft as well, He said that a manufacturer may install TSOd equipment, but has no requirement to do so. He said an owner is welcome to replace or install non TSOd equipment if they wish. Realistically, the various manufacturers of equipment and the various shops selling it (Sportys, AS, etc) woulod not be making or selling non TSOd equipment if it was not legal to use it.

jc pacquin · Post by **jc pacquin** » Thu Nov 13, 2008 22:24

champs, tcrafts etc....one can worry themselves to distraction if they want to. in the 80's I owned a 195 cessna. It was a real pain in the ass. ALOT of replacement parts....volt. reg. generator, etc etc were off automobiles. (see 195 site for further enlightenment) the 195 newsletter told where to buy this stuff. An aeronca champ is VERY simple compared to a 195 in upkeep, in technique of flying, in most everything! I finally sold it and was glad to be rid of it. (the final straw was the gimbal gear which gave out.) in other words, fly it safe and don't work yourself into a lather. Its supposed to be fun, not a constant source of worry. look for trouble, you'll certainly find it! jp

Captgrumps · Post by **Captgrumps** » Thu Nov 13, 2008 23:45

jc

You cold have put a piece of non TSO'd 4130 bar stock in the slot on that Goodyear X-wind gear and locked it out like I did. The 195 Club has a Shade Tree Mechanic Manual for just that type stuff. I had two 195's with 300 Jakes and spent alot of time in the auto parts store.--Condensors, points and etc. 195's were close quarters airplanes to work on like a Bellanca--A C-85-12 with starter on a Champ is a piece of cake compared to some 195 stuff. Helped two friends maintain their 195's and was glad to see them go.

Doug

Post by **joea** » Sat Nov 22, 2008 19:50

Here we have the answer direct from a FAA guy!

~~~~~

Non-TSO'd ASI is not a problem for a 1946 Aeronca here in the US. UMI was one of the original manufacturers for ASI's, Tachs, ammeters etc. for military contracts before and after WW II.

Things that may require a TSO for Part 91 include ELT's, replacement seatbelts, transponders, encoders and a few others.