Bill Are You Readying This

[rkittine]

I wonder what the status of the STC for the C-85-12 installation in a post war 11AC, BC or CC Chief is? Somewhere else people area claiming that the service bulleting allowing the installation of a C-85-8 also covers the C-85-12 which they claim is the same engine. From my conversations with you, I was under the impression that the installation of a C-85-12 in a Post War Chief currently could only be done with a 337 and Field Approval. Last we talked you seemed to think you were close getting the STC. Would love to get clarification and hear more.

Thanks, Bob
73 - WA2YDV

[Paul Agaliotis]

Bob,
My posting on the other site is just to give other solutions to this problem, not to put Bill on the spot.
The Continental Overhaul Manual gives you the Model Designations in Section I item 1.1, they are the C75,C85,C90 and O200. It further explains them in Section III, a -8 with no provision for Starter/Generator, and the -12 with Starter/Generator installed. This information can be used as approved data for whatever the installer want to do with it. That can be Field Approval, STC, or a log entry as a Minor Alteration. What ever the local ASI/FSDO agrees to.
The TCDS has the 11BC engine as the C85-8F so only the flange shaft is approved. Even when it replaces a tapershaft A65? Of course not, it is a minor alteration to the engine model. Just as all of the dash number and letter designations are.
I try to use all of the information and Approved Data that I can find to support my repair/alteration plan.
Paul

[rkittine]

Paul, Bill and I chatted for a long time today. See my other post and you might want to give Bill a call. - Cheers, Bob

[EDGEFLY]

Paul, Bill and I chatted for a long time today. See my other post and you might want to give Bill a call. - Cheers, Bob

Aw, come on, Bob. After, such an illuminating discussion betwixt the three of you, what is your conclusion re: the STC status ? I'm expecting Paul to speak out on his view of it. Or, at least go back to his position of 8/21. Maybe, Bill will give us his view here on the forum too.

Dale

[rkittine]

Hey Dale,

I am no expert on this and in my original Chief was able to put the engine in with a 337 and field approval based on a lot of data including that supplied by Don Sword. Now trying to put a plain C-85-12 into another Chief, I went to what I would consider one of the great sources and followed what Bill said. Who knows what the interpretations are that will be acceptable, but I am flying LSA and have a lot of asserts and I cross every T and dot every I. Bill said he has not yet received the STC for the installation of the C-85-12 in an 11AC or BC, but he was going to contact the FAA to see where it stands. I know he was in the que when then government shut down was used as an excuse for late response on things like this, CFI renewals (which I got just prior to the 120 expiration of the temporary) etc.

A friend recently put a C-85-12 into a 7ACA, but the FAA would not take anything like an Aeronca or Champion Type Certificate or Service letter and he had to go through the whole field approval process, which he also ended up getting.

In any case I am sure he will post it when he gets it.

Ciao - Bob

[Paul Agaliotis]

Dale,
These subjects can be difficult for everyone.
My position is, if I have approved data for ANY installation it is allowed with a log entry. Provided it doesn't meet the major repair/alteration criteria. If the ASI or ACO have some issue with the repair the onus is on them to provide the FAR violated. If there was no violation, then their response is nothing more than an opinion. And that, in a nutshell, is the problems in the FAA. They want to enforce by opinion, rather than the published regulations. If there is a problem with the regulations, or the interpretation of them, than it is their mandate to change them.
Paul

[Richard Murray]

Paul,

And that, in a nutshell, is the problems in the FAA. They want to enforce by opinion, rather than the published regulations. If there is a problem with the regulations, or the interpretation of them, than it is their mandate to change them.

Truer words were never spoken. Each ASI I have had contact with attempts to find the rule and then use it to support their conclusion. No rule they are beside themselves and don't want to be the one to decide so they answer no. If you can find an ASI who has twenty-five years or more working experience you can get a lot accomplished.

[MikeB]

We (our IA) apparently had an issue with installing a Cessna 150 exhaust system on a 7AC. Even though we had all kinds of supporting paperwork (approved 337's) and I have them approved on both my old 7AC and my L16 w/0200, it wound up having to go through Chicago engineering for approval. Seems like common sense should prevail but I guess it doesn't at times. The Cessna 150 exhaust is a pretty common 'improvement' on a lot of Champs and Chiefs. Personally it's a much cleaner installation than the Halon Wilson system and without all the stack bends.
Mike