[ARC5] WW2 Aircraft

[Richard Knoppow]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Richard C. Grosser" <richard at richardgrosser.net>
To: <ARC5 at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Friday, October 21, 2011 11:06 AM
Subject: [ARC5] WW2 Aircraft


>I must add a reality check to this thread. Airplanes are 
>registered by the
> FAA in several categories, for example:
>
> Experimental - very limited use - no passengers Limited 
> Exhibition. No
> passengers for hire (make a donation to the foundation & 
> get a free ride) No
> more than 15 seats Standard Category - The same as an 
> airliner.
>
>
>
> We have a C47 that is a standard category airplane and a 
> PBY that we are
> restoring to standard category. Nothing can go into this 
> aircraft that is
> not FAA certified for that particular aircraft except 
> cargo. We could not
> even change the wind-up clock to a different one that was 
> in the plane
> without obtaining a STC approval from the FAA. All radio 
> equipment in that
> plane must be certified for that plane. Every nut, bolt, 
> washer, wire and
> even crimp lug must be certified and carry a current AN, 
> Mil or NAS code. If
> any component is added or removed, the aircraft must be 
> weighed and a new
> weight and balance table calculated. Everyone who works on 
> this aircraft
> must be in a drug and alcohol testing program and under 
> the direct
> supervision of a FAA licensed A&P mechanic. The aircraft 
> and all of its log
> books (engines, propellers and airframe) must be certified 
> by an independent
> inspector (IA) Admittedly not everyone follows the letter 
> of the law, but if
> you do not and something goes wrong, you will be in deep 
> do-do.
>
>
>
> Additionally, the FAA is imposing new regulations on 
> experimental aircraft
> that are very onerous. The rules are much more stringent 
> for aircraft
> weighing over 13,500 pounds. If the Collings foundation 
> has working WW2
> radio equipment in their aircraft, it is probably illegal 
> depending on
> registration type and STC status.
>
>
>
> We have 32 military aircraft of which six are flyable at 
> the present time,
> at least 20 of them have flown in the last 10 years. The 
> FAA just shows up
> without warning and asks to inspect our aircraft.
>
>
>
> Working on aircraft is very different from working on 
> anything else. I
> recently told a Doctor at a party that I was attending, 
> "You can only kill
> one person at a time, I can kill hundreds".
>
>
>
> Richard Grosser
>

    I well understand the rationale of this system but, 
supposing you have an antique aircraft which is equipped 
with modern, approved communication and navigation equipment 
but has authentic period radio equipment installed for 
display purposes only and not for practical use, would that 
be legal? I have been in a working B-17 and B-24 which were 
visiting here but did not fly in them although they offer 
rides. I did not pay special attention to the radio 
equipment at the time so I don't know what is there. Since 
these aircraft are flown around the country I can not 
imagine their not being equipped with modern radio and nav 
equipment even if the old stuff is on display.


--
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles
WB6KBL
dickburk at ix.netcom.com