Moving C170B out of type certified...

[ZAFlyer]

Is anyone familiar with the process of moving a C170B off the type certified register in N America? I recall reading somewhere that this is possible in the US but definitely so in Canada. I am looking for a reference to the legislation that covers such a move.

I understand that once moved it may not return to TC, which makes it an generally unattractive option in N America. However, here in South Africa there is a definite advantage to getting the old aircraft off the type certified register because we can then maintain on condition, something we are not able to do if type certified.

Thanks

Ross

[Bruce Fenstermacher]

There is probably some difference in interpretation between South American regs and US and Canadian regs. In the US you can't really move the AC off the TC. We already maintain the AC on condition flying under part 91. In Canada there is a maintenance category probably like what you have in mind. There is talk of a Canadian type category in the US but it is probably far off.

[minton]

I do know that if you modify your plane (Go to far) you will be placed into a "Experimental/Exhibition" class. Also I've seen Canadian Cessna's built from parts that aren't able to be certificated in the US.

[Bruce Fenstermacher]

I knew someone would bring up the experimental exhibition class. Yes it has been done but is generally not desirable. There are restrictions you may not like. Took a friend of mine 5 years to get his modified Cessna 152 into that category. Could have been him but the system it seems does not easily offer that option.

[Ryan Smith]

There is a Frankenstein 1952 B model that had the nose from the doorposts forward from a Hawk XP grafted onto it and a turbocharged Continental IO-360 installed. It's a heck of a neat airplane, and appears to be a real performer, but it's a pain to take anywhere, from my understanding. It's also been for sale for the past four years with, so far as I know, zero bites.

Experimental/Exhibition is not a good way to go, IMHO. I'd rather sit in it in a hangar making airplane noises before I'd remove a certified airplane out of that category.

[voorheesh]

Experimental category airworthiness certificates are awarded to aircraft that do not have type certificates or do not conform to their type certificates but are in a condition for safe flight. They are issued for specific purposes including: experimental/amateur built, exhibition, research and development, crew training, marketing, air racing. Maybe another one or two. They involve a pink airworthiness certificate and Operating Limitations which are binding. Owners are limited to operation within the scope of the purpose and there are operating rules (91.319). For Experimental Exhibition, the purpose involves showing or demonstrating the aircraft at air shows/events and restricts the operation to and from, crew training, etc in an annual program letter you have to get signed by the FAA annually. You hear about this from time to time but it hardly seems worth it. For one thing, the issue of demonstrating it is in a safe condition for flight would probably be very similar to obtaining a field approval or STC for an alteration from type design, so why bother? Reading the guy's question that started this thread, do you think this is what he was asking? He mentioned a type certificate registry. Hmm can't remember where that is. Maybe he is interested in getting an export approval. If the guy is still reading this stuff, have we answered your question?

[ZAFlyer]

Thanks, Voorheesh, but the situation down here turns out to be slightly different, after much research of the law. Certified aircraft are maintained under Part 47 and currently my C170 falls under this category. However, within this one can seek to operate under Part 135, the aircraft can be flown for reward or under Part 91, owner operated. Pretty similar to the US. If under Part 91 there is debate about whether that means the aircraft can be owner maintained with a sign off by an A&P. Our local authorities do not read the regs that way.

In addition, there is a Veteran category under Part 24 - NTCA Airworthiness for those aircraft no longer in production or supported by the original manufacturer. For example, I registered a Piper J3 in that category. That allows owner maintenance with a sign off by an A&P.

The question is does Cessna still support the C170? If it no longer makes parts it could be argued there is little support and therefore the aircraft is best maintained by the owner as a Veteran. Examples abound of these sorts of aircraft registered in Veteran Category - J3's, Howard DGA15, deHavilland Chipmunks and Tiger Moth's. Time for our authorities to recognize the reality that the C170 is a 62 year old aircraft, with little or no support from the manufacturer and that the "enthusiast" owner is best placed to maintain with certain guidelines.

My last resort is to scrap and de-register the aircraft, remove the data plate and return it. Then remove the engine, re-install and register its as "rebuild "full-scale" replica" under the experimental category. But who wants to go to all that hassle?

[GAHorn]

ZAflyer, I just read and responded to your other post about this matter before seeing this one, so take that into consideration when responding to the other thread.

I see your point as regards the regulations in YOUR country about taking the aircraft out of the "certified" category.

But consider this: The Cessna 170 may be 65 years old... but it IS STILL SUPPORTED by it's mfr'r. In my opinion, THAT MAKE IT A MORE VALUABLE airplane to own than some of those other vintage types. If I needed an aileron for my 170B...then all I have to do is call Cessna. Try that with a Moth. Yes, a 170 aileron can be fabricated in a well-equipped shop. So can a Moth. But for the average flyer, without aircraft tools and expertise (and mechanic certificate) that is out of the question.
On the other hand, .. IF you can mfr an aileron or any other part for your airplane..... then WHY aren't you an A&P? IN which case you don't need a sign off by an A&P. Or if you have the expertise to mfr that part, then surely you have obtained that expertise in the presence of A&P persons who are therefore readily available to you.

I understand there are regulatory differences between our countries. Here in the U.S. a Part 91 owner/operator is allowed to perform certain preventive maintenance. Furthermore, even major maintenance may be performed by the owner/pilot (or other person even) under the supervision of an A&P.

How is that not permissible in your country? Are you saying that even under the watchful eye of an A&P that an owner/pilot may not turn a wrench on his own airplane?

[bagarre]

ZAflyer,
On the other hand, .. IF you can mfr an aileron or any other part for your airplane..... then WHY aren't you an A&P?

Because it's next to impossible for a person with a day job to get their A&P, else I'd have mine by now.

[blueldr]

Had I been able to change the registration of my C-170B from "Certified" to "Experimental" and operate it in the manner of a homebuilt, I would have done it in a heartbeat. Just being able to alter it in the manner that I desired would have been worth it, I would gladly given up the possible resale value to be able to make it "My Own".

[GAHorn]

I'm convinced that bluEldr had a second-career as a songwriter and made a million off his lyrics to "I Did It My Way" sung by that guy from Hoboken.

[ZAFlyer]

Yip I agree with the last posts regarding experimental. I've been under the "Experimental" rules too long to put up with the certified nonsense again - I have an RV8 I built and built and flew a Lancair Legacy for awhile. But it looks like I'll have to put up with the certified rules awhile longer with the C170. However, I shall persevere and with luck will get it to a stage where I can self maintain.

FWIW in this Country licenced AME's (aircraft maintenance engineers) are the only ones that can sign off a certified aircraft. In the non-type certified category there are AP's (approved persons) who have passed lesser exams and can sign out experimental, veterans and the like. At our club we have several very experienced old hand AP's who will do an inspection for the love of the job and for no more payment than a beer and lunch. I trust them more than many of the maintenance shops that make it their business to maintain aircraft.

Thanks for all the comments, I now plan to get back to flying the C170. Saturday we have a fly away organized to a airport diner about 1.5 hours from base for the proverbial $100 hamburger.

Fly safe guys.

Ross

[Azpilot]

There is a Frankenstein 1952 B model that had the nose from the doorposts forward from a Hawk XP grafted onto it and a turbocharged Continental IO-360 installed. It's a heck of a neat airplane, and appears to be a real performer, but it's a pain to take anywhere, from my understanding. It's also been for sale for the past four years with, so far as I know, zero bites.

Experimental/Exhibition is not a good way to go, IMHO. I'd rather sit in it in a hangar making airplane noises before I'd remove a certified airplane out of that category.

I'll actually jump in on this discussion because you are talking about my airplane....N3JX. The limits placed on it are changed every time it changes hands or you feel like making a modification. If you have a good relationship with your FSDO, its not hell. Most of the limitations are very similar to the experimental homebuilt. So no flight over populated area, no night, no IFR, and no use for commercial operations. It can be used for flight training, but no solo. No aerial video. No glider or banner towing. I'm limited to a 350nm range from my home airport. Anything further than that is covered in my yearly program letter. Its not really a pain. I just have to let the FSDO know at least 24 hours before I take it any where. Its normally a 5 minute phone call and a letter sent to the FSDO. But understand that experimental exhibition rules have changed in the last 2 years and are going to change very soon.

Would I do it? Heck no. I got this airplane in trade for two flying cubs. But....She's a monster.

Could it be standard category again? Yes. But you need a DAR and a serious amount of cash.