All drawings that the FAA holds are propitiatory and can not be given out with out the owners permissionOriginally Posted by Aaron Novak
All drawings that the FAA holds are propitiatory and can not be given out with out the owners permission
I was under the impression that the drawings were to become public if there had not been any activity with them for some certain length of time, and that this was a recent change. Meaning manily for engine companys that no longer exist, or the very early engines of current companies. Now of course if the rights have been bought and are current, thats different I.E. Franklin.
P.S. Quick search brought up this exact subject in the US supreme court, and indeed through the FOIA the drawings held by the FAA for the typical antique are no longer considered "secret" or of military importantance, and therefore are public. Apparently it was a long and drawn out legal battle since 2002, but the final decision was made this year.
Last edited by Aaron Novak; 11-03-2011 at 07:48 AM.
that's great,, but it really applies to dormant STCs that are not supported by anyone, but most old engines we see today like my Warner, the type certificates are owned by some one.. and some charge for the blue prints and other data, when you have that data its pretty simple to use FAR 21.9 (a) (5) to certify the part.
The FAA has added guidance that the AC 43-13, can be used as approved data to repair aircraft that has no supporting manuals or prior approved data. problem is, most do.
Last edited by Tom Downey; 11-04-2011 at 11:54 PM.
Yes, our technical ability and understanding, the resources available to us, are not an issue. We are held back by the monetary paradigm we live in. The ultimate end in the future, will be purely the cost in my opinion. The price tag is what holds us back as a species...tragically, this has no relevance to what we can ultimately achieve in all kinds of fields of endeavour.
while I understand it's important to put these documents out there, I wonder if it will open up some more headaches. For example, if you attain a drawing, for lets say a piston. Can you then manufacture that piston and sell it? Who "owns" the data? I wonder if any of these sort of issues and liabilities were addressed?
I have a Monocoupe 110 with the 125 Warner. The problem I have run into is guys that have the parts won't use them or sell them to those of us who will. We are left to manufacture our own to keep flying. Since metalurgy has improved much in 80 years we can easily make parts that far exceed the quality what was made in 1930. We can do it relativley inexpensively with CNC machines. If a group of us gets together and "engineers" cylinders for our Warners, Kinners or what have you, then we can have brand new parts that will last longer than the originals. Me, I like the idea of cylinder barrels made of 4140 and nitrided, nice forged pistons and titanium valves. Might not be original but I want to fly the hell out of my airplane and not worry about the guts coming unglued.
Before you can sell the part you must have FAA parts manufacturing authority.
You can manufacture a part for your own aircraft as long as it is based upon reliable information, i.e., duplicating a part or the drawing for the part. This is according to Mike Busch A&P, IA who presents on the EAA online seminars. A logbook entry about the method of manufacture is required. You are right about selling them, FMA, required.
I am involved at this time in trying to get the FAA to use the data that was used on my F24 to upgrade the engine to a Warner 165, on a different aircraft. The FAA considers this information intellectual property of the DPE/engineer that developed the engineering. and will not use it with out their permission. I believe this is as it should be, so now we have altered course and are trying to gain a STC for all F24s to use the 165 under this STC..
Mike Busch gets his reference from FAR 21.9 (a) (5) and AC 23-27 look them up on the FAA web site FAA.Gov
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote