Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 42

Thread: What flight/engine instruments do we really need?

  1. #11
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    1,718

    Rolls Eyes

    Quote Originally Posted by Bill Greenwood View Post
    Ugghhh
    In my opinion when someone writes that "there can be no "opinions" on this, it strikes me as unusually narrow minded, especially on a forum where other experiences , knowledge and yes opinions are part of the discussion.
    +1. Also authoritarian, fascist and pedantic. Of course there are numerous appellate courts that would strongly disagree with this "no opinions" notion.

  2. #12
    DaleB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    KMLE
    Posts
    654
    Fascist??? That must just be the new buzzword for people who say things we don't agree with. I think I've heard it used more in the past few months than in the twenty years prior combined.

    Of the ten instruments listed in the reg referenced earlier in this thread, a few simply are not applicable to most new experimental planes. Specifically manifold pressure, landing gear indicator, and either water or oil temp. I found it interesting that even a slip indicator isn't required. So what you're left with is:

    Airspeed indicator.
    Altimeter.
    Magnetic direction indicator.
    Tachometer.
    Oil pressure gauge.
    Temperature gauge (either oil or coolant)
    Fuel gauge for each tank.
    Measure twice, cut once...
    scratch head, shrug, shim to fit.

    Flying an RV-12. I am building a Fisher Celebrity, slowly.

  3. #13
    Sam Buchanan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    KDCU
    Posts
    567
    Quote Originally Posted by Marc Zeitlin View Post

    To summarize my original response to THIS post, however, I'll argue that even if not legally required, it will be difficult to get a FSDO or DAR signoff without the (b) section instruments installed, and any ramp check of an aircraft without any of the (b) instruments would result in a 91.13 violation. IMO.

    I would be interested to hear from anyone who's either attempted or succeeded in getting an AC from a FSDO or DAR with missing 91.205(b) instruments, and during the attempt, what the response was to pointing out that 8130.2<x> doesn't anywhere explicitly require 91.205(b) compliance.

    Sorry for the dogmatism...
    Naaawwww.....you shouldn't have any difficulty with a DAR because they are very familiar with the Operating Limitations since they have to type the things up so you can include them in your aircraft docs. I've received Experimental Airworthiness Certificates from DAR's for three aircraft over the past twenty years, each aircraft lacking the full complement of "official" instruments. The last one, a Fokker D.VII replica had a really sparse panel when the inspection occurred. In each case, the DAR had no issues with the panel since the op lims clearly stated the aircraft was only to be operated daytime VFR unless equipped per 91.205. It is the responsibility of the pilot to make sure the aircraft is properly equipped for any particular flight, not the DAR.
    Last edited by Sam Buchanan; 09-06-2017 at 04:29 PM.
    Sam Buchanan
    The RV Journal RV-6 build log
    Fokker D.VII semi-replica build log

  4. #14

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Clarklake, MI
    Posts
    2,461
    Quote Originally Posted by Marc Zeitlin View Post
    To summarize my original response to THIS post, however, I'll argue that even if not legally required, it will be difficult to get a FSDO or DAR signoff without the (b) section instruments installed, and any ramp check of an aircraft without any of the (b) instruments would result in a 91.13 violation. IMO.
    Opinion noted. Doesn't seem to be an avalanche of 91.13 violations in FAA enforcement action records. When it gets down the the gritty, can't enforce something that doesn't exist.

    I would be interested to hear from anyone who's either attempted or succeeded in getting an AC from a FSDO or DAR with missing 91.205(b) instruments, and during the attempt, what the response was to pointing out that 8130.2<x> doesn't anywhere explicitly require 91.205(b) compliance.
    Over the years, I've seen a number of homebuilts that didn't have a magnetic direction indicator. Zip, Nada. Don't know if they were originally equipped without or removed later.

  5. #15
    rwanttaja's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    2,948
    Quote Originally Posted by Floatsflyer View Post
    Ron's diagram of a Cub panel shows 5 instruments, 6 if you include the combo oil pressure and oil temp. The primer and the cabin heat are not instruments. Neither is a fuel gauge, either a float/wire thingy on the nose tank or a glass gauge positioned on the left side wing root on much later models. Even if you add a turn and bank ball to make 7, you still don't have the 10 Marc demands to be required.
    Marc referenced 91.205, which makes clear several instruments are of the "if applicable" sort. Oil pressure gauges if using an engine with a pressurized oil system (e.g., two-strokes are off the hook), temperature gauges for liquid-cooled engines, landing gear position indicator if the plane has retractable gear, etc. A glider will thus require only three (assuming the gear doesn't retract), and most engines can't escape two or three of the remaining.

    Hmmm, steam powerplant probably could.

    Anyway, as was rightly pointed out, 91.205 is specifically applicable only to standard-category aircraft, but as stated, the chance of a DAR giving you your ticket if you LACK one of the "required" instruments might be a bit low.

    Two lovely loopholes in the reg. The first deals with the altimeter; one is required for VFR but a SENSITIVE one is required for IFR. The single-arm Cub types are OK for VFR, and, if I remember right, they don't even have to be adjustable for local pressure.

    The other factor is the lack of a compliance specification. We have to have an airspeed...and...altimeter...and tachometer, but all they have to do is provide the aircraft speed, altitude, and engine RPM, respectively. The spring & vane type olde fashioned airspeed indicator is legal. GPS altitude readout would probably be legal for VFR, though a thousand or so fathoms of lead line might be a scary option. And lots of guys, including myself, use stuff like Tiny Tachs.

    Ron Wanttaja
    Last edited by rwanttaja; 09-06-2017 at 06:52 PM.

  6. #16
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    1,718
    Quote Originally Posted by DaleB View Post
    Fascist??? That must just be the new buzzword for people who say things we don't agree with. I think I've heard it used more in the past few months than in the twenty years prior combined.
    Gee, I wonder why?😏

    Hardly a new buzzword, goes back 100 years. It's not used to describe people who say things we don't agree with. It's used to describe or label political regimes or individuals who engage in totalitarian practices that will not tolerate anyone or anything with differing opinions and opposing viewpoints. Full disclosure: I was a Poli Sci Major.

  7. #17

    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Tehachapi, CA
    Posts
    219
    Quote Originally Posted by Sam Buchanan View Post
    I've received Experimental Airworthiness Certificates from DAR's for three aircraft over the past twenty years, each aircraft lacking the full complement of "official" instruments.
    I stand corrected - thank you for the information.

    And thanks to all the folks that felt the need to respond with insults to a comment that I had already retracted due to another comment that reminded me of the particular applicability (or lack thereof) of the regs. I was wrong and I said so prior to your comments - how often do most folks do that on these fora?

  8. #18

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    WA
    Posts
    1,205
    I think fascism is an economic system defined by central state control of business. Central control tends to allow a dictatorship takeover. An economic system made up of individual and freely trading private businesses cannot be centrally controlled by dictators.
    Last edited by Bill Berson; 09-06-2017 at 09:00 PM.

  9. #19

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    2,575
    Floats and Bill B, maybe right bark, but up the wrong tree. This topic is about flight instruments, not fascism.

  10. #20

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    WA
    Posts
    1,205
    Yeah.
    I built a motorglider powered by two Tecumseh engines. The FAA inspector told me he could not issue an airworthiness certificate without an oil pressure guage. The engines didn't have an oil pump.
    Cant argue with the authority.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •