Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 39

Thread: Obtaining Title for Data Plates

  1. #21
    Mayhemxpc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Manassas, Virginia
    Posts
    603
    Quote Originally Posted by CHICAGORANDY View Post

    Beyond that this reminds me of the tale of a fellow who boasted about owning the same working axe in his family for 250 years, he only replaced the handle twenty-eight times and the head five. You have a souvenir B-17 data plate, nothing more. AFAIK data plates do not an airplane make. But SINCERE kudos on having those filled dump trucks.
    So then how is it that the Navy says the sailing ship in Boston harbor is THE U.S.S. Constitution? I think every piece from stem to stern has been replaced over 200+ years except for the name plate and the bell. Is it the bell that makes the difference? (Maybe? Since that represents at least one original part?)
    Chris Mayer
    N424AF
    www.o2cricket.com

  2. #22

    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    363
    I am not educated on the requirements for percentage of original parts required to call something the 'original' something. My gut emotional response has me thinking it would be more than a nameplate or in the case of a ship a single bell. Otherwise it 'would' be just like that farmer's axe.

    In the specific case of the one ship mentioned?

    "Naval History and Heritage Command Detachment Boston, the unit charged with overseeing Constitution’s maintenance and repair, estimates that 10 to 15 percent of the ship’s fabric is composed of timber installed between 1795 and 1797. This “original” wood includes the ship’s keel, lower futtocks, and the deadwood at the stem and stern."

    If there were at least 10% of a specific airplane on hand and the rest needed to be new materials? I reckon that qualifies too? Again, there's NOTHING wrong with creating a new construction 'clone' of something either, you just wouldn't call it the 'original' thing. The EAA has a dandy 'replica' of the Spirit of St Louis, great to examine, take pics of and watch fly. They don't claim that it IS the Spirit though.
    Last edited by CHICAGORANDY; 10-22-2017 at 09:11 PM.

  3. #23

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    WA
    Posts
    913
    Like Marty said, FAR 45.13 seems rather clear about switching data plates:

    "(b) Except as provided in paragraph (d)(1) of this section, no person may remove, change, or place identification information required by paragraph (a) of this section, on any aircraft, aircraft engine, propeller, propeller blade, or propeller hub, without the approval of the Administrator.(c) Except as provided in paragraph (d)(2) of this section, no person may remove or install any identification plate required by §45.11 of this part, without the approval of the Administrator.
    (d) Persons performing work under the provisions of Part 43 of this chapter may, in accordance with methods, techniques, and practices acceptable to the Administrator—
    (1) Remove, change, or place the identification information required by paragraph (a) of this section on any aircraft, aircraft engine, propeller, propeller blade, or propeller hub; or
    (2) Remove an identification plate required by §45.11 when necessary during maintenance operations.
    (e) No person may install an identification plate removed in accordance with paragraph (d)(2) of this section on any aircraft, aircraft engine, propeller, propeller blade, or propeller hub other than the one from which it was removed."

  4. #24

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Clarklake, MI
    Posts
    2,261
    Quote Originally Posted by Eli Josephs View Post
    I am aware, but it is not helpful.



    I'll do a title search when I have a little more time. I will ask the seller if he can obtain a bill of sale for when he obtained the plate. I'm considering getting info directly from the FAA for details, but I'm not sure who I should contact. Do you have any suggestions?

    I know that I could go amateur built, but that would have certain restrictions to its use, thus fewer people would have an interest in helping the project along.
    You can call your local FSDO and ask to speak to the ASI (Airworthiness Safety inspector) on duty. You can also ask about buying and selling data plates not attached to aircraft. It’s illegal.

    Only the B17G TC holder can build a new B17G. Last I heard Transcontinental and Western held the LTC for a B17G

  5. #25
    Thanks for everyone's help!

    The short answer is "no," it can not be used. I could maybe get around the "changing data plate" regulations, but TC and the fact that it is all new means it just won't work.

    For a while, I've been entertaining the idea of recovering a wreck, and restoring it. I'll be making another forum post about this while I'm still thinking about potential starting points for this project.
    Last edited by Eli Josephs; 10-22-2017 at 10:30 PM.

  6. #26
    rwanttaja's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    2,004
    Quote Originally Posted by Mayhemxpc View Post
    So then how is it that the Navy says the sailing ship in Boston harbor is THE U.S.S. Constitution? I think every piece from stem to stern has been replaced over 200+ years except for the name plate and the bell. Is it the bell that makes the difference? (Maybe? Since that represents at least one original part?)
    For that matter, probably none of your body cells are original to your birth. Who are you, and what have you done with Chris?

    It's actually not a bad analogy. The Constitution was launched in 1797. Since then wood has been replaced, iron has been replaced, wetware has been replaced. But it has had the continual identity as the United States Ship Constitution over all that time.

    They didn't just stroll out to the dock, jack up the bell, and slide an entirely new ship underneath*. Which was, basically, the original line of thought about the aircraft data plate.

    Ron "Helm's alee!" Wanttaja

    * Note that this is was what was done with the Constitution's contemporary, USS Constellation. There are still arguments as to whether the Constellation on display in Baltimore was launched in 1797 or 1853.

  7. #27

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Alabama
    Posts
    2,040
    Now this is interesting, as the data plate is the aircraft, and the words "restore" and "replace" can be murky. As Ron noted, the arbiter is the FAA.

    One could, in fact, build the ship and slide it under the bell and plate, providing two things:

    1) One built it EXACTLY as it was originally.
    2) Uncle Sam smiled on one's efforts.

    In mind is WWI aircraft, which are mostly bits of fittings, wheels, some engines, and the data plate at a this point. I know of a couple aircraft that were built with a surprising amount of original hardware (less wood and fabric), including engines with providence. At some point the line gets blurry, and one could argue that the plane is restored around the data plate and not the other way around.

    Other than having bragging rights on owning and flying Pilot X's plane that flew over Verdun, I don't know why one would bother with all the fuss, though. Maybe a ribbon from an airshow?

    Plus it wouldn't be an Experimental, but Certified. We have a guy restoring a Champ, and at this point he's basically built it from scratch, as it was much more of a basket case than he thought. But we're all big weirdos when it comes to airplanes.

    Frank "Except for the spars, ribs, braces on the wings, longerons and stringers on the fuselage, gear, controls, panel, and engine, it's all original" Giger
    The opinions and statements of this poster are largely based on facts and portray a possible version of the actual events.

  8. #28

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    382
    I have always wondered that fact. When does an airplane stop being an airplane. Meaning, at what point does a basket case become unrestorable ( and I am not talking about the financial part because there is always someone with deep enough pockets). I have seen piles of corroded aluminum going in for restoration. Perhaps 5% of the airplane will be used, the rest is just templates for new pieces. That to me is a NEW airplane and has nothing to do with the plane that rolled off the assembly line. They are multi-million dollar homebuilts. So where is that line that says the OP can't hand build a B-17 and slap on the data plate.
    Rick "on a lot of things I am completely stupid" H
    (Signature copyright royalty payment sent to Ron)

  9. #29

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Clarklake, MI
    Posts
    2,261
    Quote Originally Posted by wyoranch View Post
    That to me is a NEW airplane and has nothing to do with the plane that rolled off the assembly line. They are multi-million dollar homebuilts. So where is that line that says the OP can't hand build a B-17 and slap on the data plate.
    There is nothing that says he can't do that. The data plate will say "experimental amateur-built" and that is the rub. He doesn't want an E/A-B airplane. He wants a genuine Boeing airplane. Can't put a Boeing data plate on a replica.

    I can build a C-172 in my backyard. What I can't do is go to the junk yard find a 172 data plate and slap it on my creation. Even if it is exact reproduction n every respect.

  10. #30

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    382
    But how does it work for say a warbird recovered from some swamp somewhere when 95% of the plane is made in a shop?
    Thanks to everyone for their patience
    Rick

Posting Permissions

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