Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: New OLD guy

  1. #1

    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    MD Eastern Shore
    Posts
    2

    New OLD guy

    Hi folks,

    I'm checking in for the first time. I have a 1948 C-170 that was restored in 1998 and has a lot of upgrades but has been sitting since 2003 due to a heart attack. I have been flying some LSA and could probably get my 3rd class back according to my heart doctor but I just came up with diabetis and so I'm thinking of staying with LSA rather than taking a chance with a turn down on the 3rd class.

    The recent announment that EAA/AOPA is going to try to get medical self certification for recreational pilots (I'm a commercial multi CFI) caught my eye since I would really like to fly the C-170 with my bride in the right seat.

    The questions that brought me here are centered on the C-170 engine and anything else that may have fallen out of order since I stopped flying the 170. I spent 3 years flying Part 135 in Homer, AK back in the mid-80's and at the time I was working under an IA and should have gotten my A&P but didn't, so I am pretty familiar with how airplanes are put together. I also was about 2/3 done with an RV-4 when I had my heart attack. We are moving to Sandpoint, ID as soon as my wife retires (have a house there) and have joined the local EAA Chapter.

    First question: The O-300 (with 150 hours to TBO) has not run in 3 years, fuel bladders may be leaking and it needs some "fixin" in other places too.....does it make sense to try to get a ferry permit or should I just pull the wings and trailer it out to ID from MD?

    Second question: Assuming the current O-300 is just a core at this point I may want to upgrade to an O-320 or O-360 with a fixed prop. There are probably STC's for the upgrades but can I make the aircraft an EXPERIMENTAL and do some other mods like 180 gear and large tires for off airport use instead of using the available STC's. Also would there be a significant advantage in doing it this way? I would be doing the work under an IA/DAR.

    All opinions are welcome!!
    Last edited by Hal Bryan; 11-23-2011 at 10:40 AM. Reason: HTML formatting

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Clarklake, MI
    Posts
    1,183
    Hey lowrider, I think it would be relatively easy to get your 170 back into flying condition. Trying to convert it to an experimental won't be a practical option, in fact it won't be an option at all. Good luck!

  3. #3
    Richard Warner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Covington, LA
    Posts
    67
    You could make it experimental, but it would have to be for a particular purpose and would have way more operation restrictions than a regular homebuilt. Let's see, you've had a heart attack and now have diabetes. I hope your bride knows how to fly. You aren't going to like what I have to say next, but if you dig into the regulations, you probably aren't actually legal to fly even as a sport pilot since you know about your medical conditions and are supposed to self-certify before each flight anyway. I do wish you luck, but personally, I think if you do fly you should have someone who also knows how to fly with you. Just my opinion.

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Flat Rock, NC
    Posts
    27

    Joseph W. Lilley

    Lowrider;
    I say pull the wings and trailer it. A plane that has set that long may have developed all kinds of problems. Dry rotted lines, wiring, critter damage just to name a few. All of which is fixable but I think better handled when it is at you new location.
    You did not say what the total time on the engine was.
    How many times has it been overhauled? Was the engine prepared for storage or just left to sit?
    None of which means that it can't be overhauled and put back in service. Can be more than a core unless log books are gone. 0-300 is not a bad engine.
    Kind of dealing with the same type of thing with the Western North Carolina Air Museum's 1954 170B (I attached a pic)
    Fuel was left in tanks and turned to tar. Wing tanks had to be flushed, along with lines and the carb torn down and cleaned.
    I also agree that you should forget the switch to expermental idea.
    Good Luck
    Attached Images Attached Images
    Last edited by joseph W. Lilley; 11-24-2011 at 08:14 PM.

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    MD Eastern Shore
    Posts
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard Warner View Post
    ..... Let's see, you've had a heart attack and now have diabetes. I hope your bride knows how to fly. You aren't going to like what I have to say next, but if you dig into the regulations, you probably aren't actually legal to fly even as a sport pilot since you know about your medical conditions and are supposed to self-certify before each flight anyway. I do wish you luck, but personally, I think if you do fly you should have someone who also knows how to fly with you. Just my opinion.
    Richard,

    Thanks for your comments, I'm sure with the best of intentions, but I believe it to be very irresponsible to make medical evaluations on someone you do not even know. A recent stress test/EKG shows all my heart damage is repaired and my cardiologist says he has no problem with me flying or riding motorcycles. The diabetis is currently being controlled with diet and I ski, snowshoe, water ski, hunt, hike and canoe on a regular basis with no ill effect. I am concerned that people will jump to conclusions without knowing the facts and situations like mine will present a negative factor to self certification either under LSA or in getting the approval from FAA on the Recreational Pilot effort. For the past 44 years I have made a determination on whether I was fit to fly and so far I have been correct. I did not fly for 2 years following my heart attack and waited until my doctor (a former Marine flight surgeon) approved my flying.

    I believe this effort by EAA and AOPA is to be applauded loudly since it will allow thousands or tens of thousands of pilots with planes that do not fit the LSA mold but are perfectly safe to be flown by individuals who are responsible and mature enough to make their own decision, as they always have, whether they can safely take to the sky and enjoy their love of flying without endangering anyone. Flying is still safer than driving and I certainly agree that there are drivers on the road that should not be there just as there are pilots who should not be flying even with a medical. By the way, my heart attack occured 2 months after a successful 2nd class flight physical. Also, my wife is a pilot too.

    Joseph,

    Thanks so much for your comments and I believe I have reached the same conclusion...pull the wings and trailer it and it is worth saving. The 170B is a beauty...gotta love those tail draggers!!!
    Last edited by lowrider; 11-25-2011 at 10:46 AM.

Posting Permissions

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