totter

Well, here you go. Sealand posted this in August on their FB page: Sealand Aviation August 24 at 4:07 PM · Great news for our American skydiving friends! Sealand Aviation Ltd. has been granted US STC SA04835NY for the installation of a Skydive step, Skydive door, and seat removal for all Cessna 182 thru 182P model aircraft. This US STC pairs with our Canadian STC SA11-68. Now there is no place in North America that you cannot jump out of a Sealand Aviation 182 Skydive Plane. Two different steps are available for the two different landing gear styles. The seatbelts are replaced with a single tag-line harness for each jumper so there is less clutter to get tangled up in. If you already have a door, just install the step. If you don’t need a step, just install the door. If you need to fly passengers, reinstall the seats and you are good to go. The approval allows you to choose how much or how little you install. Jumping out of a 182 has never been easier or looked so good! Email parts@sealandaviation for price and availability. #aviation #skydive

That's a Canadian STC so you would want to do your Due Diligence and make sure that its been standardized for install on a N# registered aircraft first before purchase, i.e. the FAA needs to accept it. As Rob and Joe have said Sealand has a boat load of STCs for all aircraft types, so it may have already been standardized. Cheers

The above is from FAR Part 43, Appendix D. If you are going to own an aircraft then you may want to become familiar with the entire Appendix. But, in reference to your statement, the engine mount/s are required to be inspected. Also, even though it does not specifically call out for spark plugs they are part of the Ignition System which is required to be inspected as per Line (10). Every manufacture can have different procedures on HOW to do the inspect, so the FAA makes a general statement and it is up to the mechanic/IA to find out what the proper procedures are.

If you are looking for simple ( and which would add the least amount of weight) then I agree with DBCOOPER. Just primer it. If it needs to look pretty then add a coat of paint. There are aftermarket interior pieces that you can buy. Aeroplastics is one manufacture. If you're looking for the DIY project and want something very durable, not too heavy then I'd use Kydex. Most jump planes that have redone interiors are done in Kydex. It's easy to work with, easy to cut, easy to form/mold. Can by attached using simple fasteners (I.E. sheet metal screws, pop rivets).It meets all the requirements of Part 23. But that in turn means that it can be pricey.

Unless the FAA issues an AD that sets a Life Limit it is the manufacture that sets all Life Limits. And the only reason the FAA would issue an AD concerning the limit to an engine or its components would be if a failure/s occurred do to time/days in service.

Hope this will clarify a little for you. When you look at a standard aircraft, let's say a Caravan, you'll see that it has seating for 9 passengers plus two pilots. This was how the aircraft was certified by the FAA. The Type Certificate Data Sheet or TCDS. The TCDS is basically the specifications that the manufacture states they'll build the aircraft to and it is approved by the FAA. The TCDS includes, not only max seating, but also type of engines, propellers, fuel type and load, CG ranges, Max gross weight, etc... So now let's take the Caravan again. TCDS says its certified for 9 passengers or less. BUT your a DZ operator and you want to put 14 people in it. (14 is being used as example only). Can you legally do this? YES, but with approval. This approval comes in the for of a Form 337 or STC. Both are forms of alteration to the original TCDS A Form 337 is a Major Repair or Alteration form used to gain approval thru a Field Approval. Field Aprroval meaning you just send the paperwork to the local FAA office (FSDO) and if the inspector is in a good mood they Approve the alteration for that specific aircraft. An STC requires more hoops to jump thru, involves more of the FAA engineers, since it is more of a blanket alteration that may cover an entire aircraft group. Using the Caravan, with let's say serial number 1, the Form 337 would cover only serial number 1. But a STC could cover from serial number 1 thru serial number 2000. And not just the standard C208A but also the C208B Grand Caravan. So let's get back to number of passengers; You have a Caravan, want to put 14 jumpers in it. First off the regulations allow for the removal of seats for the purpose of parachute jumping. So the term "seats" is out. You lay out in your aircraft, using a seating chart and Weight/Balance form, the locations (Aircraft Stations for W/B purposes) exactly where the new seatbelt will be located for the 14 people. You show that with different fuel loads, number of people (full loads, partial loads sitting all forward or aft) that the aircraft remains within the Max Gross Weight AND within the CG Limits as stated by the TCDS. [These numbers are none negotiable] You then also submit as part of the paperwork the type of restraint that will be used [must be TSOd ( a whole different topic for discussion)], how the restraints will be attached to the aircraft, and any type of supplement seating, i.e. Straddle Benches. All this goes to the FAA FSDO in Form 337 format and like I said, if the inspector is in a good mood and agrees with all your calculations and figures and his/her supervisor is in a good mood and agrees they will come and take a look at the aircraft as altered and if the aircraft matches the paperwork they approve the alteration to the TCDS with what is called a Field Approval. This then allows you, the operator, to fly that one specific aircraft with 14 people. You buy a second Caravan you have to go thru the whole process again, but this time you can use your first alteration as Approved Data and it make the process a little easier. On the down side, if you have a FAA FSDO that is not open to the unknown, most FAA Inspectors know very little about skydiving mods so it scares them or they're just not in the mood for the extra work then they'll make you submit for an STC. You do all the paperwork and Due Diligence for the STC, send it to the ACO (Aircraft Certification Office), they look at it and say "you just need to do a Form 337 for this, send it to the FSDO" and you are now part of how the US Governmemt system works. (Tongue in cheek) Hope this answers any question, in the long format.

You forgot the CASA 235, the big brother of the 212. It is comparable in size to the ATR42, but has the rear cargo door/ramp. Still a very large aircraft.

Thanks for the correction. I missed the word "that's" and just read "in a otter". Does make a difference.

I'm assuming when you say "otter" that you mean a Twin Otter? It should have the seat track in it, unless they've been removed. Or are you looking to attach the belts to the side wall? Seat track / cargo track are the same thing, just as a note.n Edited to add: Just looked on Aircraft Spruce's web site and they sell the Brownline seat track at $78.95/ 4' section.

Paul Fayard has done this. His set up used a quick release cargo ring the attach to the Douglas style seat/cargo track. This is the track found in King Airs, Caravans and Twin Otters. Basically the cargo ring was cut so that the two seatbelt halves could be inserted and then the ring was welded closed again. (Sorry, no pictures) The couple jump mods that I did used a variation of this by using seat belts that had the clip hook at the attach end. This way you don't have to worry about welding and retaining the strength of the original ring. (If your not familiar with this it is a snap hook that can be ordered as the attach end from the manufacture. It has a small hole at the clip to insert a cotter pin so that the hook doesn't release). The two planes I did were N7581F and N2000E. $15 and a request to OK City will get you all the records on file so you actually can have a hard copy of the 337. NOTE: The seat belts were not on a stand alone 337, but were part of the larger configuration change 337 to carry more people, i.e. Jumpers.

Hey Rob, It depends on the grade of stainless. Most aren't magnetic. But the friction locks inside the clasp and on the blade halves are made of steel. So these would make the buckles magnetic regardless of the material used for the bodies.

I thought that N# looked familiar. That plane was owned and operated by Grand Canyon Airlines before Fayard bought it. Good little plane. Never worked on it for jump ops but I can say that, just like any new design there were some teething issues, like windshields cracking, but Quest was always right on top of things with a mod or service bulletin.

The guy who did these, Freddie Cabanas, past away a few years back. His son flys the Pitts here in Key West but they don't do jumps anymore.

There's more than just the Raisbeck STC. MT Propellers has an STC for a 4-bladed prop that's approved from the -100 series thru the -400 series. STC SA03368NY All those other "demands" are pretty unreasonable.

Has the DZ ever considered installing 4-bladed props? The noise level on climb is quite noticeable compared to the 3-bladed props.

Hey Rob, On the seaplanes we use stainless cables due to corrosion. The standard carbon steel cables have a tendency to rust. The down side to using stainless is that it is actually a softer metal than carbon steel so anywhere it rubs on a fairlead or conduit it ends up blending fairly easily. Your standard Cessna 182 has very straight cables runs with very few fairleads so to get cable wear would take a long time. The biggest problem area I've found to be is where the cables make a sharp 90 degree turn at the top and bottoms of the fuselage frame where the aileron cables make there runs out. Primarily at the top pulleys that are more exposed to outside conditions. deHavilland, now Viking, has a 5 year life limit on all primary control cables in the Twin Otter. It applies to everyone.

Sorry, I forgot to enable Closed Captioning: "Huh, what?" [SARCASM] Should have noticed the DHC-8, Hi Neal. Now back to seat belts.

Is this Neal? You know who I am but I don't know who you are.

Huh, what?

Agreed Jerry. I've always just referred to it as Lexan, as a general term. Never thought of it as a trade name. And as a side note, don't use the stuff they sell at Home Depot either. It gets brittle when cold and will shatter if the door is slammed. Ask me how I know!

Uh, No. You do not need mention who makes the belt, just that they are TSOd and how/where they are attached. The Field Approval is not for the seat belt, unless you are using one made by your rigger. The Field Approval is for the configuration change from the TCDS. Uh, No. Had a Caravan where the original approval was for the co-pilot's seat to be turned around and be used as the most forward seat. After use it was decided that not having the seat would be better and sliding the straddle bench all the way forward. This was deemed a minor deviation from the original approval and just required a log book entry and a W/B form change. Uh, Yes. Your analogy is comparable to using oranges instead of apples and calling it a Pumpkin Pie. Why do I say this, its because seat belts are TSOd. They are manufactured to the minimum standards as set forth by the FAA. The lexan you buy for the jump door at Home Depot/Lowe's is not manufactured to any aviation industry standard. It's not certified in any way so it needs approval to use. Changing from one seat belt manufacture to another is a minor deviation from the original field approval. Why, because all aviation seat belts are manufactured to the FAA minimum standards (TSO) and switching from one manufacture to another does not make a appreciable change to the original approval. Changing the style, minor Minor deviations are allowed and only require a log book entry. The one point where I would agree with you is if you change the manor in which the belt is attached to the airframe. Example: You are currently flying a Cessna that uses the original floor attach point where an AN bolt is used to hold the belt on. You want to change this to a Douglas type seat/cargo track so that you can use a quick release cargo ring. This would require a revision to the original 337 ICA. And here is the section from AC43-210.

Here's another add twist that goes beyond wear them; "Is your seatbelt legal/airworthy?" Next time you're at the DZ take a look at the seatbelts in the aircraft. And this goes way beyond outward condition. Down by where the seat belt attach plate is, where the webbing loops around the plate and is sewn, there should be a tag. One on each seat belt half. Now this tag can be cloth or laminated paper sewn on, or it can be a metal/plastic tag which is attached around the webbing. This tag not only contains the seat belt part number, but who made it and, this is the most important, the TSO number. If the tag is not there or its so worn/mangled from use that it can not be read, primarily the TSO number, then that seat belt is Unairworthy. You must be able to read the TSO number and it will say "TSOsuch and such"

Actually you wouldn't even need to do a 337. A 337 for seating is more for the configuration change (removing original seats, adding jump seats/straddle benches, more passengers than type certified, etc..) Being that the seatbelts are manufactured under the guidelines of the TSO means that swapping the standard lap type belts for the Hookers would be a MINOR deviation. It's kind of like installing a PMA part, (for those who don't know PMA means Parts Manufacturing Authorization and represents most aftermarket direct replacement parts). No approval is needed since the products are manufactured using, at least, the minimum standards as set by the FAA. Same as a TSO. Disclaimer: you can't installed a FAA/PMA part designed for a Piper on to a Cessna without approval. In Canada I believe they're called PDMs, Parts Designated Manufactures. Correct me if I'm wrong Rob. Now if you had your rigger wip up a couple seat belts using some lift webbing, then you'd be looking at an STC. At least in the States. Edited to add for clarification: TSO stands for Technical Standard Order and is used to set the minimum standard that a part needs to be manufactured to. With seatbelts its mainly material and strength rating. And TSOs are used for Non Aircraft Type Specifc items, seatbelts, instruments, radios, etc.. Those items that could be used in more than one aircraft type. And in order to install these types of items on a Type Certified aircraft they must be TSOd.

Hi Gary, The FAA has made a change. The ASIs' guidance for Field Aprrovals is no longer in Order 8900 "Inspectors Handbook". It is now in its own stand alone Order 8300-16. Link below. I also included some other links. The first one is the Advisory Circular AC 43-210, which is the guidance for submitting a Field Approval. The last link is to the "Job Aid". This is the one that gives guidelines in determining what needs an STC, Engineering Data or could go thru Field Approval. This one is the catch all because a look at the first grouping of aircraft type (Normal, Utility, ECT..) shows that changes to aircraft seating configurations and changes to non-pressurized aircraft doors now require Engineering Data. This is a recent change. This means hiring a DER or sending a request to the ACO. If you send something to the ACO you might as well get an STC since that is what they do. Also, The thing now with Form 337, Field Approvals, is that every one now requires an ICA, or Instructions for Continued Airworthiness. This basically shows how the alteration was installed, how to maintain it and how to replace it if need be, plus any limitations. Out of ALL those previously approved 337s for swing up doors you'll be hard pressed to find one that has an ICA and doesn't just say "installed piano hinge." I buy a case of beer to the first person who can find a 337 with an ICA before the year 2000. Inspectors are reluctant to use these previously approved 337s since the Approved Data for them has to be readily available upon request and "installed piano hinge" doesn't cut it. This is a recent change. The one thing that most FSDOs ARE required to do but don't is help in the whole process. http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/avs/offices/afs/afs300/media/major_repair_alteration_job-aid.pdf http://rgl.faa.gov/regulatory_and_guidance_library/rgorders.nsf/786843013bf2d049852569810075c599/b86d2d931ad511a286257cec006dace5/$FILE/8300.16.pdf http://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Advisory_Circular/AC43-210.pdf

Well that sucks! I guess the one thing with Anchorage is that it's a training FSDO. I've known a few inspectors that have had ANC as their first assignment so it seems reasonable that it would reflect the happenings of the lower 48. To bad you can't try Fairbanks or Juneau.