TAWS Compliance

[Capt1124]

Due to owner issues I'm not going to be able to get TAWS installed on the 7 seat Westwind I fly before the deadline.

The guy who works on the airplane is attempting to make another airplane, an old Hawker 400, legal by pulling seats out to make it a 5 seat airplane. The FAR says "configured for six or more seats." He says with an engineering report from a DER and a 337 this is legal.

However, the feds don't like it. His FSDO said it wasn't OK but when he asked them to show him where it said he couldn't do it, they didn't return his call. My FSDO said you would need an STC to do it. But the type certificate only says it's certified for a maximum of ten seats.

I don't want to get into an argument with the feds over this. I also don't want to tell the owner he can't use the plane for three months because he wouldn't give me an answer on this.

Any thoughts?

 

[mike1mc]

Doesn't seem to be the best road to go down. Not sure if you operate under 135 or not but new regs were issued a few months ago regarding seating configuartions. The feds have issued a requirement with Compliance by August 31 that all seating configurations be certificated by either TC or STC.

Example: We operate a Challenger 604. The TC issued says that the aircraft can be configured for up to 21 seats. It is currently configured for 9 seats with a 337 field approval. The feds are saying that any 337 or other FSDO approval is not valid and that the interior needs to be installed or certifcated by an STC for 9 seats. If you don't get the STC then you must operate the aircraft as a 10+ pax aircraft. For 135 ops this is a big deal because of the additional maintenance and operational requirements.

 

[Clutch_Cargo]

Capt1124,

I hate to say this but I think your FSDO is right. This is from the 8300.10 (Airworthiness Inspector's Handbook) and relates to evaluating part 135 maintenance programs. I am assuming you are not 135 but, as you have probably discovered, the FAA sometimes uses the intent stated in one area as the basis for requiring it in another. Anyway, this is what first came to mind but I'll see if I can't find something more applicable:

"The aircraft's type certificated passenger capacity is the passenger seating capacity as indicated on the Type Certificate (TC) or Supplemental Type Certificate (STC). The manufacturer (type certificate holder) may have several approved passenger seating configurations allowing the TC or STC approved capacity to be reconfigured by converting from one to another. Removing passenger seats does not constitute a change in type certificated capacity unless the resulting cabin configuration conforms to an STC or approved data.

NOTE: It is not the intent of FAR § 135.411(a)(1) to allow operators to remove or block passenger seats in order to circumvent maintenance requirements."

 

[DAS at 10/250]

Not trying to be an arse, but tell the owner to go f himself. He has had MORE than enough time, warning, and resources to get the TAWS system ordered and installed.

You haven't been able to pick up any trade magazine for a year without reading about how owners are delaying the TAWS/RVSM compliance and that there was going to be a bottleneck situation coming up.

Good luck.

 

[WMUSIGPI]

you can get a special flight permit to ferry the plane to get the taws installed after the deadline however it would only be an empty flight to the repair station. The boss won't get to move the plane after 3-29 any other way. There aren't any loopholes I know of to not comply with the taws like blocking seats.

 

[TransMach]

Mate,

I suggest you call Sandel (www.sandel.com) and get one of their units. They are simple to install (35-40 man hours), the display replaces a mechanical RMI and any Class I repair station can do the install.

TransMach