> On the Carb heat mod Richards advice is spot on. If
> you bought the kit recently you will have the updated
> documentation from Skydrive. The purpose of upgrading
> it to "Standard" is to save you the trouble of a SF9
> application. Some of the other mods I am upgrading are
> very badly documented so writing proper documentation
> is the main part of the work.
There must be some confusion here. According to the TL
3.06 and TL 3.07 documentation from the PFA (Standard
Mods, and Mods Approved for all types) an SF9 is to be
filled in each case. So a "Standard Mod" makes no
difference to what has to be done. The documentation may
not be quite so good.
In neither case does the SF9 form have to be sent to the
PFA, just put in the aircraft documentation. The first the
PFA will hear about it will be when it is mentioned on the
Permit Renewal form.
> The oil thermostat mod 10179 presents a problem that I
> am about to try and clear up. The mod is approved (all
> of type) and I was about to turn it into a "Standard"
> mod when I learnt from Andy Draper that Francis had
> banned the use of this valve as it did not "fail safe".
> This is curious as a) it was Francis who signed of the
> mod and b) if you install it with the pipes the
> appropriate way round I would say it did fail safe.
Gawd ! Sometimes it is better not to ask or stir anything
up. The PFA themselves have sent me the mod 10179
paperwork with the "approved for all types" signature on
it. On that basis I have bought the thermostat and now you
say there is some doubt ! It is shown on their list of
mods. Maybe if they had approved ANOTHER thermostat then
they could change their minds on this. If you hadn't
mentioned it I would have fitted it, and then would the
PFA have told me to take it off ?
The original aircraft with it on G-MIKI STILL has it on
after 1100 hours. I spoke to the current owner. And I am
sure it is still on G-DURO whose original mod 10179 it was.
> My own opinion is that you should progress as Richard
> suggests, put in your SF9 and get on with it. The oil
> stat documentation is poor and the pictures relate to a
> "Classic". I would be pleased if you let me know what
> you propose in terms of mounting the stat so I can use
> this for an updated "Standard" mod application.
The stat only weighs about 4 ounces. I plan to fit it
vertically with a vertical pipe to one oil cooler inlet so
that most of the weight is taken by the pipe. It will be
fixed to an engine bearer with tie wraps.
> I will TRY and progress both oil and water but getting
> any reply, even confirmation that they have received a
> message, has been taking weeks recently.
They are overworked and too busy flying replica Spitfires
! They are very slow to respond and sometimes they don't.
And the response to my query has been shown in this case
to be inaccurate.
I refuse to goad myself into making any comment about this.
Richard
|