Menu Sign In Contact FAQ
Banner
Welcome to our forums

Beechcraft K35 Bonanza

Thanks. Still a confusing topic….

FWIW, here is the cover page of the 1980s POH for the K35 (sorry, poor quality, but the only one I found on the internet so quickly):

I guess that this POH/AFM represents an optional (for the owner) substitute for the original AFM. That’s at least how I interpret the parts I marked.

I don’t really think there are any significant differences between D-reg and N-reg on these things.

Mainz (EDFZ) & Egelsbach (EDFE), Germany

boscomantico wrote:

So, it, too, calls for the FAA-approved AFM, the respective placards, and for the owners manual. It does not call for the Raytheon POH, despite this issue of the TCDS being from 1986. But why would that POH have been published, if it is in no way relevant / binding? Just some CYA exercise by Raytheon at the time?

Do these documents really have to be carried in original, for these requirements to be met?

I can’t offer an opinion regarding D registration, just N registration. The applicable regulations for FAA are:

91.9 Specifies that placards and any AFM limitations are required to be on board and used by the operator
21.5 Specifies that a POH AFM is required for any aircraft manufactured after March 1, 1979
23.2620 Specifies that the limitations section is all that is FAA approved for an aircraft such as a Bonanza

So, a POH was never required for the K model Bonanza or for my V35A bonanza, but the manufacturer does provide a POH with a later version of the AFM limitations. Can the manufacturer update the limitations, sure. Can the pilot use the updated POH limitations, yes. Can the manufacturer force you to use the updated limitations from the POH rather than the ones in the original AFM, no. The only situation where an updated POH/AFM limitations section would be required if there was an AD requiring it to be updated. You must carry an AFM in the aircraft, but it can be either the original or a later POH and you must follow the limitations in the AFM you choose to carry. I have both in my Bonanza.

GAMA adopted a standard POH format in 1979 and manufacturers still in business issued POH from that point forward using the standard POH format. My POH document has a blank space for the aircraft serial number and the registration tail number/ID. The owner fills the blanks in and the POH applies to all applicable serial numbers. IOW, there isn’t a POH assigned specifically to my aircraft. The same document contains my current equipment list and W&B information and some of the AFMS for modifications. Most of my AFMS are in a 8 1/2 binder along with the original AFM. I carry both on board to be legal.

See this opinion, not precisely on target, but notice that the FAA notes that the later POH revision is immaterial.

FAA General Counsel Opinion

KUZA, United States

boscomantico wrote:

No CAMO required for that.

Yes, sorry. Who is not in a CAMO doesn’t need it. If the airplane is in a CAMO, they would be involved.

LSZH(work) LSZF (GA base), Switzerland

Mooney_Driver wrote:

To use UL91 on approved models, all that is required is a placard signed of by a CAMO after verification that the engine is approved.

No CAMO required for that. See here

Mainz (EDFZ) & Egelsbach (EDFE), Germany

boscomantico wrote:

But why would that POH have been published, if it is in no way relevant / binding? Just some CYA exercise by Raytheon at the time?

Quite a few AFM’s of the old days were chaotic and did not yield much information, compared to later editions. Maybe Beech simply wanted to update the old AFM into something which had better content?

In the Mooney in Switzerland we also have to carry a FOCA approved = stamped AFM plus the supplements required (Autopilot e.t.c.) Operation is mostly done with the printed POH however, which every Pilot has an exemplar in print or PDF. Contents are 99% the same, airplane specific things (like the load and balance basic data and avionic supplements) however are only available in the AFM on board and the copy archived at the CAMO, which are updated as required.

Airlines write their own AFMs, POH, OM’s or whatever they are called, often enough they are massively different of the original and need certification by the CAA each time they are updated. In theory, this is also doable for private ops and will be certified by the CAA if done properly. I’ve seen some exemplars like this, where flight schools have their own version POH for their fleet, including all the special equipment e.t.c. the airplanes have. Once they are certified by the CAA, they become the operations referrence. Most people don’t do this however, as then the responsibility for the content goes to them rather than the manufacturer but it can be neat having an actual manual for this.

Piper for instance published “Information Manuals” which are the ones they sell for their types to anyone who wants them as training and personal copies. I suppose most POH’s are the same, you can order them for any plane you like. It becomes binding only once it is customized for an individual airframe and includes all the annexes for installed equipment.

So if you have i.e an STC for Autofuel, that will be in there, but it won’t be in the printed POH by the manufacturer. To use UL91 on approved models, all that is required is a placard signed of by a CAMO after verification that the engine is approved. Other than Mogas, there is no need for an STC as far as I know.

Last Edited by Mooney_Driver at 07 Feb 08:18
LSZH(work) LSZF (GA base), Switzerland

Thank you @NCYankee. I wasn’t aware of that AFM. I have never seen it in this aircraft, but maybe I have not been looking properly. In fact, this aircraft is missing the logs of its first ten years, so possibly, this original went missing as well.

In addition, this aircraft is D-reg. For fun, I have looked up the German LBA’s TCDS (Gerätekennblatt), which can be found here. A bit further down, in the section relevant for the K35, it says:

So, it, too, calls for the FAA-approved AFM, the respective placards, and for the owners manual. It does not call for the Raytheon POH, despite this issue of the TCDS being from 1986. But why would that POH have been published, if it is in no way relevant / binding? Just some CYA exercise by Raytheon at the time?

Do these documents really have to be carried in original, for these requirements to be met? Funnily, to get these manuals, they mention Beech in Augsburg as a source, and while the name has been changed, the company actually still exists! Would a replacement “copy” count as an “original”? (I understand that AFMs are serial-number specific).

These things are one reason why I would hate to operate such an old aircraft on the D-reg. An ACAM check would be a nightmare…

Last Edited by boscomantico at 07 Feb 08:23
Mainz (EDFZ) & Egelsbach (EDFE), Germany

boscomantico wrote:

91/96 Avgas is not UL91
I was unaware of this.
ESMK, Sweden

The Owners Manual was not the FAA Approved AFM that came with the airplane from the factory. The original AFM was in n 8.5 by 11 paper document with a thick paper blue colored covers. I asked a friend who still has a copy of the original AFM that came with his K mode. The K35 does not require a POH and the later POH published by Beechcraft don’t supersede the earlier AFM that came with the aircraft. If you have the original copy, it is still valid. Note that in the attached FAA approve AFM for the K35 from my friend, it lists in the limitations section on page 1:

B. Fuel: 91/96 minimum octane aviation gasoline.

I have attached his AFM. If you still have your original, you can follow its limitations.

FAA_approved_AFM_Beech_Bonanza_D6107_K35_pdf

KUZA, United States

Continental has not expressively approved any of their engines for UL91 (except I believe the IO-360-AF).

So, it can‘t be used. I was merely a bit certain as to how to read CS202b…

The K35 is an old aircraft. It originally came with an „owners manual“. That owners manual specified 91/96 (leaded) Avgas (which was a thing in the late 50s), just like the TCDS. However, later, POHs became a thing. And in 1982 or so, Beech (then: Raytheon, who had just bought the company) published POHs for all older Beech aircraft, which became the authoritative, FAA-approved manuals for the operation of these aircraft. At that time, 91/96 Avgas didn‘t even exist anymore, hence only 100LL went into the POH. @NCYankee, I hope I got that mostly right.

Anyway, 91/96 Avgas is not UL91, so that point is moot for whether 202b applies here.

Last Edited by boscomantico at 06 Feb 10:52
Mainz (EDFZ) & Egelsbach (EDFE), Germany

@boscomantico does it mean that the AFM is not up to date?
If TCDS clearly says 91/96, then surely that is approved?

EGTR
65 Posts
Sign in to add your message

Back to Top