I have the German LBA documents as pdfs.
Here you go:
emz_drehfluegler_und_kleine_Flugzeuge_AML_approvals_pdf
emz_kleine_flugzeuge_1987_1997_teil_I_pdf
emz_kleine_flugzeuge_ab_1997_teil_II_pdf
emz_verkehrsflugzeuge_1984_1997_teil_I_pdf
emz_verkehrsflugzeuge_ab_1997_teil_II_pdf
You can find the UK CAA AAN here: https://siteapps.caa.co.uk/aans/
Can anyone find current versions of the URLs in this post above which are now all dead?
These types of instruments come in two standard sizes: 2.25" and 3.125".
The wiring takes a while because you have to thread a dozen or so thermocouple wires through a hole in the firewall, and crimp all the connections. They can’t (realistically) be soldered due to the special metals used.
I would recommend a new JPI engine analyser. Installation will take quite some time. You would like need a new wiring harnass, and might want new probes as well. The newer units have much more features than the older units, and these basically pay back themself as they save time troubleshooting the engine, and for fuel savings, without burning your engine.
Great help again thank you Jesse and all the others (this Forum is really a massive big help to me!!!!)
Next question where is best to buy an edm 700 ? is a 2nd hand worth an option or do the displays with the gas display play up over time?
as i am looking into a edm 700 for my g reg 182 what is required to do??
This is grantfathered by UK CAA, see UK CAA AAN 27548 and UK CAA AAN 27548 Rev 1
as i am looking into a edm 700 for my g reg 182 what is required to do??
So EASA never did any kind of approvals database?
Not that I am aware of.
They do a database of approved equipment but that’s something else.
Correct, do note however this is not all approved equipment. It lists equipment manufactured under ETSO, equipment using different certification bases are not included, this can be TSO (non E-TSO) approved equipment, as well as equipment which doesn’t have a TSO at all (Flarm, Golze, our products)
That EASA statement is however mostly unusable because most US STC holders are not interested in dealing with EASA
This is not about dealing with EASA. You could get most US STC-ed product installed on EASA-reg aircraft, if you gain approval yourself. Does it make sense from an economical point of view? More often not. If you do the US STC / manufacturer should help you with continuess airworthiness. They should do that will all their customers.
With no database, isn’t that a useless process? Nobody will be able to discover who did the approval before – unless the avionics shop advertises it on their website, or you see another pilot flying with it and ask him.
Not really, Some shops advertise their approvals, others issue some of them freely (Trig did that for some of their products), on can see it in the technical file of the aircraft allready equipment. Often the manufacturer will know who did such an installation before, many shops also have contact every now and then, and know which approvals are available. Often the customer is not aware of the approval process, and the approval is done by the avionics shop.
In some occassions the customer is member of a type specific club, and might have knowledge of who has the same installation they want, and can then inform who did the approval process.
So most EASA approvals will end up getting duplicated. Good money for somebody, for sure!
Some of them will, others won’t. For example I recently did a Beech 18 with a GMA-340, GNC-255A and GTR-225A installation (national approval). In this case you put a lot of effort to gain this approval, while the change to pickup another Dutch Beech 18 which wants the same installation is zero.
All GTN minor change approvals are S/N limited, so can not be reused. While a GMA-340 on a Cessna 172 can be reused ceveral times.
If the approval list more equipement, the less likely it is that you will find an aircraft with the SAME configuration. As indicated before, charging only the amount of the fee’s, a would lose money on the Beech 18 (time not paid for), while I would earn on the Cessna 172 GMA-340 by re-using this. I believe this is one of the few methods to keep fair pricing to all customers.
Am I right in saying that since the mod is not published for the aircraft (unlike the FAA publishing all 337s for a particular aircraft and you can order them on a CD for a small charge) the fact that you need to contact the applicant for the modification documents, he will at that point ask you for the payment? Otherwise, I can’t see any other way to get the documents for the modification. The owner of the aircraft might have them but that’s unusual; most owners leave everything with their maintenance company.
The owner of the aircraft which modified must have this documents, For sure one can copy this paperwork from a previouse modification. This unfortunatly get’s done. For some reason some people don’t like to pay for software, films, music or aircraft approvals and just copy it. I think in general it is underestimate how much work goes into this.
