Citabria Drawing 7-1307 (Steel Gear)

S

Sector95

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 22, 2022
Messages
46
Location
Oregon
Heya everyone, working on getting 8.50's installed on my 1977 7ECA.

I had emailed the tech support folks out at ACA asking if that tire was on the drawing for my plane, and they confirmed that it was, but my A&P wants to get his hands on a copy of that drawing since the TCDS references it, but evidently doesn't have the latest information from the drawing (doesn't mention 8.50's and hasn't been updated in some time). The drawing number in question is 7-1307.

ACA wants me to pay $50 for a copy of the drawing, which I'll do if I have to, but was hoping someone might be aware of somewhere I might be able to find a copy without coughing up the dough. Not seeing it on the FAA's DRS site anywhere either. Weird to me that a drawing can supersede a TCDS but the documentation with the FAA doesn't need to be updated in kind, but I suppose there's a lot of weird things in this world.

Anyway, thanks in advance for any information/advice/comments/suggestions!
 
I could be wrong, but if it is not listed in the actual TCDS, then you need an STC or field approval. TheTCDS (thanks for the link- the FAA has made it harder to read on an iPad) states that 8:00s are the largest allowed.

Two things - one - if I were your mechanic, I would want to see some guidance that says a drawing can change TCDS restrictions, and
Two - most folks just put bigger tires on. If you ask Cleveland, they will tell you their wheels and brakes do not support 8:50s. We see them all the time on Super Cubs and 180s - no operational problems.

If you want legal 8:50s, Robbie Grove has TSO wheels that are approved all the way to 26”.
 
The whole thing has been pretty strange to chase down. I believe ACA sells aircraft with bigger tires on them from factory, and I'm having a hard time sorting out how they're able to do that legally unless the drawings that the TCDS refers to take precedence. I can't find a single reference to any tires bigger than 8.00 on any TCDS for ACA in the FAA's DRS.

Not a clue how to prove that one way or another outside of that observation.

Will keep hunting around, appreciate the response!
 
This subject was beat up pretty good back in 2020 here on the site.

Here is the STC for your 8:50X 6.00 4ply type 3 tires. STC (SA3019WE) Google it! its listed as owned by Guardian flying service out of Las Vegas, and I don't think they are charging for it. If that doesn't pan out buy the drawing and do a log book entry. And Bob is right most people don't bother with approval going to 8:50X 6.00 tires. Go one size above that thou, then your in the tundra tire work sheet world, Good luck! Brian
 
I came across that STC, but the problem has been getting a hold of that STC owner. I plan to call the FSDO today to see if they have any contact info, but I'm not entirely sure that company still exists. The only substantial hit I get on Google is for Guardian Flight out of Utah.
 
Okay, just to close the loop, after a hint from ACA that the 8.50x6 4-ply are also listed in the service and parts manuals, my mechanic went and checked and found the reference to them for the 7ECA. 🥳

Quite a saga, but now that he's satisfied, we're good to go!
 
One more nugget of info to share:

Evidently there are forms called a "Drawing Change Notice". The drawing that ACA supplies itself does not have the change on it, but DCN number AC-1511 applies to drawing number 7-1307 has the updated tire list. I'm not sure if I'm allowed to share these documents on this forum or not, considering it cost money to acquire from ACA.

Interestingly, the email I got from ACA only specified 8.50x6 4-ply, but this document allows both 4 and 6 ply of that size. It also notes that both 8.50 and 8.00 tire sizes require the installation of the spacer kit. This is specifically for steel spring gear 7ECA, 7GCAA, 7GCBC, 7KCAB, and 8KCAB models. Oleo and aluminum spring gear are different documents.

Why these documents aren't available publicly is beyond me. Difficult to ensure compliance when the things that define compliance are kept hidden.

Anyway, hope this is helpful to someone in the future! 👍
 
Well, I was skeptical, so I asked an expert. The expert is a VDER with a great deal of experience with this stuff. Check dga's comment out here:

www.j3-cub.com

Hypothetical - related to annual inspection

Let's say someone absolutely needs an annual. Don't ask why, just consider it a hypothetical question. An IA enters the following: "Jan 25, 2023 -tach time 3421 - Aircraft inspected in accordance with an annual inspection, and a list of discrepancies has been supplied to the owner." Then...
www.j3-cub.com www.j3-cub.com

Essentially, he says that a certificate holder can indeed make minor changes to a type certificate by revising a drawing. He points out that the Anchorage FSDO issued a letter a while back stating that tire size changes were minor alterations.
 
Bob Turner said:
Well, I was skeptical, so I asked an expert. The expert is a VDER with a great deal of experience with this stuff. Check dga's comment out here:

www.j3-cub.com

Hypothetical - related to annual inspection

Let's say someone absolutely needs an annual. Don't ask why, just consider it a hypothetical question. An IA enters the following: "Jan 25, 2023 -tach time 3421 - Aircraft inspected in accordance with an annual inspection, and a list of discrepancies has been supplied to the owner." Then...
www.j3-cub.com www.j3-cub.com

Essentially, he says that a certificate holder can indeed make minor changes to a type certificate by revising a drawing. He points out that the Anchorage FSDO issued a letter a while back stating that tire size changes were minor alterations.
Click to expand...
With that being said, are you saying that a mechanic can just do a logbook entry to go to an 8.5 x 6 tire Since it is being classified as a minor alteration? No 337!
 
We just bolt them on. Probably illegal. If you had a copy of that Anchorage letter, then a mechanic's signature is enough.

Remember, major alterations are carefully defined in the FARs. If there is no caveat for landing gear, changing from 6:00 to 8:50 is probably minor.
 
What my IA has taught me is that the FAR's leave room for interpretation so a responsible A&P can do their job. yes or no?
 
Well, the law is like that, but you have to do the research, and be ready to back your decision up. When the feds decide to violate you, they must state the regulation you have violated. Make sure you can prove them wrong, or at least show enough ambiguity to overcome a "preponderance of evidence" standard.

I did that for the Garmin 200 installations, and I am 98% sure I would prevail at the ALJ stage. The reason I have not yet been given a letter of violation is that they have not found the regulation requiring a TSO for a com installation.
 
Here is the regulation you need to be aware of - 14cfr43 Appendix A

(a) Major alterations -

(1) Airframe major alterations. Alterations of the following parts and alterations of the following types, when not listed in the aircraft specifications issued by the FAA, are airframe major alterations:

(i) Wings.

(ii) Tail surfaces.

(iii) Fuselage.

(iv) Engine mounts.

(v) Control system.

(vi) Landing gear
 
I of course truncated it - but it says point-blank any change to the landing gear not covered in the type cert is major. So if the type cert says 6:00x6 and you want 8:50x6, you are looking at a low probability of success. Getting that Anchorage FSDO letter (a copy will do) increases your chances dramatically.

I recommend law school for mechanics.
 
For the radio installation, the only possible way they could get me is by calling a portable battery, a circuit breaker, and a switch an "electrical system." Then that part would be "major." What I would then do is present them with industry definitions of "electrical system," which always include a continuous source and a regulator. That is where mechanics can find discretion - by knowing the regs forward and backwards.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top