Weight & Balance: Front seat, pilot and passenger

[bagarre]

I'd value what the FAA is willing to put in writing and sign.
Anything else is just another opinion.

[Bruce Fenstermacher]

...and there are also examples of a child's seat installed in baggage compartments...

The Cessna 150/152 is one that has an optional child jump seat for the baggage compartment which would make that a t 2PLCM with 3 seats.

A Piper PA-12 is a 3PLCM which has a single belt for the (narrow) back bench seat.

I hadn't considered an approval for 3 seat belt sets accord from the same points and only pulling as much as two belts. Not sure you could pull that off with the Cessna back seat frame.

What we need is a good DER who knows the 170.

[Bruce Fenstermacher]

I'd value what the FAA is willing to put in writing and sign.
Anything else is just another opinion.

True Greg, but it would be interesting none the less to hear the reaction of an inspector. Truth probably is though most inspectors don't get excited over many things done under part 91 unless they must provide a written statement or forced to enforce something.

[MattPilot]

What we need is a good DER who knows the 170.

Does anybody know of one? Is there anyone else interested in pursuing this?

[GAHorn]

Well, while at work today I had the opportunity to visit with two of our FAA Inspectors who both confirmed what we all hate to hear.... it's a violation unless the TCDS and/or the FSB Report (Flight Standards Board) allow it. (The FSB post-dates the 170 so is unlikely to be a factor.)

What I asked them SPECIFICALLY was, "Not yourselves....but...the average FAA Inspector who is at an airport and observes a pilot load or unload three children from the rear seat of a C-170... would likely do ...WHAT?"
They both looked at each other... then both turned to me and said words to the effect that they'd be seeking identification, asking if the pilot had any basis of approval for 3 occupants in the rear seat... and if not.... they'd be writing violations.
The only variance they'd tolerate would be if one of the children were under the age of 2 and sitting in the lap of an adult. (in which case they'd be asking for a wt/bal report.)

The basis of their statements IS in writing...and backed by law.
The TCDS specifies the airplane is for four occupants. (4PCLM)
The TCDS also states there are only 4 seats, 2 front, and 2 rear. (The rear is a two-person seat...not a three person seat.)

Their opinion was that an STC or Field Approval is required to exceed that limitation placed by the TCDS.

[MattPilot]

Thanks for that information gahorn ... Unfortunately with the FAA, we are guilty until proven innocent because the clarification of prior interpretation ( https://www.federalregister.gov/article ... or-general ) says nothing about the type certificate data sheets. It only refers to the approved AFM - ie the C170 operating manual.

[GAHorn]

Thanks for that information gahorn ... Unfortunately with the FAA, we are guilty until proven innocent because the clarification of prior interpretation ( https://www.federalregister.gov/article ... or-general ) says nothing about the type certificate data sheets. It only refers to the approved AFM - ie the C170 operating manual.

Matt, that is excellent investigation on your part, and (despite the fact the Owner's Manual is unapproved) I believe the answer to your question (as to whether or not the TCDS is also applicable in the lack of AFM guidance) is found in the last few paragraphs of the Federal Register document:

... the FAA agrees with the commenters that this information cannot always be obtained from the (seat and belt) equipment manufacturer. Accordingly, before multiple occupants are permitted to use the same seat and/or seat belt, if the pertinent information is available, the PIC should check whether: (1) The seat belt is approved and rated for such use; and (2) the structural strength requirements for the seat are not exceeded.

In addition, before seating multiple occupants in the same seat and/or seat belt, PICs should always check to ensure that the seat usage conforms to the limitations contained in the approved portion of the AFM or the owner's manual. Owner's manuals for older aircraft typically show the permissible seating arrangements that are to be used for the aircraft, and the number of people using a seat and/or seat belt should not exceed the number of people shown in the owner's manual seating arrangement.



I doubt anyone can find support in any document (approved or unapproved) for more than two persons of any age in the rear seat of this airplane.

[GAHorn]

With apologies to our dear bluEldr... I admit Cessna's marketing dept probably wrote the Owners Manual, but that's no reason to show such a poor representative picture of how small people used to be.

I always preferred this one:

ce140-06.jpg

Or this one:

ce170-05.jpg

At least THIS one helps point out that the front seats upholstery actually was NOT necessarily symmetrical:

It's Snowing Down South.jpg

In reality, of course, Americans WERE much smaller prior to the BIG one:

Cessquire6.jpg

But....so were the seats!:

cessna glider ad.jpg

cessna silverwing.jpg

[170C]

Probably no carbon footprint on that Cessna glider

[MattPilot]

Adding a 3rd seatbelt for a child has to be preferable and safer than adding an aux seat in the baggage compartment, but has anyone done it?


STC Holder: Waring Robert Contact:
Address: 8645 Windsong Court ~ Springfield ~ VA ~ 22153 ~ United States Phone:
STC No.: SA1-426 Reissued,10/25/2001 E-Mail: Web Site:
TC Nos.: 3A12, 3A13, 3A17, 5A6, A-799,
Models:
Cessna Aircraft Company, The -- 172B;
Cessna Aircraft Company, The -- 172A;
Cessna Aircraft Company, The -- 172;
Cessna Aircraft Company, The -- 182;
Cessna Aircraft Company, The -- 175A;
Cessna Aircraft Company, The -- 175B;
Cessna Aircraft Company, The -- 175;
Cessna Aircraft Company, The -- 180A;
Cessna Aircraft Company, The -- 180;
Cessna Aircraft Company, The -- 170B;
Cessna Aircraft Company, The -- 170A;
Cessna Aircraft Company, The -- 170 Series;
ACO: New York Aircraft Certification Office (ANE-170), Tel: (516) 228-7300

Auxiliary seat in baggage compartment.

[MattPilot]

Thanks for the encouragement Aryana. I just found an STC for the early models of the 182 which allow for this and have been in contact with a few DERs today who have been encouraging. I also found the DER who got the approval on the 182, and am establishing contact with him.

Truth be told, I don't even own a 170 yet. I am planning on purchasing one in the near future as long as I can make the airplane fit my missions. I am fully aware that my children will grow up and grow out of the 170 but that is many years out on the horizon.

[johneeb]

I think you will be the first. Blaze a trail and get this field approved from the FAA.

If it were me and I had to put 3 kids in the back of my 170, I'd just go rent a Cherokee Six instead. If this is something that you plan on doing regularly, then you may have bought the wrong plane because even with 3 belts in the back seat your kids will eventually grow too big for the plane.

Would it work, when the kids get to big, if the bicycles on the bike rack mounted on the roof had seatbelts?

[GAHorn]

Find a Cherokee Six owner who regrets not having a taildragger to fly (and is fed up with crawling around on his hands and knees to drain fuel sumps) and swap some flight time.

It only took ONE hour in a rental Cherokee to show a buddy the advantages of a high-wing airplane. (Easy pre-flight vs incomplete pre-flights due to difficulty. Cool, shaded cockpit. Better stability when airborne. Better view when airborne. Drier loading/unloading/standing place when drizzling. Less maintenance landing gear vs oleo struts.
Etc. Etc. Etc.)

[MattPilot]

Are there any others that would be interested in pursuing a field approval on this?

Also, are the 170 cabin dimensions identical to the 180 cabin dimensions?

Thanks!

[170C]

The 170, early 172 & early 180 cabin dimensions are identical as are most of the other dimensions (wingspan, etc).