delete

[DWood]

BL
I really enjoy reading about all of your adventures. You need to write a book!
Dan

[Green Bean]

"

."when I went down to Downsview in Toronto, Canada, in Feb. '51, to pick up the first De Haviland Beaver that the Air Force bought, they sold the Norseman to Wein"

Blue LDR -That should be W I E N,,, Maybe one of these were the one you flew. Noorduyn Norseman UC-64A it might have been N79902, c/n 111; or N1207, c/n 841; or N61852, c/n 163. They have one at the Alaska Aviation Heritage Museum and one is hanging from the Wright Patterson USAF Museum, Dayton, OH. One is still flying out of Juneau, AK.

[blueldr]

Sorry about misspelling the "Wien" family name. My memory isn't what it used to be. I have seen the Norseman in the museum in Fairbanks and also the one at the AF Museum at WPAFB. Neither of them were the one I used to fly.
Wien got a helluva deal when they bought that Norseman. It included the wheels, skis, and floats with beaching gear for that airplane. It also included an extra set of BRAND NEW wings, skis and Edo 7170 floats and Norsman fittings. I was told the package sold on bid for $5,000. They just wanted to get it off of the USAF inventory. They flew it off of Ladd AFB over to Weeks Field, about a three minute flight, and didn't even have to put any gas in it. I had replaced the P&W R-1340 engine about six months earlier and my CO had managed to get a BRAND NEW engine from Wright-Patterson AFB in Dayton, OH.

[GAHorn]

Hog wash George The FAA is the same here.

There are too many documented cases otherwise for your comment to be considered helpful.

Here is their phone # to call take it up with them 907-474-0276. I haven't done a field apporval since the 90's. Maybe Alaska doesn't put up with the BS that Texas does I don't know? but when I go to FSDO or ATC they are all looking at the same regs as they do in TEXAS.

Tim, I wasn't being personal but you just did and that's uncalled for . If you "haven't done a field approval since the 90's..." then what makes you so expert on current AK field approvals that you can call the experiences of others "BS" ?

Yes, since Change 16 the rules are the same for everyone..but as regards AK vs the lower-48, the FAA is not "the same". (Why do you suppose minton made his recommendation to "come to Alaska"...?? It's common knowlege.)
AOPA spent considerable time and money investigating the different ways AK operators regularly received field approvals which are denied in the lower 48. It's a well-known issue. While the "rules" may appear to be the same, it's pretty clear that FSDO inspectors in AK are significantly more lenient as a matter of policy. Here's an article AOPA published about this some time back and not much has changed in any practical sense.
At least Change 16 attempts to make the rules universal but in actual practice AK inspectors are more familiar and more likely to accomodate requests.
http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/regulatory ... roval.html

[mit]

Here is their phone # to call take it up with them 907-474-0276. I haven't done a field apporval since the 90's. Maybe Alaska doesn't put up with the BS that Texas does I don't know? but when I go to FSDO or ATC they are all looking at the same regs as they do in TEXAS.

Tim, I wasn't being personal but you just did and that's uncalled for . If you "haven't done a field approval since the 90's..." then what makes you so expert on current AK field approvals that you can call the experiences of others "BS" ?

Yes, since Change 16 the rules are the same for everyone..but as regards AK vs the lower-48, the FAA is not "the same". (Why do you suppose minton made his recommendation to "come to Alaska"...?? It's common knowlege.)
AOPA spent considerable time and money investigating the different ways AK operators regularly received field approvals which are denied in the lower 48. It's a well-known issue. While the "rules" may appear to be the same, it's pretty clear that FSDO inspectors in AK are significantly more lenient as a matter of policy. Here's an article AOPA published about this some time back and not much has changed in any practical sense.
At least Change 16 attempts to make the rules universal but in actual practice AK inspectors are more familiar and more likely to accomodate requests.
http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/regulatory ... roval.html

I have been an A&P here since 1980. It use to be much easier than it is now! I know of many many efforts to get field approvals that years ago would have been done. They ain't happening now, yes there are some that are getting them done usally I hear that it is a mechanic that is repeating it. Just tired of hearing how easy it is....

[170Bpilot566]

Greg
i think i e mailed you on barnstormers, the cessna 170B does not require a v brace, i talked to a cessna rep at
the factory about my 1954 cessna 170B ,he said the cessna 180s do require a v brace, but there is no v brace
for the CESSNA 170B, i have a factory float kit on my aircraft /no v brace ,any way,have a great day

PAUL.J.W.HARRINGTON .
MEMBER 6849

[GAHorn]

Greg
i think i e mailed you on barnstormers, the cessna 170B does not require a v brace, i talked to a cessna rep at
the factory about my 1954 cessna 170B ,he said the cessna 180s do require a v brace, but there is no v brace
for the CESSNA 170B, i have a factory float kit on my aircraft /no v brace ,any way,have a great day

PAUL.J.W.HARRINGTON .
MEMBER 6849

I believe the difference is the weight of the installed engine. The 180 IO-470 engine flexes the forward fuselage excessively, especially with pounding-wave action...the lighter C-145 was not considered a problem.
However...it's wise to add the V-brace, IMO, (doubtless will help prevent cracking) ....and don't forget that many 170's with floatkits have modified to different engines .....which Cessna factory folks usually do not take into consideration when they make commentary on such matter.

[Green Bean]

Add ski operations as a major reason for the "V" to reduce the lateral twisting, while taxiing on skis. You get lots the windshield movement without the "V" brace.

[54170b]

Just make sure to put in your nuts (backwards) in front of the brace on your wing block, so you can get them out without removing the windsheild.

[MoonlightVFR]

I am curious about this subject.

Read all 24 post but I don't know what a v brace is or does.

Enjoyed the historical notes, Norseman, Wien family name,etc

Suspect that the subject relates to float planes.

What is a V Brace? Where does it locate?


regards

[GAHorn]

A "V-brace" is a V-shaped tubular reinforcement which is mounted above the panel, behind the windshield, which adds structural strenthening to the forward fuselage/firewall/engine-mount area, usually considered part of a sea-plane/ski-plane modification.

[bigrenna]

delete

[akclimber]

Can you install the v-brace without taking out the windshield?

[Blue4]

I had my V-brace installed and field approved about a year ago using Atlee Dodge's 180 information as the basis.

It can be installed without removing the windshield.

-Scott

[minton]

Hog wash George The FAA is the same here.

There are too many documented cases otherwise for your comment to be considered helpful.

Here is their phone # to call take it up with them 907-474-0276. I haven't done a field apporval since the 90's. Maybe Alaska doesn't put up with the BS that Texas does I don't know? but when I go to FSDO or ATC they are all looking at the same regs as they do in TEXAS.

Right on Tim!