The International Cessna^® 170 Association

bradbrady wrote:Guys,
Just rember these are installed on a field aproval, and as of yeaterday my FSDO reminded me that from now on I don't send my 337'S to my FSDO but to the main Office at FAA Aircraft Registration Branch, AFS-750; P.O. Box 25504; Oklahoma City, OK.73125-0504. So you no longer get your PMI to check your work it goes straight to the main office! Make sure that your I's are dotted and your T's are crossed!!!!!
brad

Brad, the Rosen web site shows they are STCed for the 170.

I just wear a baseball cap

N2865C wrote:I just wear a baseball cap

Same here, and they are alot cheaper (sometimes free!!) no 337 required.

I carry a ball cap, but mostly use the tinted, vinyl, stick-ups that FBO's give away.

I haven't had a face lift yet so I can still squint!

Sure wish I could pee over the hood of a Peterbilt though.

Brad, the Rosen web site shows they are STCed for the 170.[/quote]
Karl,
They must have got an STC in the last year, cuz the last one I did I had to fill a field approval 337 with the 15 steps. Oh and BL I too wish I could pee over the hood of a Peterbuilt!! (but that's a personal problem)
brad

I bought mine in December of '06 and they did come with an STC. If you live far enough south where you can time an egg by the setting of the sun you may not want to shell out the cash for these visors. But in AK where the winter sun is always on the horizon and the summer setting sun takes hours, not minutes, I think they are worth the price. The articulating feature does come in handy when flying along the coast with the reflection of the setting sun coming in through the side window. I mounted mine as described in the directions and find they can be stowed forward or aft. They are also a comfortable distance away from me both stowed and in use. I'm 6' tall and do not find my headset bumping into them in the aft stowed position.

Corey, it never crossed my mind the difference that you mention regarding the position of the sun! That's a great tesitimonial for sunvisors. I guess I'll have to ask them for a donation to this years conveniton door prizes!

gahorn wrote:Corey, it never crossed my mind the difference that you mention regarding the position of the sun! That's a great tesitimonial for sunvisors. I guess I'll have to ask them for a donation to this years conveniton door prizes!

Yeah George. When we are using our plane the most, in the Summer, we go 17 miles East in the AM and return West in the PM. Great EH?

Gentlemen, I have ordered a set of visors, the 300-1's. I went to install them and I've run across a problem. Does a '53 have the factory holes in the FRONT of the carry through? Someone rivited in a strip of aluminum with barbs on it to hold my headliner. I need to know for sure if those holes are under there before I start drilling after them. Can anyone give me good measurements for locating them?

My current useless shades mount by a single screw in the BOTTOM of the carry through. Richard, were those holes there or did you drill them?

As usual this isn't going to be a simple project.
Thanks

Figure 101 of the 170B IPC indicates one screw, from the bottom.

Adding to George's answer it has been my experience looking as several 170's that while there are 2 holes on the bottom of the carry through, one on each side of the cockpit, only the pilots side has a nut plate behind it. The other hole is just that leaving no way to hold a screw into it.

To be honest as much as I've looked at this installation (visors) I've yet to figure out exactly how others have done it with out drilling new holes.

And I for one would not be drilling new holes in my carry through spar with out explicit APPROVED instructions to do so.

The solid plastic visors I took out of my plane were held there by two large sheet metal screws that penetrated the front of the carry through spar. The Rosin's bolted up via the same screws. The Rosin's also came with some sort of riv-nuts and STC to drill and install but my mechanic signed them off using the large sheet metal screws that were holding on my old visors.
On a side note... my BAS shoulder harness came with an STC that gave approval for drilling and installing four (4) small velcro pads through the same spar to hold up the shoulder belts when not in use.

The 54 I installed Rosen's in did Not have the predrilled with nutplate holes, which came as a big surprise since I was figuring it would be the same as early 172's. So i had to drill and install the rivnuts. One thing to consider is your upholstery. It would be the pits to drill and install the nut plates against bare aluminum then put the upholstery and retainer back in and find out that you now cant reach the rivnut with the screwsdue to the added thickness.

N9149A wrote:... I for one would not be drilling new holes in my carry through spar with out explicit APPROVED instructions to do so.

alaskan99669 wrote:The solid plastic visors I took out of my plane were held there by two large sheet metal screws that penetrated the front of the carry through spar. The Rosin's bolted up via the same screws. The Rosin's also came with some sort of riv-nuts and STC to drill and install but my mechanic signed them off using the large sheet metal screws that were holding on my old visors.
On a side note... my BAS shoulder harness came with an STC that gave approval for drilling and installing four (4) small velcro pads through the same spar to hold up the shoulder belts when not in use.

I agree with Bruce that drilling holes thru a spar carry through is serious. I regard Alaskan00669's experience as noteworthy (and am not criticiqueing his good post.)
Consider this: We are all driving 50+ year old airplanes, most of which have "owner modifications" of one sort or another. Most of these owner-mods do not have documentation or engineering support. The factory-designs gather enough AD notes and serious service issues without our adding additional ones that have no engineering data on them at all. While a couple of drilled holes in a spar carrythrough may have been there a long time and without data...that does not make it legal or smart. Imagine if you will, the complexity and cost of repairing those drilled holes should they later proved problematical.

It would be far better to get Rosen, etc. to provide detailed instructions on how to accomplish the installation. Lacking that, at the very least get your IA's involvement and submit a Form 337. While a 337 filed in OKC isn't "approval" of your IA's work... it does lend some degree of legality to any unapproved repairs. (Just because an IA submits a 337 does not make the described work airworthy.)