Venturi
Moderators: GAHorn, Karl Towle, Bruce Fenstermacher
N3243A wrote:"....how do I know Cessna or someone else put the proper AN5807-1 on in the first place?"
I know Bruce wrote that as a rhetorical question and didn't need (or especially want)
a reply. But it is a valid question for some folks.
The way you know is: 1: It's on the original equipment list (or superceded list along with logbook sign-off) and 2: there's no log record of a change and 3:the physical inspection of it meets the specification of AN5807-1 (which is in the public domain.) If you do suspect the venturi you have (or worse, if the feds suspect it) then that falls under the purview of "Suspected Bogus Parts", the title of a lengthy Advisory Circular which lays out the procedures for verification and reporting. If your IA suspects it, then he's supposed to research it (probably by taking measurements combined with research) before he approves it for return to service. If the FAA suspects it, they're supposed to put a "condition tag" on your airplane, effectively grounding it until you do all the work necessary to convince them to remove the tag.
It's one of those deals where you can "beat the rap" but not "beat the ride" (thru the legal system.)
(BTW, the reason I'm so persistent in my efforts to give only the legal answer to most questions is because people expect/want me to. It's up to them to decide whether to attempt to stay legal or deviate on their own. But in order to make that decision to deviate from standards, one has to know what the standard is. Don't ask me what the PN of my taillight lamp/bulb is. I know a 50-cent 1156 backup bulb fits, shines bright, and lasts longer than the $8.95 number 1777, but being an automotive bulb it's incorrect. Dum-dee-dum....
I know Bruce wrote that as a rhetorical question and didn't need (or especially want)
a reply. But it is a valid question for some folks.The way you know is: 1: It's on the original equipment list (or superceded list along with logbook sign-off) and 2: there's no log record of a change and 3:the physical inspection of it meets the specification of AN5807-1 (which is in the public domain.) If you do suspect the venturi you have (or worse, if the feds suspect it) then that falls under the purview of "Suspected Bogus Parts", the title of a lengthy Advisory Circular which lays out the procedures for verification and reporting. If your IA suspects it, then he's supposed to research it (probably by taking measurements combined with research) before he approves it for return to service. If the FAA suspects it, they're supposed to put a "condition tag" on your airplane, effectively grounding it until you do all the work necessary to convince them to remove the tag.
It's one of those deals where you can "beat the rap" but not "beat the ride" (thru the legal system.)
(BTW, the reason I'm so persistent in my efforts to give only the legal answer to most questions is because people expect/want me to. It's up to them to decide whether to attempt to stay legal or deviate on their own. But in order to make that decision to deviate from standards, one has to know what the standard is. Don't ask me what the PN of my taillight lamp/bulb is. I know a 50-cent 1156 backup bulb fits, shines bright, and lasts longer than the $8.95 number 1777, but being an automotive bulb it's incorrect. Dum-dee-dum....
Last edited by GAHorn on Thu Jan 29, 2004 6:56 pm, edited 1 time in total.
'53 B-model N146YS SN:25713
50th Anniversary of Flight Model. Winner-Best Original 170B, 100th Anniversary of Flight Convention.
An originality nut (mostly) for the right reasons.
50th Anniversary of Flight Model. Winner-Best Original 170B, 100th Anniversary of Flight Convention.
An originality nut (mostly) for the right reasons.
BEANS IN OUR EARS
"NOW HEARS WHY WE DON'T PUT SUM BEANS IN OUR EARS BEANS IN OUR EARS BEANS IN OUR EARS- - - - NOW HEARS WHY WE DON'T PUT SUM BEANS IN OUR EARS - - - BEEEAAANNNSSS IN OUR EEAARRS!!!!!!!!
DON'T AXE FER TRUBLE AND ULE GIT LESS.
EENY BURRO CRAT WHO GITS AXED EENY TANG IMPORT WILL TAKE IT TO MEAN - - IT JES GIVE HIM A CHANCE FER TO MAKE UP SUM MORE RULES. REMINES ME OF THE JOKE ABOUT THE BODY PARTS WANTIN TO BE THE MOS IMPORTANT. THE A- - HOLE WON! MY ADVISE IS - - IFN YOU DOANT WANNA SEE NO SLIMEY STUFF DOANT TURN OVER NO ROXS
NOW COMIN ON AN LETS PUT SUM BEANS BE- - *& %$Z %MFF &)(_+_ *&% ^$@X@ ~@~@~ OOOWWWWWEEE
DON'T AXE FER TRUBLE AND ULE GIT LESS.
EENY BURRO CRAT WHO GITS AXED EENY TANG IMPORT WILL TAKE IT TO MEAN - - IT JES GIVE HIM A CHANCE FER TO MAKE UP SUM MORE RULES. REMINES ME OF THE JOKE ABOUT THE BODY PARTS WANTIN TO BE THE MOS IMPORTANT. THE A- - HOLE WON! MY ADVISE IS - - IFN YOU DOANT WANNA SEE NO SLIMEY STUFF DOANT TURN OVER NO ROXS
NOW COMIN ON AN LETS PUT SUM BEANS BE- - *& %$Z %MFF &)(_+_ *&% ^$@X@ ~@~@~ OOOWWWWWEEE
OLE GAR SEZ - 4 Boats, 4 Planes, 4 houses. I've got to quit collecting!
-
Bruce Fenstermacher
- Posts: 10318
- Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2002 11:24 am
So George maybe I missed it somewhere here so let me ask you directly.
If the Wag Aero 8" venturi meets AN5807-1 standards then it would be a legal venturi replacement. Yes or No.
George, I think I might have read between the lines here and think that you said since the Wag Aero 8" venturi is longer than the 4" AN5807-1 that it could not meet that standard and therefor not be a legal replacement on our aircraft without another means of approval. Did I read this?
If the Wag Aero 8" venturi meets AN5807-1 standards then it would be a legal venturi replacement. Yes or No.
George, I think I might have read between the lines here and think that you said since the Wag Aero 8" venturi is longer than the 4" AN5807-1 that it could not meet that standard and therefor not be a legal replacement on our aircraft without another means of approval. Did I read this?
CAUTION - My forum posts may be worth what you paid for them!
Bruce Fenstermacher, Past President, TIC170A
Email: brucefenster at gmail.com
Bruce Fenstermacher, Past President, TIC170A
Email: brucefenster at gmail.com
-
zero.one.victor
- Posts: 2271
- Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2002 12:11 am
Anyone who wonders why the homebuilt aircraft market is expanding at such a rapid pace needs only to view this thread 
Flying should be about flying and not about wading through mountains of legal jibberish that in the end means very little. It fits, it works, I like it. Nuff said. I sure am starting to like that new Glastar Sportsman 2+2 kit. If it only had a straight or round tail intead of a silly swept tail it would be perfect 
My 54' has two 4" veturis each separately running it's own gyro. From the looks of the plumbing it has been this way for many years and I'm not about to fix something that isn't broken 
Flying should be about flying and not about wading through mountains of legal jibberish that in the end means very little. It fits, it works, I like it. Nuff said. I sure am starting to like that new Glastar Sportsman 2+2 kit. If it only had a straight or round tail intead of a silly swept tail it would be perfect My 54' has two 4" veturis each separately running it's own gyro. From the looks of the plumbing it has been this way for many years and I'm not about to fix something that isn't broken John, 2734C in Summit Point, WV
Yes. Any venturi that meets the AN5807-1 is legal. (Go to the Mx Library and read AC20.62D., approved parts are: "Standard Part. Is a part manufactured in complete compliance with an established U.S. Government or industry-accepted specification which includes design, manufacturing, and uniform identification requirements.N9149A wrote:So George maybe I missed it somewhere here so let me ask you directly.
If the Wag Aero 8" venturi meets AN5807-1 standards then it would be a legal venturi replacement. Yes or No.
George, I think I might have read between the lines here and think that you said since the Wag Aero 8" venturi is longer than the 4" AN5807-1 that it could not meet that standard and therefor not be a legal replacement on our aircraft without another means of approval. Did I read this?
The specification must include all information necessary to produce and conform the part. The specification
must be published so that any party may manufacture the part. Examples include, but are not limited
to, National Aerospace Standards (NAS), Air Force-Navy Aeronautical Standard (AN), Society of Automotive
Engineers (SAE), SAE Aerospace Standard (AS), Military Standard (MS), etc.
Additional approval basis is legally req'd if the venturi doesn't meet the AN5807-1 standard.
Last edited by GAHorn on Fri Jan 30, 2004 3:32 am, edited 1 time in total.
'53 B-model N146YS SN:25713
50th Anniversary of Flight Model. Winner-Best Original 170B, 100th Anniversary of Flight Convention.
An originality nut (mostly) for the right reasons.
50th Anniversary of Flight Model. Winner-Best Original 170B, 100th Anniversary of Flight Convention.
An originality nut (mostly) for the right reasons.
I posted AC 20.62D in the Library for those wanting to read the text.zero.one.victor wrote:Come on now--is "bogus" even a real word? I woulda thought the FAA would use the word "counterfeit",or maybe even "spurious".
Eric
From the FAA website, search for word "bogus", resulted in:
1. 129.14R3
...preapplication meeting will be held with the FAA Principal Inspectors and principals of...must have procedures to prevent the use of bogus or suspected unapproved (SUP) parts and...techniques and practices are derived from FAA approved data. The GMM must have definitions...
http://www.faa.gov/fsdo/ifomia/129_14.html
And:
Parts and Materials
ICAO Annex 6, Part 1, Ch 8, par 8.7.4.3
ICAO document 8335-an1879/3 pars 6.3.2
Advisory Circular (AC) 20.62D
The GMM must have very detailed instructions on parts receiving procedures, including procedures to record the details of the receiving inspection. It is suggested that AC 20.62D (as revised) be consulted for additional guidance.
The GMM must have procedures to prevent the use of bogus or suspected unapproved (SUP) parts and the reporting requirement, should such parts be found.
ONe of the recent witch-hunts the feds conducted resulted in their own DC-3 and Sabreliner being grounded for numerous bogus parts.
Last edited by GAHorn on Fri Jan 30, 2004 3:24 am, edited 1 time in total.
'53 B-model N146YS SN:25713
50th Anniversary of Flight Model. Winner-Best Original 170B, 100th Anniversary of Flight Convention.
An originality nut (mostly) for the right reasons.
50th Anniversary of Flight Model. Winner-Best Original 170B, 100th Anniversary of Flight Convention.
An originality nut (mostly) for the right reasons.
UNAPPROVED PARTS NOTIFICATION
NO. 96-243
December 8, 1998
AFFECTED AIRCRAFT: All aircraft.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this Unapproved Parts Notification is to advise all
owners, operators, maintenance entities, and parts suppliers that a large number
of surplus aircraft parts have been imported from a foreign military source
without documentation attesting to conformity or condition.
BACKGROUND: During a suspected unapproved parts investigation it was
discovered that International Logistics Network Technologies, Inc., (ILN), 21040
Osborne Street, Canoga Park, CA, 91311, formerly of Chatsworth, CA, has been
selling numerous aircraft parts that may not conform to their type design. These
suspected unapproved parts were obtained by ILN from a foreign military source
without documentation to the parts’ condition nor traceability to an FAA-approved
manufacturing process. ILN has been representing these parts as being in new
unused condition. Twenty parts obtained during the investigation were tested
and determined not to meet type design. Some of these parts are considered
flight safety critical parts.
RECOMMENDATION: Regulations require that type certificated products
conform to their type design. Aircraft owners, operators, maintenance
organizations and parts suppliers should inspect their aircraft and/or aircraft parts
inventories for parts purchased directly from ILN or from another source that may
have obtained parts from ILN. Any referenced parts that have been purchased
from ILN should be inspected for traceability to ensure that the parts conform to
current approved standards and technical data. Advisory Circular (AC) 20.62D,
Eligibility, Quality and Identification of Aeronautical Parts, may be used for
guidance in inspecting the parts. If any suspect parts are found, please notify
FAA Inspector Thomas Tucker at the Dallas Flight Standards District Office,
(214) 902-1800, or Special Agent Cathy Stewart at the Defense Criminal
Investigative Service, (817) 543-4354, ext. 241.
NO. 96-243
December 8, 1998
AFFECTED AIRCRAFT: All aircraft.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this Unapproved Parts Notification is to advise all
owners, operators, maintenance entities, and parts suppliers that a large number
of surplus aircraft parts have been imported from a foreign military source
without documentation attesting to conformity or condition.
BACKGROUND: During a suspected unapproved parts investigation it was
discovered that International Logistics Network Technologies, Inc., (ILN), 21040
Osborne Street, Canoga Park, CA, 91311, formerly of Chatsworth, CA, has been
selling numerous aircraft parts that may not conform to their type design. These
suspected unapproved parts were obtained by ILN from a foreign military source
without documentation to the parts’ condition nor traceability to an FAA-approved
manufacturing process. ILN has been representing these parts as being in new
unused condition. Twenty parts obtained during the investigation were tested
and determined not to meet type design. Some of these parts are considered
flight safety critical parts.
RECOMMENDATION: Regulations require that type certificated products
conform to their type design. Aircraft owners, operators, maintenance
organizations and parts suppliers should inspect their aircraft and/or aircraft parts
inventories for parts purchased directly from ILN or from another source that may
have obtained parts from ILN. Any referenced parts that have been purchased
from ILN should be inspected for traceability to ensure that the parts conform to
current approved standards and technical data. Advisory Circular (AC) 20.62D,
Eligibility, Quality and Identification of Aeronautical Parts, may be used for
guidance in inspecting the parts. If any suspect parts are found, please notify
FAA Inspector Thomas Tucker at the Dallas Flight Standards District Office,
(214) 902-1800, or Special Agent Cathy Stewart at the Defense Criminal
Investigative Service, (817) 543-4354, ext. 241.
'53 B-model N146YS SN:25713
50th Anniversary of Flight Model. Winner-Best Original 170B, 100th Anniversary of Flight Convention.
An originality nut (mostly) for the right reasons.
50th Anniversary of Flight Model. Winner-Best Original 170B, 100th Anniversary of Flight Convention.
An originality nut (mostly) for the right reasons.