The International Cessna 170 Association

Had some damage to one side wing, short story it needs replacement, rest of the plane is ok.

Can the L-19 wings be installed, or what other wings are compatible with a 170B? Up in Alaska and cringing at shipping charges.

L-19 wings would need the flaps removed and the B model flaps installed. You would probably want to replace with L-19 wings in pairs. Hate to have rocket pod mounts on only one wing. 172 wings are your best bet. Better probably is having what is left of your wing repaired. Here is a 2017 letter with guidelines from Cessna.
viewtopic.php?f=41&t=15341

Jill Oates in YWG is selling a 170B parts package for 10K Can. I think possibly a bit optimistic a pair of wings there but a wing typically can be found for 2500 and flight surfaces about 500ea. I think her ad is on Kijjij Manitoba. Trucking might ad another $ 1500, thats a WAG on my part.

thanks for the replies, the damage on the other wing is not bad but the cuff has damage...so easiest thing I imagine would be to replace it as a pair. I see a few pairs of 175 wings for sale, are those still able to be approved on field approval? If not what is the cutoff on compatibility for 172s?

175 wings would have the advantage of addit’l fuel capacity. Of course, the indicating system is different. It’s been done to several 170s.

I'd be interested in seeing how guys have got C-175 wings approved. It seems to me it would be a hard sell to use the Cessna letter Bruce provided as approved data (EDIT: acceptable data, the end of the Cessna letter says it is not approved data) as it says:

FUEL SYSTEM: The fuel system in the replacement wing must be the same or an approved option for the aircraft. Typical fuel system considerations are as follows:
a). Capacity: If the fuel capacity of the replacement wing is different than the original capacity the new capacity must have been an option on the aircraft and the quantity system must be changed to reflect the new capacity. Both wings must have the same fuel capacity.

n2582d wrote:I'd be interested in seeing how guys have got C-175 wings approved. It seems to me it would be a hard sell to use the Cessna letter Bruce provided as approved data as it says:

FUEL SYSTEM: The fuel system in the replacement wing must be the same or an approved option for the aircraft. Typical fuel system considerations are as follows:
a). Capacity: If the fuel capacity of the replacement wing is different than the original capacity the new capacity must have been an option on the aircraft and the quantity system must be changed to reflect the new capacity. Both wings must have the same fuel capacity.

It’s surprising any inspector would accept that letter at all for any basis of approval...as it was not issued by Cessna Engineering at all.
.
One of our Board Members (recently retired...Congratulations!)....converted his B model using 175 wings and wrote about it in these forums.
viewtopic.php?f=24&t=13095&p=137425&hil ... gs#p137425

GAHorn wrote:...It’s surprising any inspector would accept that letter at all for any basis of approval...as it was not issued by Cessna Engineering at all. ...

If not by Cessna Engineering then what department would have written this? Doesn't look like a Cessna marketing letter to me.

As Karl wrote about in the link you provided above the amount unusable fuel is significant when using 175 wings and tanks. There are several threads here that discuss that.

n2582d wrote:

GAHorn wrote:...It’s surprising any inspector would accept that letter at all for any basis of approval...as it was not issued by Cessna Engineering at all. ...

If not by Cessna Engineering then what department would have written this? Doesn't look like a Cessna marketing letter to me.

As Karl wrote about in the link you provided above the amount unusable fuel is significant when using 175 wings and tanks. There are several threads here that discuss that.

Have you seen and read the Cessna Letter?

The 175 has 10 gls of unuseable fuel, IIRC. However, like the 170 which claims to have 5 gals of unuseable... some of us playing “test pilot” have discovered with care that at least 40 gals can be accessed.

Yeah George, I read the letter. The FAA has two categories regarding data for alterations, “acceptable data” and “approved data”. Geoff Kelley, the author of the letter says the letter is not Approved Data. One’s FSDO would have to decide whether it is Acceptable Data for a field approval. The FAA inspector’s signature in block three of the 337 form makes that acceptable data now approved data.

Geoff is a Service Engineer at Cessna. Seems to me that he could get in a lot of trouble if he was sending such a letter with a Textron letterhead without authorization from the Cessna Engineering department. His Linkedin profile indicates that he is an A&P/I.A.

Well how would you know which wing you have on your plane ? Have you ever seen a data plate anywhere or on anything (Cessna) other than the one on the rear door post?
What about your ailerons ? Other than balance weight differences, they pretty much are all the same between many models. Do you know whether your plane has the originals? Flaps?

Just put this out there for discussion. I’m personally more concerned about fit and condition of components than where they started their life.

n2582d wrote:....If not by Cessna Engineering then what department would have written this? Doesn't look like a Cessna marketing letter to me.

n2582d wrote:Yeah George, I read the letter. ...Geoff is a Service Engineer at Cessna. Seems to me that he could get in a lot of trouble if he was sending such a letter with a Textron letterhead without authorization from the Cessna Engineering department. His Linkedin profile indicates that he is an A&P/I.A.

So I guess you answered your own question.?

AS Bruce mentioned there have been a couple versions of a “Cessna Letter” and the one to which I was referring my my earlier post was NOT in reference to the engineering department.
After extensive searching I gave up and found (and archived) Geoff Kelley’s letter which is apparently the one you are basing your comments upon, Gary.
In the case of Mr. Kelley’s Letter, he actually states the information in the letter is only a set of “Guidelines” derived “in working with our Engineering Department”.
Whether the “guidelines” are sufficient in scope to be “acceptable data” without additional concerns must be determined by someone else.
Mr. Kelley implies in Item No. 2 that Cessna believes they should be further consulted and that different wing replacements “ will be considered on an individual basis” . To me, that seems to mean the letter is not intended to provide a basis for approval... but instead is only providing things to consider....a set of guidelines for planning purposes.
If I were facing such a predicament I don’t think I’d want to complicate my life any more than necessary, and don’t think I’d involve Cessna if I didn’t have to. A qualified DER would be preferable, IMO. In a practical sense however, this type of substitution has been done successfully many times and I would have no problems strapping one on and going flying in it.

I actually spoke to the Cessna person who produced my letter dated in 2000. I asked for a copy of my letter as mine was fading. When he realized what I wanted he said he was surprised the FAA, using only the letter he had sent, approved the wings that had already been flying my airplane for 30 years. He stated the letter was only the first step, a guide for customers to use to find suitable replacement wings. Once wings were found, Cessna would draft another letter to the FAA in support of the installation of the specific wings by part number on the receiving airframe.

I do not recall whether "in support of" was in the form of approved or acceptable data but it was implied the FAA would have little issue with making the final approval with the second letter.

He actually sent me an exact copy of my letter with a current date as the Word template they all used automatically updated the date. This Cessna rep is long retired as he indicated I'd called him a few weeks before his last day with Cessna.

I was actually glad to see the same basic letter with a 2017 date at it shows, at least in 2017, Cessna was still following the same practice they did about 2004 time frame.

There is a listing on Barnstormers for two 170B wings for sale.