O-300-B approval

[ron74887]

Everyone, For all those waitng-- Just got approval of the O-300-B is the Cessna 170 series aircraft and it will be available thru The International Cessna 170 Association Headquarters as soon as the board decides the price. This should only take a few days and I have to get the hard copy via snail mail. Ron Massicot

[ron74887]

Guys, change the heading to read correct. Can't read or type but learning how to operate this computer??? maybe?? thanks Steve for letting me know. Ron

[Bruce Fenstermacher]

This is great news. The STC allows the use of the 0-300-B on all three models of the 170. With this and our other STC there is no model of 0-300 we can't use on our aircraft. There are a few airplanes out there with 0-300-Bs installed that can now come out of the closet.

For those interested this STC was recieved in record time. It was September 7th, 2007 when in an email I ask Ron Massicot what he thought it would take to add the 0-300-B to our existing STC. Ron had developed a good working relationship with a Seatle FSDO guy named Vince when he transfered his STC to the Association. Vince it turned out was a Swift owner and very familiar with the C-145/0-300 series engine. He understood exactly what we wanted to accomplish and went to work for us.

And so after going back and forth a few times with technical information from Parts, Overhaul and Service manuals we have a brand new STC. Took just about 8 months. Record time I'd say. Who says you can't work with the FAA.

Thanks Ron and Vince.

[blueldr]

My question is why the FUZZ even required a (an?) STC for this. The C-145/O-300 engines are all alike as far as physical configuration, power output, weight,accessories,etc. If the little propeller oil valve is wired off and the oil passage in the output shaft is plugged, what is the difference.To the best of my knowledge,any C-145/O-300 engine will bolt right up where any other one was installed and perform exactly the same. On the ragwing C-170 you are supposed to have a fuel pump because of the size of the fuel lines. Big deal. There is no engine difference!
On the other hand, engines such as the Lycoming O-360 have a number of different physical configurations and they are not at all likely to be interchangable in any given installation. The same thing holds for the Lycoming O-320. Their engines dash numbers can have very different physical configurations and would not at all be interchangeable.
It is easy to see that the FAA has been relieved of the task of promoting aviation in our country.

[GAHorn]

... On the ragwing C-170 you are supposed to have a fuel pump because of the size of the fuel lines. ....

There is no difference in the actual size of the lines. (All aircraft have 3/8" AN6 lines.) The difference is routing of the lines that creates a fuel-delivery problem for the ragwing. When the engine is requesting the most fuel (which is during takeoff and climb) the routing thru the forward doorpost, which is an uphill route during the takeoff/climb segment, is when the installation cannot meet the CAR3 requirements for 150% fuel-flow for the engine. Cessna changed the routing thru the rear doorpost on subsequent models which met the requirement so the fuel pump is not req'd for later aircraft.

[Brad Brady]

Hey Ron,
Thanks for the time and effort you put into getting this Approval....I know it takes a lot of paper shuffling and mail expense! Again, Thank You.
Brad

[blueldr]

Thanks, George. I was under the impression that the ragwing had AN5 lines and that was the reason for the fuel pump.
Don't really know why I thought that. I've seen a number of ragwings on which the fuel pump was missing and the airplane seemed to work fine without it.

[mike roe]

Great work.Keep us posted on price and availablity.Put me down for one.

[fishdoc]

So, a "friend of mine" recently purchased this really wonderful 170A with the O-300B in it not realizing it was something other than an already approved installation. What should "he" do to "come out of the closet"

[ron74887]

guys, I got the hard copy yesterday in snail mail and will sign it over today and mail it back to transfer it to the Assn. I just need to ask a few questions to Vince cause I will send copies of the original drawing to Jan and hand deliver them in Branson. As far as BL's question, you are corrrect that they are the same except that in todays politically correct BS your insurance co may just walk away and say you have an unapproved engine. Since Cessna sent out planes in 55/56 with this engine, it was never added to the A-799 type cert. So we found someone with some common sense that understood in that time period they would have put either the 2H or B and never thought any different since they are the same as the C-145-2 is to the O-300-A and in 2008 the T'S and I's are not crossed or dotted just enought to allow it not to be correct. You are obviously trying to use to much common sense in a now uncommon sense time. If one has the B engine, the price charged by the Assn to make the engine legal will way out weight the BS from the feds. I know some people are waiting for this so contact Jan and put your name on a list as they will be in Jan's hands in a few weeks. I do not know if the board has decided the price. The other STC for the C, D or E engine is $75 for members and $150 for non members, to give some idea. Another reason to be a member! Ron

[MoonlightVFR]

Question

Would the B designation be on the engine data plate?

My original engine is off enjoying service as a florida airboat powerplant. C 170B 1954 sn 26433.

The replacement engine came out of a 172 and I think I heard 0 300 B as the replacement type.

At the time I think a comment was made that it would have been better if it was a D engine. Vaccuum pump mounting pad ?


So does the engine data plate tell the tale? What happens if non data plate engine block side get separated from its original counter part?



Regards

[Bruce Fenstermacher]

The model should be on the data plate. The case halves are a matched set. One with out the other and they are probably junk. At the very least the halves would have to be matched with a line bore of the cam and crank bearing bosses.

[GAHorn]

The "D" engine's attraction, in my view, is NOT the vacuum pump pad. (Vacuum pumps, especially the dry pumps, fail. Frequently and suddenly. They are a horrible development when compared to the good-ol' wet pumps.... and single engine airplanes have no business flying hard/low IFR on purpose. Venturi's do just fine if properly installed and their failure rate is on the order of Zero to the tenth power.)
The real attraction of a "D" (or a "C") engine is the 6-bolt crankshafts which are available (and supplanted with newly mfr'd units by TCM.) The early 8-bolt cranks, in airworthy condition, are difficult to find and are expensive to purchase.

The engine data plate should have both a MODEL and a SERIAL on it. The MODEL would be something like: O-300-A .... or O-300-B ... etc etc. (or an earlier engine might be C-145-2 ... etc etc. and although equivalent in terms of performance and applicability, would technically not be an O-300 engine .

A SERIAL NUMBER might have a "D" within it's numbering range. BUT... that letter "D" when in a serial-range, refers not to engine model...but to the fact that the engine probably has a "Dampened" crankshaft.

[SteveF]

Ron,

I got my STC for the O-300-B in the mail from Jan today. I would like to give you a very large THANK YOU for the time and effort you spent to get this cleared up with the FAA. Having the STC in my possession is a great relief and addition to my having the correct paperwork for the plane.

SteveF

[Bruce Fenstermacher]

Steve,

You do reallize that you need to have a IA execute a 337 for the STC. It should be a no brainer. Then your golden,