most common 180ph upgrade?

[bagarre]

Currently, the issue is not the STC for installing a TCM IO-360.
You can buy the STC today (the paperwork) and it is possible (if your FSDO agrees) to fabricate an approved motor mount.
The issue for most people is the cost involved. Not of the STC but of the parts and labor to perform the work.

The owner of STC SA00728SE has stated (to me) that he is willing to sell a copy of the STC and is even willing to sell a copy of the approved design drawings to make the mount (both specifically licensed for a single airplane of course). He does not have PMA to make the mount so he cant/wont do that.
With that paperwork, you have approval for most all of the conversion. Your hurdle is to have your FSDO agree to approving the mount if fabricated under 21.9a5 (Owner Made Part). But that's no small hurdle and I don't know if an engine mount has EVER been approved under 21.9a5.

But that IS your cheapest route if you want a TCM IO-360.
Creating a NEW STC will cost a LOT more and you still have the problem of fabricating the mount.

Also, keep in mind that STC SA00728SE is a fairly thin document and leaves much of the process up to the skill and imagination of the mechanic. I've looked at the paperwork and was amazed at how little it described. Support will be very minimal and you don't get a 'kit' with all the parts you need. You get the paperwork.

The Avcon Lycoming 180hp conversion for around $15k gets you everything needed less motor and prop plus a very helpful and supportive company to call when you have problems.

IMO, the Lycoming 360 isn't as desirable as the TCM 360 but there are plenty flying today so it must work if not with a few issues of cracked stringers.

[blueldr]

I think the idea of forming a group to finance the development of an STC for the installation of the Continental IO-360 engine in the Cessna airplane is a good idea. As a matter of fact, I wouldn't be a bit surprized if someone wouldn't come up with the wherewithall to accomplish that task if the grease was thick enough.
The original financing group would have to kind of be gamblers, I'd guess, but even though I'm more than somewhat over the hill and can't possibly get back into flying. I'd probably nibble at that kind of bait.
Why don't one of you young eager beavers that has a yen for this thing dangle your dinger into the pond and see what might be done. Try finding out how many "Stock Holders' might be corralled and for how much stock, and maybe who would be capable and eager to do the development for what kind of price.
I'd be interested in discussing this idea with any other members that would care to. Give me a call or an email or PM.

Dick lemmon --- 916-635-5566 --- blueldr17@gmail.com

[marathonrunner]

Speaking from very recent and personal experience, you need a lot of time and a very thick wallet to finance and get this going. Also the 170 crowd are not like the Cub guys. They tend to be a bit more frugal and that is not to be taken as an insult. It is just if you do develop an STC the price may deter people even if it is a good idea. I can see this kind of STC being very expensive to develop and to purchase after the STC is issued. It also takes years to muddle through all the paperwork to get the STC. Moving as fast as you can and everything falling into place perfectly, I would say at least 3 years. Any DAR/DER's in the club? You will for sure need some of those for this project.

This is not to deter anyone, just some hard facts you need to know and acknowledge before you jump in the pond and figure out that although your original intention was to drain the pond you might be up to your ass in aligators.

[Kyle]

If the association for example, was able to purchase the STC from it's current holder, then as I understand it, the association could pass that to members licensed for their particular airplane. The initial seed money might be able to pool enough cash for a purchase. Of course the current STC owner would have to be willing to sell it. That would be much easier than developing a new one. If the association was then able to contract with an engine mount manufacturer, based upon the mentioned engineering drawings to get the PMA, then they would be able to offer a more complete package. As bagarre mentioned (sorry I don't know your first name), the paperwork is missing allot of information but perhaps folks who have this installation currently or who have had it in the past, like DIck - might be able to fill in the blanks.

Even if the current owner would not sell it, but individuals still were able to buy the two main items (STC, and engine mount drawings) is their any way the association could work with a company to do the mounts?

Although I have purchased some STC's for use in a few airplanes over the years, including a HP upgrade to a 182 a few years ago, this is not something I've ever been involved with. Just trying to think out of the box - and as mentioned, the resources of a group (association) would defiantly be greater than the one

Kyle T.

[bagarre]

No one can make the motor mount for resale unless they have a PMA for that specific part.

Your fastest route thru this is to call your FSDO and get them to agree that it can be an Owner Made Part. At that point YOU can contract Acorn Welding or any other quality shop to fabricate YOUR mount for YOUR airplane. But to make and sell an airplane part for other airplanes requires a PMA.
This is a good article on the subject
http://150cessna.tripod.com/parts.html


Getting the 170 association to buy the STC gets you no closer to getting an approved motor mount as there would still be no PMA to make the mount.

Another route is to buy the STC and try to get a modified Maule motor mount approved via Field Approval.

Any route will require your FSDO to be on board with the project so, I'd start those conversations early.

[marathonrunner]

This is an IO 360. In addition to a mount, you also need to modify the induction system for alternate air. You also need a return line too the fuel tank, a header tank, an electric boost pump. Starting to gain a little weeight here. I have not read FAR 21 extensively but I am sure there are more items that need to be added. Was this a one time STC? It does not sound like it had enough documentation to duplicate it or instructions for the installation or even an ICA.

What is wrong with putting your aircraft in experimental category to do this? IF not used for hire there is really no stigma attached to experimental. There are thousands of them sharing airspace with certified aircraft every day.Also a PMA is not all that difficult to acquire. There are for more hurdles to this project then getting a mount fabricated and a PMA.

[bagarre]

It's not a one time STC it's a regular STC except the owner can't make the mount.

All the other parts can be bought and the STC give you approval to use them.
The motor mount is the only part that is not available for purchase.
...and the baffles but they aren't nearly as difficult as the mount.

[marathonrunner]

If this is a multiple STC AND for sale, then it would not be that difficult to get a company to manufacture the mount and get a PMA if they do not already have one. That is for sure the cheapest way to go is to buy an existing STC. I would first get the parts that are needed to go with it and price them out to make a kit. Airforms in Big lake Alaska can make the baffles as they have CNC capability and a PMA. Atlee could make the mounts and has a PMA. IF all other parts are available then this does not sound so complicated and, some easy to follow instructions can be generated for installation.

[marathonrunner]

It sounds expensive and heavy to me. Keep in mind that the fuel injection system needs to be set up and checked regularly in accordance with TCM SID 97-3. I have the gauges and they are not inexpensive. Not every shop has this capability.

[bagarre]

I'm pretty sure PMA needs to be issued for each part.
Meaning, a shop would have to be given PMA to manufacture this particular mount.
If not, I'm sure Tom would have outsourced the motor mount by now.

[marathonrunner]

Yes but once you have a PMA it is easy to add to it.

[marathonrunner]

Easy being a relative term based on getting a full fledged STC to begin with

[blueldr]

marathonrunner

To the best of my knowledge, there is absolutely NO way to change a certified airplane to experimental and then use it in the manner of a homebuilt. ANY change to EXPERIMENTAL will have conditions tied to it that will seriously restrict normal use.

FYI, none of the Continental IO-360 installations I've seen, except the XP Mods, uses a header tank. I personally would not have it without one since you have no way of knowing where the return fuel is going.
With a header tank the fuel return just goes back to the header and then back to the engine again. No fuel ever has to go back to the wing tanks. The header tank is vented to the wing tanks.

[marathonrunner]

Well, I do know of some former certified airplanes that are definitely in the experimental category. I had to do that with my 170 for the float STC and it did have restrictions such as you mentioned. Some do not and I am not sure the rules for that. I never wanted to do it so never looked into it.

Yes going back to a header tank is another option and not the wing. I do not know how the STC is written. I just know with that fuel injection system you do have to run the fuel somewhere unlike a Bendix system. I am hoping it has alternate air as well that is either qutomatic and spring loaded door or a knob that you pull from within the cockpit.

[blueldr]

In my discussions with the local FSDO and OKC, I could not find anyone in the FAA anywhere that could tell me of any method of changing my registration to experimental and then being able to operate it in other than restricted conditions where permission from the FAA was required to go almost any place out of my designated area and do any thing with the plane.
I would have been delighted to have been able to change the registration to experimental and operate it like a homebuilt, but it apparently just couldn't be done legally.