Stearman project

Those A-9 magneto switches are rare as hen's teeth. Looks good. I have a Taylorcraft that took me 3 years. I understand the time it takes to rebuild an airplane. As an IA, I have helped in several others too. Tim
 
As an IA, I have helped in several others too. Tim

Yeah, I couldn't have tackled this job if I wasn't an IA myself. Paying someone else just to do the 337s would've driven me to bankruptcy. :banghead:

Harvey
 
Harvey that's a super nice project! You are a dedicated and persistent individual!!

If you ever fly into Angelina "International" let me know and I will come give it a look for sure!

David
 
where are the completed pics.. you never finished this post. Would love to see the plane out on the tarmac , or in the air, with engine and prop.
 
Awesome! You must have a stack of 337s the size of a New York City phonebook...... Flustered
 
Woodchucker,

The plane isn't completed yet. I ran into a bureaucracy roadblock with the FAA. The problem was that the FAA had disapproved my engine conversion. To remind you, my Stearman was originally certificated with a 220hp engine and I was trying to install a 275hp engine. Unfortunately, the FAA's current guidance at the time (obviously written by government lawyers who don't know beans about aircraft) limits engine changes to +/- 10% of the originally-approved horsepower. Otherwise, one has to go through a full-blown STC (Supplemental Type Certificate) application process with engineering analysis', flight trials with a certified and FAA-approved test pilot, etc. I was told that this would cost between $50,000 and $100,000 with NO guarantee of approval at the end. (Now comes the silly part.) I argued that the Stearman was originally certificated with 220hp and 450hp engines and that my intended 275hp installation falls within the 220hp and 450hp approved limits. The FAA said no, the regs don't read that way. I could go +/- 220hp OR I could go +/- 450hp but anything in between is unapproved. In other words, the FAA would allow me to install an engine as small as 198hp (220-10%) or as large as 495hp (450+10%) but they're not sure if the plane it would safely fly with 275hp!!! And they weren't going to budge from their position!!! So I retreated to my corner to lick my wounds for awhile!

However, about a year ago, I discovered that someone else had recently jumped through the FAA's hoops and was awarded an STC to do exactly what I was trying to accomplish, and his STC was granted duplication approval by the feds! So I purchased a copy of his STC and I'm now good-to-go on my own conversion! I've been working on my Stearman for about three weeks now. It won't fly this year (I still have a long ways to go) but probably next year.

The absurdity of all this is that the FAA approved almost every engine known to man on the Stearman airframe back in its crop dusting days (mine dusted with a 600hp engine!) and the only time there was a problem was when someone hit a barn. The old-time feds knew this but all of the new feds have grown up with very little aviation common sense. As far as they know, a "round" engine is what hangs under an airliner's wing!

Harvey
 
Last edited:
I am aware of how absurd the FAA can be. I think common sense is lacking everywhere in govt. I'm sorry to hear that you got caught in the bureaucratic nonsense.
 
Ewkearns,

You're not too far off!

Harvey

That A/C is old enough that you should be able to find some existing field approvals signed by a DAMI. If you find one, they carry the same weight as an STC good for ANY aircraft with the same TCDS or AS......
 
Back
Top