Matronics Email Lists :: View topic - Needed: Answer; Is Non-TSO Altimeter

Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists

Get Email Distribution Too! FAQ Search Memberlist Usergroups Register

Profile Log in to check your private messages Log in

Needed: Answer; Is Non-TSO Altimeter - Good for IFR?
Goto page 1, 2 Next

Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> RV-List

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author Message

darnpilot(at)AOL.COM
Guest

Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2007 4:21 am Post subject: Needed: Answer; Is Non-TSO Altimeter - Good for IFR?

Help.

 

 My Glasair III needs its two year IFR certification, i.e., pitot/static, altimeter, & transponder check.  The altimeter (I just found out) is non-TSO'd.  Does anyone have the Regs and/or clarification that says this is legal for IFR in an experimental aircraft?  My local avionics shop says no, and will not do the test and certification.

 

 Thank you in advance.

 

 Jeff

   More new features than ever.  Check out the new AOL Mail! 

  [quote][b]

acepilot(at)bloomer.net
Guest

Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2007 4:34 am Post subject: Needed: Answer; Is Non-TSO Altimeter - Good for IFR?

My gut says non TSO is a no go for IFR, but I will try going through the 

regs tonight when I have more time.  My thought is you'd probably want 

the best and most trusted equipment for flying IFR since you only get 

one chance to get it right 



Scott

http://corbenflyer.tripod.com/

Gotta Fly or Gonna Die

Building RV-4 (Super Slow Build Version)



darnpilot(at)aol.com wrote:



 	  Quote: 	
		   Help.



 My Glasair III needs its two year IFR certification, i.e., 

 pitot/static, altimeter, & transponder check.  The altimeter (I just 

 found out) is non-TSO'd.  Does anyone have the Regs and/or 

 clarification that says this is legal for IFR in an experimental 

 aircraft?  My local avionics shop says no, and will not do the test 

 and certification.



 Thank you in advance.



 Jeff

 ------------------------------------------------------------------------

 <http://o.aolcdn.com/cdn.webmail.aol.com/mailtour/aol/en-us/text.htm?ncid=aolcmp00050000000003>!

dougpflyrv(at)aol.com
Guest

Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2007 4:55 am Post subject: Needed: Answer; Is Non-TSO Altimeter - Good for IFR?

I ENCOUNTERED THE SAME PROBLEM WITH 3 DIFFERENT RV'S AND 2 AVIONICS SHOPS. I PUT IN A TSO'D ALTIMETER AND ENCODER SO THERE IS NO QUESTION.

 GOOD LUCK.

 DOUG PRESTON

 RV-10 N372RV  78 HRS.

 

   

 

   

 

 --

darnpilot(at)aol.com
Guest

Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2007 5:50 am Post subject: Needed: Answer; Is Non-TSO Altimeter - Good for IFR?

One other thing...the EAA on their website says it is OK.  Seems a bit of a gray area, but the EAA seems confident in their interpretation.  Is there any FAA type letters confirming the EAA's position?  

 

 I called several major avionics shops, and mostly got it was OK, but a couple "no it is not".  I'm confused, but would prefer to not spend $800+ on a TSO'd altimeter, when I have what seems like a perfectly good altimeter.  If it passes the test, then how is it inferior?  Would the (God forbid) insurance company take a more strident view?

 

 TIA

 

 Jeff

 

 

 --

rhdudley1(at)bellsouth.ne
Guest

Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2007 6:10 am Post subject: Needed: Answer; Is Non-TSO Altimeter - Good for IFR?

Jeff,

 

 I just sent a post on the RV-list about my experience with a non-TSOd altimeter (Falcon). Mine passed the altimeter/transponder/static system two times in the last 3 years at an FAA repair station. The technician said that he couldn't issue a yellow tag because of the non TSO nature ot my altimeter but attached a label that it was certified to 20,000 feet.

 In case you didn't read my previous post, I will add it below. It now reads 10,000 feet.

 =============================

 FWIW - I have a Falcon altimeter that I installed in my RV-6A about four years ago. The plane has been flying since February 2005 and has about 130 hours. The altimeter has been certified twice to 20,000 feet per FAR 43 App. E at an FAA repair station with no problems, the latest check in February this year. I even posted and e-mail on the RV-list indicating my delight in this reasonably priced, Chinese made instrument being so precise and reliable.

 

 A week ago in checking the cockpit in preparation for a flight, about two weeks since my last flight, I found the altimeter reading about 4000 feet. In in the process of trouble shooting, I disconnected the static line from the altimeter and found that it was still reading 4000 feet. The problem was obviously internal in the altimeter. I removed it from the instrument panel and took it home. After a week on my desk, the indicated altitude has increased to about 9000 feet and is still slowly climbing. 

 

 Consulting with the Wultrad folks I found that the instrument could be overhauled for $150. Since the current price is about $250 this was not attractive. And, since my confidence in the reliability of the instrument had been destroyed, I "bit the bullet" and purchased a United, TSOd altimeter at about three times the price of the Falcon. If you, have one of these you may want to keep a close eye on the field altitude at the correct altimeter setting. I noticed a small increase in the indicated field altitude a few weeks before the very large increase I mentioned

 ================================

 

 Best regards and good luck,

 

 Richard Dudley

 RV-6A flying

 

 

 

 darnpilot(at)aol.com (darnpilot(at)aol.com) wrote:

 [quote]One other thing...the EAA on their website says it is OK.  Seems a bit of a gray area, but the EAA seems confident in their interpretation.  Is there any FAA type letters confirming the EAA's position?  

   

 I called several major avionics shops, and mostly got it was OK, but a couple "no it is not".  I'm confused, but would prefer to not spend $800+ on a TSO'd altimeter, when I have what seems like a perfectly good altimeter.  If it passes the test, then how is it inferior?  Would the (God forbid) insurance company take a more strident view?

   

 TIA

   

 Jeff

   

   

 --

wdleonard(at)gmail.com
Guest

Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2007 7:07 am Post subject: Needed: Answer; Is Non-TSO Altimeter - Good for IFR?

Without question, non-TSO is OK for experimental aircraft.  I would consider making the shop show you where it says that a TSO is required to pass the static-system test. 



I have 2 non-TSO altimiters (Rockymountain and Bluemountain) and they both pass every time.  Both are easy to calibrate down to less than 10' error at any altitude.  -  i.e. they both outperform any TSO steam guage.  But that is beside the point.



If you google you can find  a copy of the instructions for performing the static system test.



Dave Leonard



 On Nov 13, 2007 7:18 AM,  <darnpilot(at)aol.com (darnpilot(at)aol.com)> wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		    Help.

 

 My Glasair III needs its two year IFR certification, i.e., pitot/static, altimeter, & transponder check.  The altimeter (I just found out) is non-TSO'd.  Does anyone have the Regs and/or clarification that says this is legal for IFR in an experimental aircraft?  My local avionics shop says no, and will not do the test and certification. 

 

 Thank you in advance.

 

 Jeff

   More new features than ever.  Check out the new AOL Mail!

 

   	  Quote: 	
		  

	
	


-- 

David Leonard



Turbo Rotary RV-6 N4VY

http://N4VY.RotaryRoster.net

 http://RotaryRoster.net  [quote][b]

mrobert569(at)hotmail.com
Guest

Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2007 7:49 am Post subject: Needed: Answer; Is Non-TSO Altimeter - Good for IFR?

Jeff,

  

 There is no requirement for any instrument to be TSO'd.  By regulation the ELT and the transponder must meet a TSO standard.  That's all!  If the instrument can be tested to show its accuracy then it is acceptable for use in your Glasair III under IFR.

  

 Mike Robertson

 Das Fed

  	  Quote: 	
		    To: rv-list(at)matronics.com

Subject: Needed: Answer; Is Non-TSO Altimeter - Good for IFR?

Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2007 07:18:19 -0500

From: darnpilot(at)aol.com



 Help.



My Glasair III needs its two year IFR certification, i.e., pitot/static, altimeter, & transponder check.  The altimeter (I just found out) is non-TSO'd.  Does anyone have the Regs and/or clarification that says this is legal for IFR in an experimental aircraft?  My local avionics shop says no, and will not do the test and certification.



Thank you in advance.



Jeff

   More new features than ever. Check out the new AOL Mail!



 	  Quote: 	
		  



blank>http://www.matronics.com/contribution

t=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV-List

p://forums.matronics.com



	
	
Boo! Scare away worms, viruses com/standard/en-us/purchase/trial.aspx?s_cid=wl_hotmailnews' target='_new'>Try now!  [quote][b]

mike109g6(at)insideconnec
Guest

Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2007 8:35 am Post subject: Needed: Answer; Is Non-TSO Altimeter - Good for IFR?

Jeff,

 I believe that the regs actually state that only an  A&P with correct equipment can do your 2 yr/signed off by IA.  In other  words, an Avionics shop is NOT your only source to get the work done  legally.  Sounds like someone is trying to sell you an instrument.   Ditto, it doesn't have to be TSO instruments, they just have to pass.  If  that were the case I think that Garmin, Chelton, Avidyne, and OP are the  only companies that offer TSO'd electric panels(MFD"S), and they cost mucho  $.  And there are a bunch of MFD's that are IFR compliant, and used.   As Dave pointed out, more accurate than steam gauges.

 Try contacting your local EAA counselor or the EAA  wedsite for more info.  Also you FAR/AIM '08 edition will spell it all out  for you.

 Mike H 

 [quote]   ---

mr.gsun+rv-list(at)gmail.
Guest

Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2007 9:42 am Post subject: Needed: Answer; Is Non-TSO Altimeter - Good for IFR?

So does that mean that the glass cockpit stuff (Dynon, Blue Mountain etc) won't be usable for IFR in an RV?



On 11/13/07,  darnpilot(at)aol.com (darnpilot(at)aol.com) <darnpilot(at)aol.com (darnpilot(at)aol.com)> wrote: 	  Quote: 	
		    Help.

 

 My Glasair III needs its two year IFR certification, i.e., pitot/static, altimeter, & transponder check.  The altimeter (I just found out) is non-TSO'd.  Does anyone have the Regs and/or clarification that says this is legal for IFR in an experimental aircraft?  My local avionics shop says no, and will not do the test and certification.

 

 Thank you in advance.

 

 Jeff

   More new features than ever.  Check out the new  AOL Mail!

 

  

[/b] 	
[b]

pbesing(at)yahoo.com
Guest

Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2007 3:14 pm Post subject: Needed: Answer; Is Non-TSO Altimeter - Good for IFR?

Time to find a new avionics shop.



Paul Besing



---

pbesing(at)yahoo.com
Guest

Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2007 3:15 pm Post subject: Needed: Answer; Is Non-TSO Altimeter - Good for IFR?

Good luck with that.  As soon as they find out it's "Experimental" some places are sent slamming their doors, throwing away the key, and changing their phone number because they are so afraid of those crazy people who build airplanes in the garages.  I was lucky, I'm at an airport that has alot of experimentals, and they are easy to work with.  As a matter of fact, my "Non-TSO'd" Rocky Mountain uEncoder was more accurate than most he tests...he was very impressed   Oh yeah, and I built that in my garage too, which also gives my altitude to ATC in an IFR environment!  Scary!



Paul Besing



-----  Original Message ----

From: David Leonard <wdleonard(at)gmail.com>

To: rv-list(at)matronics.com

Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2007 8:04:54 AM

Subject: Re: Needed: Answer; Is Non-TSO Altimeter - Good for IFR?



 Without question, non-TSO is OK for experimental aircraft.  I would consider making the shop show you where it says that a TSO is required to pass the static-system test. 



I have 2 non-TSO altimiters (Rockymountain and Bluemountain) and they both pass every time.  Both are easy to calibrate down to less than 10' error at any altitude.  -  i.e. they both outperform any TSO steam guage.  But that is beside the point.



If you google you can find  a copy of the instructions for performing the static system test.



Dave Leonard



 On Nov 13, 2007 7:18 AM,  <darnpilot(at)aol.com (darnpilot(at)aol.com)> wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		    Help.

 

 My Glasair III needs its two year IFR certification, i.e., pitot/static, altimeter, & transponder check.  The altimeter (I just found out) is non-TSO'd.  Does anyone have the Regs and/or clarification that says this is legal for IFR in an experimental aircraft?  My local avionics shop says no, and will not do the test and certification. 

 

 Thank you in advance.

 

 Jeff

   More new features than ever.  Check out the new AOL Mail!

 

   	  Quote: 	
		  	
	


-- 

David Leonard



Turbo Rotary RV-6 N4VY

http://N4VY.RotaryRoster.net

 http://RotaryRoster.net        Get easy, one-click access to your favorites.    [quote][b]

mr.gsun+rv-list(at)gmail.
Guest

Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2007 3:48 pm Post subject: Needed: Answer; Is Non-TSO Altimeter - Good for IFR?

So, if I want my -7 blessed for IFR, I take it to an avionics shop friendly to Experimentals and ask them to certify the airplane or each instrument?



On Nov 13, 2007 3:13 PM, Paul Besing < pbesing(at)yahoo.com (pbesing(at)yahoo.com)> wrote:

[quote] Good luck with that.  As soon as they find out it's "Experimental" some places are sent slamming their doors, throwing away the key, and changing their phone number because they are so afraid of those crazy people who build airplanes in the garages.  I was lucky, I'm at an airport that has alot of experimentals, and they are easy to work with.  As a matter of fact, my "Non-TSO'd" Rocky Mountain uEncoder was more accurate than most he tests...he was very impressed   Oh yeah, and I built that in my garage too, which also gives my altitude to ATC in an IFR environment!  Scary! 



Paul Besing



-----  Original Message ----

From: David Leonard <wdleonard(at)gmail.com (wdleonard(at)gmail.com)>

To: rv-list(at)matronics.com (rv-list(at)matronics.com)

 

Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2007 8:04:54 AM

Subject: Re: Needed: Answer; Is Non-TSO Altimeter - Good for IFR?



 Without question, non-TSO is OK for experimental aircraft.  I would consider making the shop show you where it says that a TSO is required to pass the static-system test. 



I have 2 non-TSO altimiters (Rockymountain and Bluemountain) and they both pass every time.  Both are easy to calibrate down to less than 10' error at any altitude.  -  i.e. they both outperform any TSO steam guage.  But that is beside the point.



If you google you can find  a copy of the instructions for performing the static system test.



Dave Leonard

  On Nov 13, 2007 7:18 AM,  <darnpilot(at)aol.com (darnpilot(at)aol.com)> wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		     Help.

 

 My Glasair III needs its two year IFR certification, i.e., pitot/static, altimeter, & transponder check.  The altimeter (I just found out) is non-TSO'd.  Does anyone have the Regs and/or clarification that says this is legal for IFR in an experimental aircraft?  My local avionics shop says no, and will not do the test and certification. 

 

 Thank you in advance.

 

 Jeff

   More new features than ever.  Check out the new AOL Mail!

 

   	  Quote: 	
		  	
	




-- 

David Leonard



Turbo Rotary RV-6 N4VY

 http://N4VY.RotaryRoster.net



 http://RotaryRoster.net        Get easy, one-click access to your favorites.     	  Quote: 	
		  

	






[b]

lifeofreiley2003(at)yahoo
Guest

Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2007 3:58 pm Post subject: Needed: Answer; Is Non-TSO Altimeter - Good for IFR?

I agree... time to find another shop!



Darrell

--- Paul Besing <pbesing(at)yahoo.com> wrote:



[quote] Time to find a new avionics shop.

 

 Paul Besing

 

 ---

pbesing(at)yahoo.com
Guest

Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2007 4:25 pm Post subject: Needed: Answer; Is Non-TSO Altimeter - Good for IFR?

The only things that have to be certified for IFR are the transponder, encoder, and altimeter.  All can be done in about an hour of work.  You don't really certify the "airplane", just that the pitot/static and transponder have been tested and are within the standards of the regulations.  This needs to be done every 24 months to be IFR "certified".



I wouldn't even tell them that the instruments aren't TSO'd.  Just go to an avionics shop and tell them you need a transponder and pitot static check.  If they won't do it because you have a big "experimental" sticker on your plane, then you probably won't want to do business with them anyway.  Ask any of the flying IFR birds,  lancairs, glasairs, RV's, etc around your field and they'll tell you where to go.



Paul Besing



---

darnpilot(at)aol.com
Guest

Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2007 4:43 pm Post subject: Needed: Answer; Is Non-TSO Altimeter - Good for IFR?

Thanks for the replies.  My shop is actually pretty good (and the only one in town).  I understand, somewhat, that they are caught between the FAA and their own ignorance.  The local Orlando FSDO (avionics inspector) says the shop cannot "certify" a non-TSO'd altimeter.  They showed me the FARs that they THINK says this, but it is clear that they are wrong.

 

 My philosophy is to try to give my local shop the work, but I might be forced to go elsewhere.  It bugs me because there is no reason that I have to go to all the additional trouble and expense of an out of town avionics shop for this simple requirement.

 

 I'm going to contact the EAA and get them on the ass of the local FSDO and try to educate them accordingly.  This is the kind of excrement I was trying to get away from by going to the experimental world.

 

 Jeff

 

 

 --

passpat(at)aol.com
Guest

Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2007 5:22 pm Post subject: Needed: Answer; Is Non-TSO Altimeter - Good for IFR?

you folks should read the requirments to fly in an IFR inviroment and then equip accordingly

 

 

 --

Kellym

Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 1705
Location: Sun Lakes AZ

Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2007 9:11 pm Post subject: Needed: Answer; Is Non-TSO Altimeter - Good for IFR?

The regulation calls for a "sensitive altimeter". Reference is 91.205. 

No mention of TSO at all.

If you want to minimize cost, buy an overhauled unit from one of the 

reputable instrument shops like Century Instruments, for about $375.

For certification the requirements are in Part 43, Appendix E. Again, no 

mention of TSO.

In general, TSO is only required for Part 135 and 121.



darnpilot(at)aol.com wrote:

[quote] Thanks for the replies.  My shop is actually pretty good (and the only 

 one in town).  I understand, somewhat, that they are caught between 

 the FAA and their own ignorance.  The local Orlando FSDO (avionics 

 inspector) says the shop cannot "certify" a non-TSO'd altimeter.  They 

 showed me the FARs that they THINK says this, but it is clear that 

 they are wrong.



 My philosophy is to try to give my local shop the work, but I might be 

 forced to go elsewhere.  It bugs me because there is no reason that I 

 have to go to all the additional trouble and expense of an out of town 

 avionics shop for this simple requirement.



 I'm going to contact the EAA and get them on the ass of the local FSDO 

 and try to educate them accordingly.  This is the kind of excrement I 

 was trying to get away from by going to the experimental world.



 Jeff

 --

_________________
Kelly McMullen
A&P/IA, EAA Tech Counselor # 5286
KCHD

pbesing(at)yahoo.com
Guest

Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2007 10:09 pm Post subject: Needed: Answer; Is Non-TSO Altimeter - Good for IFR?

I didn't cover the other requirements, and yes, there are other equipment requirements, but as far as an inspection for IFR cert goes, there are no other inspection/certification requirements besides the pitot/static and transponder.  Obviously things like VOR checks (pilot check) and having all the other equipment, etc is another discussion.



Paul Besing



---

mrobert569(at)hotmail.com
Guest

Posted: Wed Nov 14, 2007 7:54 am Post subject: Needed: Answer; Is Non-TSO Altimeter - Good for IFR?

Not bad.  You are exactly correct right up to the last sentence.  Even for 121 and 135 there is no requirement for TSO.  If that were true then the Cessna instrument cluster for their engine instrument cluster would have to be removed as it is manufacturer specific and not TSO'd.  Outside of FAR 91, which calls for a TSO for the ELT and that the Transponder must be shown to meet a TSO standard during testing, the FARs that covers ALL instruments installed in aircraft is FAR Parts 23 through 29, and they do NOT mention TSO's at all for instruments.  And we all know that FARs 23 through 29 do not apply to Experimental aircraft.  The only thing we have that covers what has to be installed in our aircraft is FAR 91.205, and only because the Operating Limitations bring them into play.

 I know that the old school inspectors with the FAA and with older established repair stations don't buy this but if they were forced to look through the FAR's and prove to you what states that all flight instruments must be TSO'd to be used for instrument flight, they could only point to the requirement for the encoding altimeter and transponder having to meet a TSO standard during testing, and to the ELT.

 Sorry for the rant but this has been a touchy subject within Flight Standards that I have fought, and proven.

 Mike Robertson

 Das Fed

 P.S. For 121 and 135 aircraft they are held to only those items listed in the aircraft parts manuals and/or to 337's.

 > Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2007 22:09:17 -0700

[quote] From: kellym(at)aviating.com

 To: rv-list(at)matronics.com

 Subject: Re: Needed: Answer; Is Non-TSO Altimeter - Good for IFR?

 --> RV-List message posted by: Kelly McMullen <kellym(at)aviating.com>

 The regulation calls for a "sensitive altimeter". Reference is 91.205. 

 No mention of TSO at all.

 If you want to minimize cost, buy an overhauled unit from one of the 

 reputable instrument shops like Century Instruments, for about $375.

 For certification the requirements are in Part 43, Appendix E. Again, no 

 mention of TSO.

 In general, TSO is only required for Part 135 and 121.

 darnpilot(at)aol.com wrote:

 > Thanks for the replies. My shop is actually pretty good (and the only 

 > one in town). I understand, somewhat, that they are caught between 

 > the FAA and their own ignorance. The local Orlando FSDO (avionics 

 > inspector) says the shop cannot "certify" a non-TSO'd altimeter. They 

 > showed me the FARs that they THINK says this, but it is clear that 

 > they are wrong.

 >

 > My philosophy is to try to give my local shop the work, but I might be 

 > forced to go elsewhere. It bugs me because there is no reason that I 

 > have to go to all the additional trouble and expense of an out of town 

 > avionics shop for this simple requirement.

 >

 > I'm going to contact the EAA and get them on the ass of the local FSDO 

 > and try to educate them accordingly. This is the kind of excrement I 

 > was trying to get away from by going to the experimental world.

 >

 > Jeff

 >

 >

 > --

wgill10(at)comcast.net
Guest

Posted: Wed Nov 14, 2007 9:21 am Post subject: Needed: Answer; Is Non-TSO Altimeter - Good for IFR?

Hello Mike,

 I have the Dynon D10A and plan to use its encoding altimeter which is not TSO'd. Will it be acceptable per the FAR's for use if it meets the testing requirements at the instrument shop? 91.217(c) indicates that the encoder must meet TSO. Thanks in advace for clarification.

 Bill  

 [quote]-------------- Original message -------------- 

From: Mike Robertson <mrobert569(at)hotmail.com> 

  .hmmessage P { margin:0px; padding:0px } body.hmmessage { FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY:Tahoma }  Not bad.  You are exactly correct right up to the last sentence.  Even for 121 and 135 there is no requirement for TSO.  If that were true then the Cessna instrument cluster for their engine instrument cluster would have to be removed as it is manufacturer specific and not TSO'd.  Outside of FAR 91, which calls for a TSO for the ELT and that the Transponder must be shown to meet a TSO standard during testing, the FARs that covers ALL instruments installed in aircraft is FAR Parts 23 through 29, and they do NOT mention TSO's at all for instruments.  And we all know that FARs 23 through 29 do not apply to Experimental aircraft.  The only thing we have that covers what has to be installed in our aircraft is FAR 91.205, and only because the Operating Limitations bring them into play.

I know that the old school inspectors with the FAA and with older established repair stations don't buy this but if they were forced to look throu  gh the  FAR's and prove to you what states that all flight instruments must be TSO'd to be used for instrument flight, they could only point to the requirement for the encoding altimeter and transponder having to meet a TSO standard during testing, and to the ELT.

Sorry for the rant but this has been a touchy subject within Flight Standards that I have fought, and proven.

Mike Robertson

Das Fed

P.S. For 121 and 135 aircraft they are held to only those items listed in the aircraft parts manuals and/or to 337's.

[quote] Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2007 22:09:17 -0700

 From: kellym(at)aviating.com

 To: rv-list(at)matronics.com

 Subject: Re: Needed: Answer; Is Non-TSO Altimeter - Good for IFR?

 --> RV-List message posted by: Kelly McMullen <kellym(at)aviating.com>

 The regulation calls for a "sensitive altimeter". Reference is 91.205. 

 No mention of TSO at all.

 If you want to minimize cost, buy an overhauled unit from one of the 

 reputable instrument shops like Century Instruments, for about $375.

 For certification the requirements are in Part 43, Appendix E. Again, no 

 mention of TSO.

 In general, TSO is only required for Part 135 and 121.

 darnpilot(at)aol.com wrote:

 > Thanks for the replies. My shop is actually pretty good (and the only 

 > one in town). I understand, somewhat, that they are caught between 

 > the FAA and their own ignorance  . The  local Orlando FSDO (avionics 

 > inspector) says the shop cannot "certify" a non-TSO'd altimeter. They 

 > showed me the FARs that they THINK says this, but it is clear that 

 > they are wrong.

 >

 > My philosophy is to try to give my local shop the work, but I might be 

 > forced to go elsewhere. It bugs me because there is no reason that I 

 > have to go to all the additional trouble and expense of an out of town 

 > avionics shop for this simple requirement.

 >

 > I'm going to contact the EAA and get them on the ass of the local FSDO 

 > and try to educate them accordingly. This is the kind of excrement I 

 > was trying to get away from by going to the experimental world.

 >

 > Jeff

 >

 >

 > --

Display posts from previous:

	Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> RV-List	All times are GMT - 8 Hours Goto page 1, 2 Next
Page 1 of 2

Jump to:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum