Rotating Beacon Removal

bpaige · Post by **bpaige** » Thu May 28, 2009 4:02 pm

My plane has wing tip strobes installed. It also has a self contained strobe on top of the fuselage that is broken. I have removed and disassembled it to find that it has been arcing inside the can and is not repairable. I don't want to buy a new replacement since the wing tip strobes seem adequate. So I would like to patch the hole on the fuselage, remove the wiring and breaker, update my w/b and equipment list and be done with it. Is this reasonable or is there some requirement for me to replace the unit? Thanks...bpaige

Post by **GAHorn** » Thu May 28, 2009 4:10 pm

Remove it and throw it away. Update the equipment list and wt/bal.
A good repair might be to install a standard inspection-cover and doubler. Use a gasket if you worry about rain. A better repair would be a "dollar and a dime' patch. (It looks like a dime, laid onto a dollar-bill.)

bpaige · Post by **bpaige** » Thu May 28, 2009 10:01 pm

That's what I was hoping to hear. Thanks for the reply Gahorn.

trake · Post by **trake** » Fri May 29, 2009 1:28 am

just the wingtip strobes might not be legal for anti collison light coverage. I researched this when i wanted to remove my rotating beacon. I have tip strobes and a tail strobe and so was legal to remove my cabin top mounted rotating beacon

Brad Brady · Post by **Brad Brady** » Fri May 29, 2009 3:07 am

trake wrote:just the wingtip strobes might not be legal for anti collison light coverage. I researched this when i wanted to remove my rotating beacon. I have tip strobes and a tail strobe and so was legal to remove my cabin top mounted rotating beacon

Trake,
where did you find that information?.....wing tip strobes should be sufficient....Brad

n2582d · Post by **n2582d** » Fri May 29, 2009 8:30 pm

gahorn wrote:Remove it and throw it away. Update the equipment list and wt/bal.

George's advice is correct but incomplete in my opinion. If the strobe on the fuselage was installed with an STC that strobe is now part of the type certificate for your aircraft. To amend that type certificate you need to file a 337 form stating how you have removed the strobe, repaired the hole, and amended the equipment list and weight and balance.

Post by **GAHorn** » Fri May 29, 2009 8:51 pm

n2582d wrote:
gahorn wrote:Remove it and throw it away. Update the equipment list and wt/bal.
George's advice is correct but incomplete in my opinion. If the strobe on the fuselage was installed with an STC that strobe is now part of the type certificate for your aircraft. To amend that type certificate you need to file a 337 form stating how you have removed the strobe, repaired the hole, and amended the equipment list and weight and balance.

Would you need to file a Form 337 if you decided never to use autogas in your approved airplane, and did not renew the fuel placards at painting, and threw the old STC paperwork in the trash?

Wingtip strobes meet all requirements for coverage for anti-collision lights.

Here's the best system, in my opinon. It costs only a few bucks more than the incandescent type, and you'll save that money the first time you don't have to replace bulbs (LEDs last virtually forever) and you'll never burn yourself touching them (they don't get hot) and you'll save about 6 Amps of electrical demand on your system. You can be like the big-boys and run your nav lights continuously/permanently without fear of burning-out bulbs or running down your battery.

http://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/e ... 105648.php

N2865C · Post by **N2865C** » Fri May 29, 2009 9:13 pm

Brad Brady wrote:
trake wrote:just the wingtip strobes might not be legal for anti collison light coverage. I researched this when i wanted to remove my rotating beacon. I have tip strobes and a tail strobe and so was legal to remove my cabin top mounted rotating beacon
Trake,
where did you find that information?.....wing tip strobes should be sufficient....Brad

The old rotating beacons are grandfathered in on aircraft manufactured before 1957. To remove it and replace with wingtip strobes I believe you would have to meet the current standards. Properly placed wingtip strobes should do the job.
From Whelen: http://www.whelen.com/aviation/catalog/ ... ystems.pdf

n2582d · Post by **n2582d** » Fri May 29, 2009 10:24 pm

gahorn wrote: Would you need to file a Form 337 if you decided never to use autogas in your approved airplane, and did not renew the fuel placards at painting, and threw the old STC paperwork in the trash?

Depends. If you wanted to keep your airplane legal, then yes. If you were bold like Bluelder you would say ... . Actually if you were Bluelder you wouldn't have bothered getting the autogas STC to use auto gas in the first place.

jrenwick · Post by **jrenwick** » Fri May 29, 2009 11:20 pm

gahorn wrote:....Would you need to file a Form 337 if you decided never to use autogas in your approved airplane, and did not renew the fuel placards at painting, and threw the old STC paperwork in the trash?

Ignoring your

and taking you seriously, I think a better example would have been something that involves an actual modification to the type, like maybe a Bartone exhaust or a 180HP Lycoming. Wouldn't you at least have to stamp "Superceded" on the 337, and make a logbook entry that the STC mod was removed?

In the case of the autogas STC, I believe that one stipulates that certain parts and materials can't be used. If you were going to install something that isn't compatible with autogas (such as replacing a worn-out Delrin needle valve with a neoprene one in a Stromberg carburetor), wouldn't you have to document in some way that the STC no longer applies? Maybe just tossing the STC paperwork and removing the autogas placard is enough?

In either case, it seems to me you'd want to log the removal of the STC -- but since it's not a change to the original type certificate, it wouldn't require a 337. Right? Or does Oklahoma City need to know that the 337, if submitted with the STC originally, no longer applies?

Post by **GAHorn** » Sat May 30, 2009 12:01 am

That's my opinion, John. Removal of an STC does not require a new form 337 because the removal-act merely returns the aircraft to it's former, approved, status. Only a logbook entry is required.

In the case of an anticollision beacon removal, the beacon was not required in original certification therefore removal does not alter the previous type certificate. I do not believe removal requires anything more than recordation in the logs. It's an interesting discussion, and that's only my opinion, but I'm not a regulator or an inspector that's likely to have a problem with a removed non-essential piece of equipment.

Installation of a replacement system, such as a strobe system, is a different matter. It requires and approval basis, perhaps such as an STC. (But I believe that a simple 337 using approved parts is also permissible.) Removal of either system is again...only a log entry. (IMO, again.)

Removal of a system which is required-equipment for a co-dependent-system, would be a different matter, but I cannot think of such a situation at the moment.

The repair of the existing hole from the removed equipment might qualify it as a major-repair, however, and THAT might require a 337. However, a rotating beacon does not normally require holes larger than 6", or form bulkheads in pressurized aircraft, or are installed within primary structure, etc., so I do not believe a rotating beacon removal from the fuselage of a 170 is anything other than a minor alteration. (logbook entry)

Perhaps a better example might be oversized tires? If 8:50" tires are installed per an STC...does it require a Form 337 to remove then and return the aircraft to original 6:00 X 6 tires? I don't think so.

Brad Brady · Post by **Brad Brady** » Sat May 30, 2009 1:03 am

gahorn wrote:That's my opinion, John. Removal of an STC does not require a new form 337 because the removal-act merely returns the aircraft to it's former, approved, status. Only a logbook entry is required.

In the case of an anticollision beacon removal, the beacon was not required in original certification therefore removal does not alter the previous type certificate. I do not believe removal requires anything more than recordation in the logs. It's an interesting discussion, and that's only my opinion, but I'm not a regulator or an inspector that's likely to have a problem with a removed non-essential piece of equipment.

Installation of a replacement system, such as a strobe system, is a different matter. It requires and approval basis, perhaps such as an STC. (But I believe that a simple 337 using approved parts is also permissible.) Removal of either system is again...only a log entry. (IMO, again.)

Removal of a system which is required-equipment for a co-dependent-system, would be a different matter, but I cannot think of such a situation at the moment.

George,
I believe your correct....removing an STC'd part and installing another, should show up on the new 337 for the new STC....(IE removed part number xxxxxxx as per STC #xxx1 installed part number xxxxx as per STC #xxx2 weight and balance changes made and equipment list updated) Soooo... the change, (by default) will be in the paper work.....Brad

c170b53 · Post by **c170b53** » Sat May 30, 2009 4:49 pm

Up here the equip list, W & B, and electrical load sheet would require an amendment with the log book skin repair. I would consider George correct in that the installation does not involve bulkheads hence minor repair.

LBPilot82 · Post by **LBPilot82** » Sun May 31, 2009 12:11 am

A little off topic but not too far, here's a frustrating situation. I currently have the Whelen wingtip/strobe setup with the incandescent bulbs. I am looking to shed some load so I contacted Whelen to see if I could purchase just replacement nav. bulbs to go to LED. Knowing their answer before I even got it, sure enough, they gave me some nonsense about their being too much involved and they can only sell the complete system, not even the wingtip units. Like I said, pretty frustrating.

Post by **GAHorn** » Sun May 31, 2009 4:16 am

LB... Spruce will quite happily sell you ONLY the wintip LED units. Buy them, install them. Log it as a replacement of the light fixture. Ta-Daaaaa! end of story. (They are PMA'd, direct replacements.)

Here's their advertising statement in the Spruce catalog: "Direct replacement (Exact Footprint) for the Whelen Model A650PG/PR series without replacing the current strobe power supply. "

http://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/e ... en7110.php

The International Cessna 170 Association