Flying with RH door removed

[rudymantel]

Has anyone flown with the pax door removed ? I've done it many times in 180's but never in my 170- (a friend asked me to take him up to photograph his home.)
Rudy

[Alterfede]

I flew without passenger door several times last summer, doing photo flights, no problems at all, only the noise and a little of wind on my face, but not much, the poor photographer is the one that stand the strong wind, but is still the same things to fly. If you have a intercom headset, better. And of course, there is a lot of new noises.

[funseventy]

I have done this a lot and it does require a 337. I would be glad to share the 337 with you. If you are doing photo work you can also remove co-pilot's yoke and turn the seat around and back it up all the way to the panel. I used the rear pin to pin it in place since the seat's pin no longer has a hole to go into. It works slick and is all approvable. I just did a photoshoot for Northern Pilot Magazine and the Photographer loved it. I'd love to help anyway I can.

Kelly

[GAHorn]

The 170 series is approved for flight with one cabin door removed in accordance with Advisory Circular 105-2C, Appendix 2, dated 1/2/91. No additional equipment, spoilers, etc. is required. It does not require a 337, as it is a minor alteration.

EDIT: Be aware that circa 2011 FAA CANCELLED AC 105-2C. LATEST INFO INDICATES THAT FORM 337 (FIELD APPROVAL) OR STC MUST BE UTILISED FOR OPERATIONS WITH DOOR REMOVED.

[funseventy]

The local FSDO required a 337. They used the Advisory Circular as the basis for the approval. They added a placard that stated "No Loose Articles in airplane with door removed." I think it was a good addition, along with the Continued Airworthiness statement related to who can remove and install the door and return it to service. I think you'd be hard pressed to get an FAA inspector to say it was OK without having a 337. I have 1000 hours of formation time and I still think that something trying to get away from you in the cockpit would be a bit of a distraction when trying to do your best work. I know when I was in Alaska, I would have to instruct pilots on the removal and installation of seats and sign them off as having been trained. That was as the Director of Maintenance in a 135 group but it still shows their idea of minor is different than ours, most of the time.

[funseventy]

If your photo man allows his arm to stick out in the wind in the right conditions it starts an alarming buffet. If this happens to you just pull his arm back in. It will also have a little bit of a buffet as you are adding power for take off, but it goes away pretty quick as you are rolling. Oh by the way, you can also feel a pressure change in the cockpit with the application of flaps.

If it changes the aerodynamics of the airplane, doesn't that make it a major alteration by definition?

[GAHorn]

I wouldn't personally consider a pressure change to be an aerodynamic handling change,...I'd consider it a perceived pressure change by my eardrum. Wouldn't the same thing happen if you opened the window and stuck your hand out? In any case, this isn't something worth a disagreement over. It's a typical beaurocrat thing. Anytime they say "OK" to something is the only time they're endangering their job. They can say "No" millions of times for any reason whatsoever and their job is still secure.
If I wanted to fly my airplane with the door off, I'd remove it, log it, and carry a copy of AC 105-2C with me. I'm sure the FAA has a few guys who'd argue that the door cannot be removed/installed by the owner/pilot. I can't help but wonder how they think interiors, side windows, and trim is installed on a door, and I believe the door on unpressurized aircraft are non-structual, non primary, under the guidelines of 43, Appdx A. (Sort of like, How in the world do they think a tire change is made? Do they imagine the brakes are not removed first in order to get the wheel off the axle? But brakes are not covered under FAR 43, Appdx A, preventive mx, and a pilot/owner cannot perform that act. Doh!)
In any case, once you've consulted with them you've certainly got to go by what they tell you unless you can find another inspector with a differing opinion. The less we tell them, the better off I feel we are.

[Koop]

I think Gahorn is right! I will never go to the FAA for anything unless there is a gun to my head. Just had a bad experience. Tryed to be honest and do the right thing. Best thing is, keep your mouth shut. I'm trying to get a positive attitude about the whole thing, but it is going to take awhile. Koop

[rudymantel]

Never ask permission, always beg forgiveness-
Thanks guys,
Rudy

[170C]

Regarding asking if you can do something to your plane, it reminds me of something someone long ago said to me, "Don't ask, you might not like the answer!"

[dkalwishky]

My 172 has an STC to remove the PAX door, the prior owner was a skydiver and wanted to jump from the plane. Several of his friends did a number of times. I have an STC in my paperwork for the removal..

Dave

[CAS]

I have a Flight Manual Supplement issued by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (our version of FAA) entitled "Operations with a Door or Window Removed" that permits door off operations with certain conditions (which must be placarded in the aircraft). These include airspeed limitations (110 knots I think) angle of bank limited to max 30 degrees, no loose articles and NO Smoking

I have operated the aircraft (a C170A) with the door off on a number of occasions with no problems apart from it being a bit cool and breezy.

David

[GAHorn]

My 172 has an STC to remove the PAX door, the prior owner was a skydiver and wanted to jump from the plane. Several of his friends did a number of times. I have an STC in my paperwork for the removal..

Dave

On that note,...a FSDO Inspector informed me (regarding a different question) that if a person wants a one-time approval (field approval) that their guidelines state they must first determine whether an STC is existing for that modification, and if so, then either they must steer the applicant toward that STC,...or the applicant must provide good reason that their situation or modification is sufficiently different than the STC to warrant a seperate approval basis.
So, when removing a door, ....how many different ways can it be done? (That's why I would rather just do it, and carry the FAA's own document authorizing it. Let them argue among themselves.)

By the way,...the AC 105-2C states that the Cessna 120 thru the 172 may operate doorless without an STC but that models 175 thru 206 must operate in accordance with various STC's and in some cases STC accompanied by a Service Kit (usually for spoilers, etc.) (Other than engine and fuel capacity, can anyone tell me the difference between a 175 and a 172?) Then the 207,208 may operate sans STC, but back to STC's for the 210 and up.

[zero.one.victor]

"Spoilers": I was just recently eyeballing a couple early 182 jump planes at a local skydiving operation & I noticed that they both had a home-made fairing just forward of the RH door,along the leading edge of the door opening. I assumed that was to keep too much air from entering the cabin when the jump door was in the up position & possibly blanking out the tailfeathers. Is that what you mean by "spoilers",George?

Eric

[GAHorn]

Yep. The 205/206 series requires it also.