procharger Posted November 26, 2022 Report Share Posted November 26, 2022 Oksana Glushik (oksana.glushik@flightdesign.com)To:you + 2 more Details Dear Ronnie, Thank you for your email, We regret to say but e-prop number DUR-3-170-C4-T not approved for CTSW. For detailed information please contact our Dealer in USA Airtime Aviation Inc. - Tom Gutmann Jr, he is in copy of this email. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Baker Posted November 26, 2022 Report Share Posted November 26, 2022 I have a MRA that was issued two months ago. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Madhatter Posted November 26, 2022 Report Share Posted November 26, 2022 I just wonder if there is a lot of pressure from Neuform. The E-Prop smokes them. The first US MRA was granted based on my original data (according to Tom Peghiny) and I've been told a lot of these props are now being used on CT's. At the time I bought mine I was told by E-Props that about 85 CT's in Europe were using this prop. Probably just need to follow the money. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GlennM Posted November 27, 2022 Report Share Posted November 27, 2022 I have an MRA, also. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
procharger Posted November 27, 2022 Author Report Share Posted November 27, 2022 Tom sent the MRA form and I sent it back with $75.00 not sure what this person is saying just wanted to throw this out there FYI. I already ordered the prop anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Baker Posted November 27, 2022 Report Share Posted November 27, 2022 It seems like they went through this earlier this year. Stopped doing MRA's for a little bit, then started back up again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Meade Posted November 28, 2022 Report Share Posted November 28, 2022 5 hours ago, Tom Baker said: It seems like they went through this earlier this year. Stopped doing MRA's for a little bit, then started back up again. E-PROPS MRAs? All MRAs? Only new MRAs (never been done on that appliance before)? It seems curious FD would stop issuing an MRA that had multiple previous issuances, and then slide the explanation off on the Gutmans. I haven't heard of any accidents associated with E-PROPS. Well maybe we'll never know. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anticept Posted November 28, 2022 Report Share Posted November 28, 2022 They stopped the E-PROP MRA for a short time because flight design germany didn't finish the approval process. I couldn't get it until recently. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Baker Posted November 28, 2022 Report Share Posted November 28, 2022 10 hours ago, Jim Meade said: E-PROPS MRAs? All MRAs? Only new MRAs (never been done on that appliance before)? It seems curious FD would stop issuing an MRA that had multiple previous issuances, and then slide the explanation off on the Gutmans. I haven't heard of any accidents associated with E-PROPS. Well maybe we'll never know. E-Prop MRA's. The sent the explanation off to the Gutmanns because they are now the USA point of contact for Flight Design, and where new MRA's are sent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Meade Posted November 28, 2022 Report Share Posted November 28, 2022 I just talked with Tom Jr. He has queried FD on this issue as he was surprised by it since he's processed many MRAs for the E-PROPS. He thinks, and in talking with Tom Peghiny found Tom also thinks that there is a translation - in other words communication - glitch and all will be resolved rapidly and satisfactorily (that last is my summation, not Tom's). Sounds like there will be clarification shortly. Hopefully Procharger will update the thread. I had not understood the FD process for MRA submission and Tom confirmed Tom's note that they go through FDUSA. (I've had MRA on other SLSA European aircraft so was only familiar with that instance which was not the same as FD.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anticept Posted November 28, 2022 Report Share Posted November 28, 2022 Just so that it's clear, FDUSA doesn't approve major modifications without FD Germany's approval first. FDUSA was giving MRAs for a short time due to a misunderstanding from FD Germany, in that the process had not finished yet for retrofit. That was earlier this year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tip Posted November 28, 2022 Report Share Posted November 28, 2022 Oksana Glushik Is from Kherson, Ukraine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anticept Posted November 29, 2022 Report Share Posted November 29, 2022 Right, but FD Germany is the manufacturer from a legal perspective. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Meade Posted November 29, 2022 Report Share Posted November 29, 2022 2 hours ago, Tip said: Oksana Glushik Is from Kherson, Ukraine. I believe you. I bet she is not IN Kherson as we speak. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Meade Posted November 29, 2022 Report Share Posted November 29, 2022 8 hours ago, Anticept said: Just so that it's clear, FDUSA doesn't approve major modifications without FD Germany's approval first. FDUSA was giving MRAs for a short time due to a misunderstanding from FD Germany, in that the process had not finished yet for retrofit. That was earlier this year. Well, you have me totally confused, Corey. What do you mean when you say FSUSA doesn't approve major modification without FD Germany's approval first? 1. By "major" do you mean MRA, or are there "major" modifications that are not MRA, and if so, can I have an example? I'm ignorant of the definitions on this. 2. When you say FDUSA (I assume your "FSUSA" is actually FDUSA) doesn't approve without FD Germany's approval first, I get confused again. If FD Germany has to approve the MRA first, then FDUSA doesn't seem to me to have any role at all in approving. They simply pass on the approved MRA from FD Germany. Or do you mean FD Germany gives blanket approval for FDUSA to act as primary agent for some range of products? For example, does FD Germany delegate to FDUSA the authority to act on certain appliances? That would make FDUSA like an ODA in the US MRA procedure, it would seem to me. I am not nitpicking, I am confused. You obviously have access to information the rest of us don't have and I'm trying to understand what you are saying. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anticept Posted November 29, 2022 Report Share Posted November 29, 2022 FDUSA has authorization to do approvals for the US market. That's why you see Tom's stamp and signature on the MRA forms, even though FDUSA is not the manufacturer. That was Tom's personal business and they were functioning as an importer. I've been told manufacturers can delegate many authorities but I haven't looked too much into it. However, it's NOT a blanket approval to do whatever they want. Again, I don't know the specifics, but I do know there are things like vortex generators which I can't get any approvals for. I also can't get an approval to replace the voltage regulator with a different unit. It's always "It's not approved by FD Germany, so I can't give that to you". This was the roadblock to getting my E-prop and I had to wait months before those started back up again. Major changes: this isn't a word I am using from the FAA perspective, but rather one that just means significance. I could get an MRA to use a different hose brand and a different fittings system for example. They won't give me anything for Vortex Generators. Madhatter had the same experience. I tried going the "work with a university aeronautical department to generate engineering data" route and still got a "no". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Madhatter Posted November 29, 2022 Report Share Posted November 29, 2022 I never requested any approval for vg's because I did not know if they would work on a CT. I also knew FD would never approve them. As it turned out they were the best modification I ever did on the CT. They completely changed the landing characteristics in the flare by not dropping out when slow. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anticept Posted November 29, 2022 Report Share Posted November 29, 2022 I thought you told me on the phone that you asked about em. Anyways, this is one of the downsides to the manufacturer responsible airworthiness system. Certified/certificated has its downsides in red tape, but we can still do modifications like this without being at the mercy of a manufacurer without switching to experimental. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.