DOCSLIB.ORG

2014 ALP Chapter

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
2014 ALP Chapter CHAPTER TWO Airport Facility Requirements ChapterChapter OneOne To properly plan for the future of Livermore DESIGN CRITERIA Municipal Airport, it is necessary to translate forecast aviation demand into the speciic types The FAA publishes Advisory Circular (AC) and quantities of facilities that can adequately 150/5300-13A, Airport Design, to guide serve the identiied demand. This chapter uses airport planning. The AC provides guidance the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) on various design elements of an airport approved forecasts, as well as established intended to maintain or improve safety at air- planning criteria, to determine the airside (i.e., ports. The design standards include airport runways, taxiways, navigational aids, marking elements such as runways, taxiways, safety and lighting) and landside (i.e., hangars, aircraft areas, and separation distances. According parking apron, and automobile parking) to the AC, "airport planning should consider facility requirements. both the present and potential aviation needs and demand associated with the airport." The objective of this effort is to identify, in Consideration should be given to planning general terms, the adequacy of the existing runway and taxiway locations that will meet airport facilities and outline what new future separation requirements even if the facilities may be needed, and when these may width, strength, and length must increase be needed to accommodate forecast demands. later. Such decisions should be supported by A recommended airport layout concept will the aviation demand forecasts, coordinated be presented that consolidates all facility with the FAA, and shown on the Airport requirements into a single development Layout Plan (ALP). concept for the airport. 2-1 FINAL - SEPTEMBER 2014 FAA AC 150/5300-13A, Airport Design is based upon planned development with was published on September 28, 2012. It no operational component, while the RRC replaces AC 150/5300-13, Airport Design describes the current operational capabil- which was dated September 29, 1989. ities of a runway where no special operat- The latter was subject to 18 published ing procedures are necessary. The RRC changes over 23 years. for a runway is established based upon the minimum runway to taxiway center- The previous Airport Design AC estab- line separation. lished the design standards based primar- ily on the Airport Reference Code (ARC). Paragraph 4 defined the ARC as “a coding DESIGN AIRCRAFT system used to relate airport design crite- ria to the operational and physical charac- The selection of appropriate FAA design teristics of the airplanes intended to oper- standards for the development and loca- ate at the airport.” tion of airport facilities is based primarily upon the characteristics of the aircraft In the current AC, the definition of the which are currently using or are expected Airport Reference Code is found in Para- to use the airport. The critical design air- graph 102.i. and reads, “An airport desig- craft is used to define the design parame- nation that signifies the airport’s highest ters for the airport. In most cases, the de- Runway Design Code (RDC), minus the sign aircraft is a composite aircraft repre- third (visibility) component of the RDC. senting a collection of aircraft classified The ARC is used for planning and design by three parameters: Aircraft Approach only and does not limit the aircraft that Category (AAC), Airplane Design Group may be able to operate safely on the air- (ADG), and Taxiway Design Group (TDG). port.” In the case of an airport with multiple runways, a design aircraft is selected for The RDC is defined in Paragraph each runway. The first consideration is 102.mmm. as, “A code signifying the design the safe operation of aircraft likely to use standards to which the runway is to be the airport. Any operation of an aircraft built.” Paragraph 105.c. indicates that the that exceeds design criteria of the airport Aircraft Approach Category (AAC), the may result in either an unsafe operation Airplane Design Group (ADG), and the or a lesser safety margin unless air traffic approach visibility minimums combine to control Standard operating Procedures form the RDC of a particular runway. (SOPs) are in place for those operations; These provide the information needed to however, it is not the usual practice to determine certain design standards that base the airport design on an aircraft that apply. uses the airport infrequently. The current Airport Design AC introduces The design aircraft is defined as the most not only the RDC, but also the Runway demanding category of aircraft, or family Reference Code (RRC). The RRC is de- of aircraft, which conducts at least 500 fined as, “A code signifying the current op- operations per year at the airport. Plan- erational capabilities of a runway and as- ning for future aircraft use is of particular sociated parallel taxiway.” Like the RDC, importance since the design standards the RRC is composed of the same three are used to plan separation distances be- components: the AAC, ADG, and runway tween facilities. These future standards visibility minimums. The RDC, however, must be considered now to ensure that 2-2 FINAL – SEPTEMBER 2014 short term development does not pre- to the visibility minimums expressed by clude the long range potential needs of runway visual range (RVR) values in feet the airport. of 1,200, 1,600, 2,400, 4,000 and 5,000. The third component should read “VIS” Exhibit 2A summarizes representative for runways designed for visual approach design aircraft categories. As shown on use only. Generally, runway standards the exhibit, the airport does not currently, are related to aircraft approach speed, nor is it expected to, regularly serve larg- aircraft wingspan, and designated or er commercial transport aircraft such as planned approach visibility minimums. Boeing 737, 747, 757, or 767. Large Table 2A presents the RDC parameters. transport aircraft are used by commercial carriers which do not currently use, nor are they expected to use, the airport TAXIWAY DESIGN GROUP (TDG) through the planning period. However, some of the largest business jets, such as The TDG relates to the undercarriage di- the Gulfstream V are capable of operating mensions of the design aircraft. Taxi- at the airport under certain conditions. way/taxilane width and fillet standards, and in some instances, runway to taxiway In order to determine airfield design re- and taxiway/taxilane separation re- quirements, a design aircraft, or group of quirements are determined by TDG. It is aircraft with similar characteristics, is de- appropriate for taxiways to be planned termined for each runway. This determi- and built to different TDG standards nation begins with a review of aircraft based on expected use. currently using the airport and those ex- pected to use the airport in the future The TDG standards are based on the Main planning period. Gear Width (MGW) and the Cockpit to Main Gear (CMG) distance. The taxiway design elements determined by the appli- RUNWAY DESIGN CODE (RDC) cation of the TDG include the taxiway width, taxiway edge safety margin, taxi- The AAC, ADG, and approach visibility way shoulder width, taxiway fillet dimen- minimums are combined to form the RDC sions, and in some cases, the separation of a particular runway. The RDC provides distance between parallel taxi- the information needed to determine cer- ways/taxilanes. Other taxiway elements tain design standards that apply. The first such as the taxiway safety area (TSA), tax- component, depicted by a letter, is the iway/taxilane object free area (TOFA), AAC and relates to aircraft approach taxiway/taxilane separation to parallel speed (operational characteristics). The taxiway/taxilanes or fixed or movable ob- second component, depicted by a Roman jects, and taxiway/taxilane wingtip clear- numeral, is the ADG and relates to either ances are determined solely based on the the aircraft wingspan or tail height (phys- wingspan (ADG) of the design aircraft uti- ical characteristics) - whichever is most lizing those surfaces. restrictive. The third component relates 2-3 FINAL – SEPTEMBER 2014 A-I • Beech Baron 55 C-II, D-II • Cessna Citation X (750) • Beech Bonanza • Gulfstream 100, • Cessna 150 200,300 12-MP-12-2A-02/04/13 • Cessna 172 • Challenger 300/600 • Cessna Citation Mustang • ERJ-135, 140, 145 • Eclipse 500/550 • CRJ-200/700 • Piper Archer • Embraer Regional Jet • Piper Seneca • Lockheed JetStar • Hawker 800 less than B-I • Beech Baron 58 C-III, D-III 100,000 lbs. • ERJ-170 • Beech King Air 100 • CRJ 705, 900 • Cessna 402 • Falcon 7X • Cessna 421 • Gulfstream 500, • Piper Navajo 550, 650 • Piper Cheyenne • Global Express, Global 5000 • Swearingen Metroliner • Q-400 • Cessna Citation I (525) over B-II • Super King Air 200 C-III, D-III 100,000 lbs. • ERJ-90 • Cessna 441 • Boeing Business Jet • DHC Twin Otter • B-727 • Super King Air 350 • B-737-300, 700, 800 • Beech 1900 • MD-80, DC-9 • Citation Excel (560), • A319, A320 Sovereign (680) • Falcon 50, 900, 2000 • Citation Bravo (550) • Embraer 120 A-III, B-III C-IV,, D-IV • DHC Dash 7 • B-7B-75757 • DHC Dash 8 • B-7B-76767 • DC-3 • CC-130-130 Hercules • Convair 580 • DDC-8-70C-8-70 • Fairchild F-27 • MD-1MD-111 • ATR 72 • ATP C-I, D-I • Beech 400 D-V • B-747-4B-747-40000 • Lear 31, 35, 45, 60 • B-77B-7777 • Israeli Westwind • B-7B-78787 • A-330A-330,, A-340 Note: Aircraft pictured is identified in bold type. Exhibit 2A AIRCRAFT REFERENCE CODES TABLE 2A Runway Design Code Parameters Aircraft
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Runway Analysis
    CHAPTER 5 RUNWAY ANALYSIS 5 5 RUNWAY ANALYSIS INTRODUCTION The primary issue to be addressed in the William R. Fairchild International Airport (CLM) Master Plan involves the ultimate length and configuration of the runway system. At present there are two runways; primary Runway 8/26 and crosswind Runway 13/31. Runway 8/26 is 6,347 feet long and 150-feet wide with a displaced threshold of 1,354 feet on the approach end to Runway 26. The threshold was displaced to provide for an unobstructed visual approach slope of 20:1. Runway 13/31 is designated as the crosswind runway and is 3,250-feet long by 50-feet wide. In the 1997 ALP Update, the FAA determined that this runway was not required to provide adequate wind coverage and would not be eligible for FAA funding of any improvements in the future. The Port of Port Angeles has committed to keeping this runway functional without FAA support for as long as it is feasible. Subsequent sections of this analysis will reexamine the need for the runway. Both runways are supported by parallel taxiway systems with Taxiway A serving Runway 8/26 and Taxiway J for Runway 13/31. Taxiway A is 40 feet wide and Taxiway J is 50 feet wide. AIRFIELD REQUIREMENTS In determining airfield requirements, FAA Advisory Circular (AC) 150/5300-13, Airport Design (Change 14), has been consulted. This circular requires that future classification of the airport be defined as the basis for airfield planning criteria. As shown in the forecast chapter, the critical aircraft at CLM is expected to be the small business jet represented by the Cessna Citation within 5-years.
    [Show full text]
  • 79952 Federal Register / Vol
    79952 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 244 / Tuesday, December 21, 2010 / Rules and Regulations Unsafe Condition DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, (d) This AD was prompted by an accident Washington 98057–3356; telephone and the subsequent discovery of cracks in the Federal Aviation Administration (425) 227–1137; fax (425) 227–1149. main rotor blade (blade) spars. We are issuing SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 14 CFR Part 39 this AD to prevent blade failure and Discussion subsequent loss of control of the helicopter. [Docket No. FAA–2009–0864; Directorate We issued a supplemental notice of Compliance Identifier 2008–NM–202–AD; Amendment 39–16544; AD 2010–26–05] proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend (e) Before further flight, unless already 14 CFR part 39 to include an AD that done: RIN 2120–AA64 would apply to the specified products. (1) Revise the Limitations section of the That supplemental NPRM was Airworthiness Directives; DASSAULT Instructions for Continued Airworthiness by published in the Federal Register on AVIATION Model Falcon 10 Airplanes; establishing a life limit of 8,000 hours time- July 27, 2010 (75 FR 43878). That Model FAN JET FALCON, FAN JET in-service (TIS) for each blade set Remove supplemental NPRM proposed to FALCON SERIES C, D, E, F, and G each blade set with 8,000 or more hours TIS. correct an unsafe condition for the Airplanes; Model MYSTERE-FALCON (2) Replace each specified serial-numbered specified products. The MCAI states: 200 Airplanes; Model MYSTERE- blade set with an airworthy blade set in During maintenance on one aircraft, it was accordance with the following table: FALCON 20–C5, 20–D5, 20–E5, and 20– F5 Airplanes; Model FALCON 2000 and discovered that the overpressure capsules were broken on both pressurization valves.
    [Show full text]
  • Top Turboprop Series: We Compare Popular Pre-Owned Models
    FOR THE PILOTS OF OWNER-FLOWN, CABIN-CLASS AIRCRAFT SEPTEMBER 2019 $3.95 US VOLUME 23 NUMBER 9 Top Turboprop Series: We Compare Popular Pre-Owned Models Five Questions The Latest on One Pilot’s with Corporate the Cessna Denali Introduction Angel Network & SkyCourier to Aerobatics Jet It US One year $15.00, two years $29.00 Canadian One year $24.00, two years $46.00 Overseas One Year $52.00, Two Years $99.00 Single copies $6.50 PRIVATE. FAST. SMART. EDITOR Rebecca Groom Jacobs SEPTEMBER2019 • VOL. 23, NO. 9 (316) 641-9463 Contents [email protected] EDITORIAL OFFICE 2779 Aero Park Drive 4 Traverse City, MI 49686 Editor’s Briefing Phone: (316) 641-9463 E-mail: [email protected] 2 A Career Shaped by Turboprops PUBLISHER by Rebecca Groom Jacobs Dave Moore PRESIDENT Position Report Dave Moore 4 What Makes a Turboprop CFO Safer? Answer: You Rebecca Mead PRODUCTION MANAGER by Dianne White Mike Revard PUBLICATIONS DIRECTOR Jake Smith GRAPHIC DESIGNER Marci Moon 6 TWIN & TURBINE WEBSITE 6 Top Turboprop Series: www.twinandturbine.com Pre-Owned Piper Meridian ADVERTISING DIRECTOR and Daher TBM 700C2 John Shoemaker Twin & Turbine by Joe Casey 2779 Aero Park Drive Traverse City, MI 49686 12 Five on the Fly with Phone: 1-800-773-7798 Corporate Angel Network Fax: (231) 946-9588 [email protected] by Rebecca Groom Jacobs ADVERTISING ADMINISTRATIVE COORDINATOR & REPRINT SALES 14 The Latest on the Betsy Beaudoin Cessna Denali and Phone: 1-800-773-7798 [email protected] SkyCourier ADVERTISING ADMINISTRATIVE by Rich Pickett ASSISTANT Jet It Erika Shenk 22 Intro to Aerobatics Phone: 1-800-773-7798 by Jared Jacobs [email protected] SUBSCRIBER SERVICES Rhonda Kelly Diane Smith Jamie Wilson Molly Costilow 22 Kelly Adamson P.O.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter Three, Part 2
    The FAA's substitution list recommends conditions at Georgetown Municipal the BEC58P, the Beech Baron, to Airport. (Measured single event noise represent the light twin-engine aircraft information is for comparative purposes such as the Piper Navajo, Beech Duke, only and cannot be used as input into Cessna 31, and others. The CNA441 the INM.) Both the loudest sound levels effectively represents the light (Lmax) and the Sound Exposure Levels turboprop and twin-engine piston (SEL) for various aircraft types were aircraft such as the King Air, Cessna recorded during the noise measurement 402, Gulfstream Commander, and program at each noise monitoring site. others. A detailed INM grid point analysis can then be prepared that generates Lmax The INM provides data for most of the and SEL values for the corresponding business turbojet aircraft in the aircraft types at each noise monitoring national fleet. The MU3001 effectively site for comparison. The resulting represents the Cessna Citation I, II and measured and predicated Lmax and V series aircraft. The CIT3 represents SEL values can then be compared. the Cessna Citation III, IV, and VII series aircraft. The GlIB designator Table 3E depicts the range of measured represents the Gulfstream II and III Lmax and SEL values from monitor series aircraft. The LEAR35 effectively sites one and three and the predicted represents the Lear 30 and 50 series, Lmax and SEL values from the INM for the Sabreliner 65, the Falcon 10, 50, these sites. (Monitor sites one and three and 200, and the Hawker 700 and 800 were used because they received the series aircraft.
    [Show full text]
  • The Years of Change
    The Years of Change In early January of 1993 all the B-2 structural tests were successfully completed. The static load tests were taken to failure to 161% of maximum stress, and the durability test completed more than 2 lifetimes, which represented 20,000 design flight hours. January 1993 confidence was high for the $4-billion PAMPA Program as the company prepared to complete its first flight evaluation aircraft. However, the realities of the “post-cold war” era forced management to gear up for a tough year as the battle of the defense budget continued in Washington. The ailing commercial aviation industry presented additional challenges for the company. Boeing cut production on all their programs, and 1993 looked very gloomy. The company announced plans for down-sizing up to 1,500 people by the end of the year. Vought president Gordon Williams streamlined the management team to help the company ride out the business downturn, and still continue to meet its customer requirements. He stated that “business will be smaller but stronger.” In March 1993 Vought shipped its last engine nacelle for the Canadair business jet while continuing production on the regional jet nacelles. The 500th horizontal stabilizer for the Boeing 767 was shipped during March, and 141 employees elected to retire. In the meantime, Loral Corporation formed a new missiles group by combining Loral Vought Systems and Loral Aeronutronic during the month. At the end of April, 104 employees elected to retire. McDonnell Douglas certified Vought’s business processes in early May, which was another milestone on the way to becoming a preferred supplier for McDonnell Douglas.
    [Show full text]
  • Aviation Activity Forecasts BOWERS FIELD AIRPORT AIRPORT MASTER PLAN
    Chapter 3 – Aviation Activity Forecasts BOWERS FIELD AIRPORT AIRPORT MASTER PLAN Chapter 3 – Aviation Activity Forecasts The overall goal of aviation activity forecasting is to prepare forecasts that accurately reflect current conditions, relevant historic trends, and provide reasonable projections of future activity, which can be translated into specific airport facility needs anticipated during the next twenty years and beyond. Introduction This chapter provides updated forecasts of aviation activity for Kittitas County Airport – Bowers Field (ELN) for the twenty-year master plan horizon (2015-2035). The most recent FAA-approved aviation activity forecasts for Bowers Field were prepared in 2011 for the Airfield Needs Assessment project. Those forecasts evaluated changes in local conditions and activity that occurred since the previous master plan forecasts were prepared in 2000, and re-established base line conditions. The Needs Assessment forecasts provide the “accepted” airport-specific projections that are most relevant for comparison with the new master plan forecasts prepared for this chapter. The forecasts presented in this chapter are consistent with Bowers Field’s current and historic role as a community/regional general aviation airport. Bowers Field is the only airport in Kittitas County capable of accommodating a full range of general aviation activity, including business class turboprops and business jets. This level of capability expands the airport’s role to serve the entire county and the local Ellensburg community. The intent is to provide an updated set of aviation demand projections for Bowers Field that will permit airport management to make the decisions necessary to maintain a viable, efficient, and cost-effective facility that meets the area’s air transportation needs.
    [Show full text]
  • What's Your Business Aircraft Worth Today?
    BR Buying & Selling 2 JuLY17.qxp_Layout 1 19/06/2017 14:54 Page 1 BOARDROOM T BUYING & SELLING What’s Your Business Aircraft Worth Today? Points of Value Specific to Cessna’s Larger Cabin Business Jets Senior Certified Aircraft Appraiser Jeremy Cox continues his Citation customers looking to step up into the forthcoming series spotlighting aircraft makes and models and their value Citation Hemisphere, and who typically have a requirement for points in today’s market. This month, the focus is on Cessna’s additional range over what the Longitude offers. larger business jet models… A brief comparison between the Longitude and the $16.35m Citation Latitude shows a longer cabin in the Longitude, while hile the Business Aviation community awaits the its cross-section is the same as that of the Latitude. That extra certification and first deliveries of Cessna’s length is put to good use, as the Longitude will accommodate W future $35m flagship model, the Citation 12 passengers (over the nine of the Latitude). It will also fly Hemisphere, sometime after 2020, how does about 800nm further and 30 knots faster. the owner of a stand-up cabin Citation already Topping the longer-established in-production models of the on the market evaluate its worth? larger Citation product range are the Citation Sovereign and the Citation X. Overview of Cessna’s Larger Model Jets The imminent flagship of Cessna’s Citation fleet is the There are three versions of the Citation Sovereign, including: $23.995m Citation Longitude (expected to begin delivering late 2017/early 2018), which provides performance and cabin • Citation Sovereign (original model): Powered by PW306C enhancements over the ‘game-changing’ Citation Latitude.
    [Show full text]
  • Aluminum Propeller Applications
    SENSENICH FIXED-PITCH ALUMINUM PROPELLERS INSTALLATION GUIDE One attaching kit is furnished with each propeller. An attaching kit for the flanged shaft will be supplied for all installations unless otherwise specified. Tapered shaft installation must be specified. When ordering for Lycoming O-145 installation, specifiy 74CKL attaching kit. STATIC RPM MIN. DIA. AIRCRAFT ENGINE STANDARD CLIMB CRUISE DIAMETER LIMITS FOR REPAIR NOTES Aero Commander 100 Lycoming O-320 /150 74DM6-0-60 74 inches Aeronca 11AC Continental A-65 / 65 74CK-0-46 74 inches 2100-2250 72.5 inches 1 Aeronca 11BC Continental C-85 / 85 74CK-2-46 72 inches 2160-2380 70 inches 1 Aeronca 11CC Continental C-85 / 85 74CK-2-46 72 inches 2300-2465 70 inches 1 Aeronca 15AC Continental C-145-D 74DR-0-52 74DR-0-54 74 inches 2240-2490 72 inches Aeronca 65TAC, L3, O58, YO58 Continental A-65 / 65 74CK-0-46 74CK-0-44 74 inches 2050-2250 72 inches 1 Aeronca 65TL, 65LA, 65LB, 65TAL Lycoming O-145-B 74CK-2-36 72 inches 2250-2550 68 inches 2 Aeronca S11AC Continental A-65 / 65 74CK-0-40 74 inches 2070-2170 72.5 inches 1 Aeronca S11BC Continental C-85 / 85 74CK-2-40 72 inches 2280-2380 70 inches 1 Aeronca S11CC Continental C-85 / 85 74CK-2-40 72 inches 2300-2465 70 inches 1 Aeronca S15AC Continental C-145 74DR-0-48 74 inches 2380-2540 72 inches Aeronca S65TC, SO-58D Continental A-65 / 65 74CK-0-40 74 inches 2050-2250 72 inches 1 American General AG-5B Lycoming O-360 /180 76EM8S10-0-63 76EM8S10-0-61 76EM8S10-0-65 76 inches 76 inches Avions Pierre Robin DR400 / 118 Lycoming O-235-L2C 72CKS6-0-56
    [Show full text]
  • Fying Clubs in Pakistan
    1 NAME: Tanveer Raza ID: 13005001067 Supervisor: Mr. Kalim Ur Rehman Department: BS Aviation Management School: Institute of Aviation Studies 2 ABBREVIATIONS: ........................................................................................................ 22 CHAPTER 1: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: ......................................................................................... 23 INTRODUCTION: ......................................................................................................... 25 BACKGROUND: ............................................................................................................ 26 PAKISTAN GENERAL AVIATION LIST: (PCAA) ................................................... 27 CHAPTER 2: PIA FLYING ACADEMY: (PIA) .............................................................................. 29 FLEETS: ........................................................................................................................ 29 Cessna 172: ...................................................................................................................................................... 29 Cessna 152: ...................................................................................................................................................... 30 ACADEMY COURSES: ............................................................................................ 30 Private pilot license (PPL): ...........................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • DASSAULT AVIATION Model Falcon 10 Airplanes
    43878 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 143 / Tuesday, July 27, 2010 / Proposed Rules Applicability New Requirements of This AD: Actions Bulletin SBF100–27–092, dated April 27, (c) This AD applies to Fokker Services B.V. (h) Within 30 months after the effective 2009; and Goodrich Service Bulletin 23100– Model F.28 Mark 0100 airplanes, certificated date of this AD, do the actions specified in 27–29, dated November 14, 2008; for related in any category, all serial numbers. paragraphs (h)(1) and (h)(2) of this AD information. concurrently. Accomplishing the actions of Issued in Renton, Washington, on July 21, Subject both paragraphs (h)(1) and (h)(2) of this AD 2010. (d) Air Transport Association (ATA) of terminates the actions required by paragraph Jeffrey E. Duven, America Code 27: Flight Controls. (g) of this AD. (1) Remove the tie-wrap, P/N MS3367–2– Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Reason 9, from the lower bolts of the horizontal Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. (e) The mandatory continuing stabilizer control unit, in accordance with the [FR Doc. 2010–18399 Filed 7–26–10; 8:45 am] airworthiness information (MCAI) states: Accomplishment Instructions of Fokker BILLING CODE 4910–13–P Two reports have been received where, Service Bulletin SBF100–27–092, dated April during inspection of the vertical stabilizer of 27, 2009. F28 Mark 0100 aeroplanes, one of the bolts (2) Remove the lower bolts, P/N 23233–1, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION that connect the horizontal stabilizer control of the horizontal stabilizer control unit and unit actuator with the dog-links was found install bolts, P/N 23233–3, in accordance Federal Aviation Administration broken (one on the nut side & one on the with the Accomplishment Instructions of Goodrich Service Bulletin 23100–27–29, head side).
    [Show full text]
  • Name of Plan Wing Span Details Source Area Price Ama Ff Cl Ot Scale Gas Rubber Electric Other Glider 3 View Engine Red. Ot C
    WING NAME OF PLAN DETAILS SOURCE AREA PRICE AMA POND RC FF CL OT SCALE GAS RUBBER ELECTRIC OTHER GLIDER 3 VIEW ENGINE RED. OT SPAN COMET MODEL AIRPLANE CO. 7D4 X X C 1 PURSUIT 15 3 $ 4.00 33199 C 1 PURSUIT FLYING ACES CLUB FINEMAN 80B5 X X 15 3 $ 4.00 30519 (NEW) MODEL AIRPLANE NEWS 1/69, 90C3 X X C 47 PROFILE 35 SCHAAF 5 $ 7.00 31244 X WALT MOONEY 14F7 X X X C A B MINICAB 20 3 $ 4.00 21346 C L W CURLEW BRITISH MAGAZINE 6D6 X X X 15 2 $ 3.00 20416 T 1 POPULAR AVIATION 9/28, POND 40E5 X X C MODEL 24 4 $ 5.00 24542 C P SPECIAL $ - 34697 RD121 X MODEL AIRPLANE NEWS 4/42, 8A6 X X C RAIDER 68 LATORRE 21 $ 23.00 20519 X AEROMODELLO 42D3 X C S A 1 38 9 $ 12.00 32805 C.A.B. GY 20 BY WALT MOONEY X X X 20 4 $ 6.00 36265 MINICAB C.W. SKY FLYER PLAN 15G3 X X HELLDIVER 02 15 4 $ 5.00 35529 C2 (INC C130 H PLAMER PLAN X X X 133 90 $ 122.00 50587 X HERCULES QUIET & ELECTRIC FLIGHT INT., X CABBIE 38 5/06 6 $ 9.00 50413 CABIN AEROMODELLER PLAN 8/41, 35F5 X X 20 4 $ 5.00 23940 BIPLANE DOWNES CABIN THE OAKLAND TRIBUNE 68B3 X X 20 3 $ 4.00 29091 COMMERCIAL NEWSPAPER 1931 Indoor Miller’s record-holding Dec. 1979 X Cabin Fever: 40 Manhattan Cabin.
    [Show full text]
  • 358 August/September 2009
    International Cessna 120/140 Association P.O. Box 830092 Richardson, TX 75083-0092 ISSUE 358 August/September 2009 In This Issue Officers & State Reps Info - Page 2 Upcoming Events - Pages 3 Building Up Some HorsePOWER, Victor Grahn - Page 4 0-200 Installation-Randy Thompson- Page 5-6 Cessna 120/140 Buyers Guide Intro-Chris Vehrs - Page 8-15 Alabama Convention Info Page 16-18 For Sale/Wanted - Page 21 Christian Vehrs in N2032V, his family’s 1947 Cessna 120 Serving the World of Cessna 120/140’s for over 32 years! Page - Aug/Sept 2009 #358 - Send photos/articles to [email protected] International Cessna 120/140 Association Officers & State Representatives “Quick List” 2009-2010 OFFICERS DELAWARE MONTANA TEXAS Ken & Lorraine Morris- President Hugh Horning-ILG Walter Bell-GGW Ken Dwight-DWH 302-655-6191 406-367-5472 281-440-7919 815-547-3991 [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] FLORIDA NEW HAMPSHIRE Leonard Richey-58T Don Becker Terry Dawkins-54J Glenn Mori-NH69(pvt) 940-627-1883 Vice President 850-376-8284 603-539-8655 [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] Billy Shires-TDW 620-663-1148 Kenneth Gibson-ZPH NEW JERSEY 806-353-1177 [email protected] 813-949-6256 Jim & Diane Morton-WWD Orville Winover, Jr.-TYR Dick & Nicki Acker [email protected] 609-884-8723 903-939-1418 Secretary/Treasurer GEORGIA [email protected] [email protected] Bob Parks-WDR NEW MEXICO John “Vic” White 989-339-1009 770-962-6875 Ed Blevins-E06 830-438-5072 [email protected] [email protected] 505-399-2449
    [Show full text]