can not seem to get a straight answer on this subject.

how much structural-ness is there in the flat aluminum with a lot of 3" and 2-1/4" holes in it?

is this a 337 or just a logbook entry

Thanks,
Bradley

Depends on the airplane. At Kenmore we do some pretty serious panel mods for Cessnas and deHavilland with just a logbook entry. As long as you're just cutting new flat flight and switch panels you're not changing anything structural. As far as we're concerned as long as there's no change to how the flight controls are supported or any removal of underlying aircraft structure it's a minor.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Halestorm wrote:Depends on the airplane. At Kenmore we do some pretty serious panel mods for Cessnas and deHavilland with just a logbook entry. As long as you're just cutting new flat flight and switch panels you're not changing anything structural. As far as we're concerned as long as there's no change to how the flight controls are supported or any removal of underlying aircraft structure it's a minor.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Thanks, Halestorm

it is a Cessna 180 1956 so early style panel. I was wondering how it would be major, after all as long as it is attached the same way, I couldn't see how having the holes in different places would change the structural strength of the airframe.

I was wondering those who have redone their panel, did you get a 337 or did you put an entry in your logbook?
I ask because there are some awesome panels on this forum

Bradley

It's a minor alteration and a major expense... Everyone I know has done it with a log book entry and a fifty pound box of cash.

Thanks for the replies.
just a couple that popped into my mind are these

bigrenna wrote:

or

Darinh wrote:

AWESOME

doc_dyer wrote:Thanks for the replies.
just a couple that popped into my mind are these

bigrenna wrote:

or

Darinh wrote:

AWESOME

The first panel was at least 10x$ as the second one, those little boxes are spendy

I think bigrenna stated that his panel was a STC'd Avion panel.

Hammer wrote:It's a minor alteration and a major expense... Everyone I know has done it with a log book entry and a fifty pound box of cash.

+1

Hammer wrote:It's a minor alteration and a major expense... Everyone I know has done it with a log book entry and a fifty pound box of cash.

#Hammerism

That's what we will call these priceless quotes from now on.

I made a new instrument panel for my 175, cut it out of .090 2024 T3. Since the panel that actually held the instruments was fastened to a base structure, I would consider any modification to that base structure as a major alteration, modifying or replacing the removable bits on the other hand in my opinion fits the definition of a minor alteration:

According to 14 CFR 21.93, “A ‘minor change’ is one that has no appreciable effect on the weight, balance, structural strength, reliability, operational characteristics, or other characteristics affecting the airworthiness of the product. All other changes are ‘major changes’ (except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section).”

For that reason I installed my panel as an "overlay" and just made a logbook entry. My new panel is fastened to the original instrument panel supporting structure, which supported each control yoke itself so its not making any changes to any geometry or primary structure. If the original underlying structure wasn't complete or didn't have supports for the control yoke shafts where they pass through the panel, I would have been more leary to consider it a minor alteration. I used the existing holes in the panel support structure to lay out the instruments to prevent any modifications of the support structure itself, it took alot of time and a few plexiglass templates to get everything placed just right.