Tri-pacer Rudder/Aileron Interconnect

[Troy Hamon]

I have thought about disconnecting the cable but I'm under the impression that doing so would jeperdise my airworthy certificate. Any thoughts with regards to this? Or is it even possible? Because I too have a problem with this when landing in a cross wind.

We replaced some control cables when we did our major project a couple years ago. They were all installed to listed tensions, but there were not listed for the interconnect. What we found was that the interconnect was way too tight...I could handle the crosswinds but it was a serious workout. We loosened the interconnect cable tension at the last annual to maintain full separation and no possibility of them swinging around. That is not really very loose, but it is a lot different than having a lot of tension on them. The airplane is now a breeze to handle on a crosswind landing, still some pressure from the interconnect, but it is more of a suggestion than a demand. At this point, removing the interconnect would not offer enough of an improvement to make it worthwhile to pursue for us.

My two cents.

[luvcubs]

Loosening the cables might be the best solution for the 135 hp airplanes, but according to Mike Sellers, removing the interconnect system on a 150 or 160 hp airplane is acceptable as long as the aircraft stays in Normal Category?

For an airplane converted per the STC, yes, as long as the PA-22-150 or 160 is in serial number compliance with note 3 on the TCDS. Of course if your airplane still has a nosewheel, it would need kit 14926 installed and would also be eligible in Utility catergory. It is interesting to note that there are many 1955 PA-22-150 serial numbers prior to those listed in Note 3 that are not applicable.

Steve, very informative additional info from Univair.

[Nathan Hiebert]

To all of you that have disconnected the aileron/rudder interconnect system in your airplanes; did you just disconnect the cables or remove that portion of the cable all together?

[Bob Mac]

On my '52 135 I disconnected.
On the current '58 150 that I am now working on I removed them completely.

[Nathan Hiebert]

Bob, when you removed it completely, did you need a field approval to cover it? I removed mine completely, but I am second guessing myself as to whether or not I should have. I talked with the guys from Univair and they said completely removing the cables is NOT covered by the STC. So now I can't decide if I should try for a field approval to cover removing the cables or build new cables including the interconnect system, but leaving it disconnected (which seems extremely pointless to me). I'd rather spend the time pressing on with the project!

[Bob Mac]

I guess my question would be (as you imply) : From the regulatory viewpoint what REALLY is the difference between removal and disconnection? In neither case is it "functional" any longer. There no doubt is room for argument about the paperwork needed. I and some of my IA friends (I am one, too) and a nearby DAR agree that we are allowed to do this.
It is understandable that Univair won't approve something that is not addressed in their STC. And I am well aware that there is plenty of disagreement about this among the folks that participate here. So I'd suggest that you talk with your local IA and see where he comes out. Because he is the guy you ultimately have to be at peace with. I am at peace with the 2 airplanes based on our strip and 2 based 30 miles up the road. Half of them are my IA responsibility and the other two, another guy's. They all have the "removal" process performed.
And, to avoid the likely accusation that I operate from a posture of unbridled arrogance, I freely admit that I have been wrong before!!

Bob

[Nathan Hiebert]

Bob, I agree with everything you have said. I am the IA signing off on all of this and I'm just trying to figure out what will make the FAA happy, since they will be issueing me a new AW. But I agree...there is no difference between it being disconnected and removed. Thanks for the help!

[Bob Mac]

Being right now in the middle of helping to figure out what to do with a HIGHLY modified cub, it might be worthwhile to see what it would cost you to get a DER, rather than the Feds, to issue a new AW Cert.

[James H Price]

Hi! Just joined and noticed you post on the aileron/rudder interconnect. I have had several tripacers and PA 22/20 and
currently a 1950 PA20 with 150. One of the Tripacers I had the interconnect removed as per an STC, that I thought was
on the current SWPC disc, but I have not checked. IF THE AIRCRAFT IS CORRECTLY RIGGED, it is a much nicer flight without
the interconnect and with the tailwheel, I would not keep the interconnect. Now a question for you. I recently purchases
this Pacer at Benton Ks and I keep it at Abilene KS. After a thorough check of the books, it had the 150 mounted in 1976
with STC SA1-167. This STC requires a supplement flight manual; Susquehanna Aero-Marine Aircraft Flight Manuel Supplement, dated 2/14/58. This updates the WB envelope, and other flight caracteristics. I do not have this supplement.
I wondered if it would be possible to get a copy from you, assuming that you have that. Hope to hear from you.
Jim Price 785-479-1088 daytime.

[Bob Mac]

I don't recall having this manual. But at my age lack of recall is standard! I'll look.