External A/C Camera Mount

[OmegaShield 0]

A week ago, I saw a video with a shot of a 4-way exit from a camera mounted on a wing or wing strut. I liked the idea so much that a friend and I came up with a mount design. Basically, the base will attach to a strut (no strut modifications) and the camera can attach to the base. Both will have a shroud to reduce the aerodynamic forces on the assembly.

Before I do any detail design and building stuff, I wanted to know if anyone knew if there is any FARs that would cover this? And if so, what sections should I look in?

[teason 0]

In canada, to mount anything to the aircraft, you need and STC. I'm sure the FAA has a similar requirement.

To get the STC, you need to do a whack load of testing. The pod we use cost $10000 to certify.

There are mounts out there that have the approval. Finding an approved mount would probably be the most affordable.

Also, as an alternative to an external mount, a lipstick cam can be mounted in the wing and a clear plastic plexi inspection panel can be installed.

Depending on the regs, a certification may be required for that too but at least you won't lose 50 feet per minute of climb.

I would rather be a superb meteor, every atom of me in magnificent glow, than a sleepy and permanent planet.

[ldpace 0]

STC's are designed for a modification that is to be sold/installed on multiple aircraft of the same type. This does require extensive paperwork and testing. It is not applicable for one time mods. The appropriate process for this mod is a Form 337. This is referred to as a "Field Approval". An AP/IA fills out the required paper work and submits drawings. He must convince the FAA/FSDO that the mod will not adversely affect the aircraft's strength or performance. If the FAA/FSDO is satisfied the with alteration, they will approve the installation and may or may not want to inspect the aircraft after installation. This used to be done all the time and was fairly easy, but in the past ten years, due to staffing cut backs by the FAA, they don't approve them like they used to. Discuss the Form 337 with the mechanic that maintains the aircraft and he can tell you the likelihood of success. It varies depending the region of the country and local FAA/FSDO staffing.

[CSpenceFLY 1]

Or if this is for your personal use just do it.If you are talking build and sell you will have to jump through the hoops.


.

[ldpace 0]

Yo Chris
The pilot can not "legally" fly an aircraft when it has been modified from it's original certified condition unless it has been STCd or had a 337 accomplished.
That includes duct tape etc on the wing strut. This only becomes a factor if the FAA pulls a ramp inspection or if an accident occurs and there is an investigation. It will also void any insurance on the aircraft. These things are done all the time, you just need to know the rules and risks.

[CSpenceFLY 1]

Highly aware.I'm not building camera mounts.He has been told the rules and risks.


.

[riggerrob 643]

The FAA is far more liberal with 337 Field Approvals than Transport Canada.
For example, a Canadian DZ operated two, almost identical Cessna 182s. The first airplane hd a TC-approved jump step, but the second plane's step was just a copy of the first, without the tonnage of paperwork. You could not tell the difference between the first and second steps at arm's length.
The step on the second airplane had passed numerous annual inspections and TC inspections.
After the first airplane crashed, TC took a long, hard look at the second airplane and demanded that the un-documented step be removed.
The final solution was to trek up a steep mountain, remove the step from the wreckage - of the first airplane - and bolt it onto the second.