Bike rack STC

[Ryan Smith]

Looks better than this one.

[robw56]

It's real, here's a link to the companies site. It's an outfit in New Zealand that will fly mountain bikers out into the backcountry. Check out the gallery on the site. There's more pictures with bikes under the wings. http://www.adventureflightsgoldenbay.co.nz/Home.html

[DaveF]

"Hey, thanks! You take the bikes. I'll, uh, walk!"

[robw56]

Wow, no doubt now that it's real! Pretty cool. I wonder how it flies with all that drag hanging off the wings...

With 300hp.... Probably still faster than a 170

[bagarre]

I wonder what the market would be to have an internal bike rack to fit two full sized bikes.

I had an idea of removing the rear seat and hat shelf and building a bike mount that could attach to the existing seat nutplanes in the plane.
The idea was to store the bikes vertically with the front wheel taken off.
It would be simple to build but probably impossible to get approved

Folding bikes are very nice to putting around town but I'd like to haul two mountain bikes.

[Bruce Fenstermacher]

I wonder why you would need an approval David. The bikes are cargo. You could throw them in the back and forget them. No security at all.

Don't modify any of the aircraft by using mounting points already there for the bike rack.

[bagarre]

I didn't want to do that.
I wanted them secured for the sake of the bikes as well as my interior as neither are all that cheap.

[robw56]

I can fit a full sized mountain bike in the back of my 170 without removing the wheels although it's a lot easier getting it in and out of the plane with the front wheel removed.

https://www.backcountrypilot.org/images ... d18602.jpg

[Bruce Fenstermacher]

I didn't want to do that.
I wanted them secured for the sake of the bikes as well as my interior as neither are all that cheap.

Yes I understand that.

But when you are trying to decide what if any regulations you need to comply with when you make or change something you have to look at what regulations you might be breaking if you do nothing but just load up the bikes. There are no regulations how cargo must be secured in your aircraft. Therefor anything you do to secure them with the exception of modifying the airframe would likely need no approval.

Seats and seat belts on the other hand would be different because they would have to, at the least, meet the certification requirements the airplane is flying under.

[bagarre]

Yep, That's what Im looking to do with two bikes.

Do you need the extended baggage to fit the bike in there?
Pulling the front wheel would help with that.

Also, I don't see this as modifying the airframe. I'm making a bracket that uses the existing seat bolt locations with no changed to the airframe needed. You are removing the rear seat tho. And the Jury is still out if that requires a 337 or not.

[robw56]

Without the extended baggage Im sure you could fit two bikes back there with the front wheels removed. The hat shelf, if installed, would get in the way though. On another note, to make loading easier, I pull the passenger side door off (I have quick release pins) and slide the right seat all the way forward. To secure the bike there are several pre existing 10-32 and 1/4-28 bolt holes where you can install tiedown rings. I could care less if the tie-down rings are supposed to have some sort of approval. In my opinion it's much safer to have your stuff in the back tied down, then to just have it laying back there.

[robw56]

I have a fun advertisement from 1954 I'll be posting soon. Cessna brags in the ad that the 170B can go from a 4 place aircraft to a hauler in less than 7 min, and they show 4 time lapse photos of a gentleman removing the rear seat with a clock next to him. They also lay out 645 lbs of cargo in front of the aircraft saying that the plane can carry a 1/4 ton of cargo with the seat removed.

And I bet he didn't even get a field approval!!!

[bagarre]

With a few eye bolts in the seat bolt holes, I could tie them off like Rob did easy enough.
Now if only we were allowed to fly with no back seat

[blueldr]

What the hell! We're not allowed to fly without a back seat? I sure as hell didn't know that I was in some sort of a violation all those camping years. I don't believe I had a back seat in the airplane for the last fifteen years that I owned it. A lot of times I laeft the roght front seat at home too. I always corrected the weight and balance for the seat removal and just assumed that was all I had to do.

[robw56]

What the hell! We're not allowed to fly without a back seat? I sure as hell didn't know that I was in some sort of a violation all those camping years. I don't believe I had a back seat in the airplane for the last fifteen years that I owned it. A lot of times I laeft the roght front seat at home too. I always corrected the weight and balance for the seat removal and just assumed that was all I had to do.

I was just joking and I assume David was too. I agree with you that it's no big deal to take the back seat out. Just have a current weight and balance for whatever your configuration is. I can count one one hand the number of times I've flown with the rear bench seat installed.