Re: Expermintal Airworthiness certificate
Posted: Tue Nov 20, 2001 10:31 am
'All,
What Mike says and more. The FAA hates the conversion of Cert aircraft to Exp.
Its a little more in depth. It is true an A&P can perform the Condition Inspection (Like and Annual), no need for an IA. The owner can assist and do certain preventive Maint items IAW FARs. If you the owner want to modify the airframe or engine that will effect airworthy factors, your AW cert is null and void. You will be required to go back to FAA or hire a DAR and or a DER to start the paperwork all over again. You may be required to fly a restricted flight time. And a DER starts at around $500.00 bucks and goes up. I wish I could make that kind of money filling out 337s.
This brings up the insurance issue. Most Insurance companies have restrictions, 25 hour and so on. So you may not have insurance for the first few hours, your risk. Also most companies will charge more for Exp aircraft. I had a Pitts Special for years and did I pay out the butt.
Also keep in mind you can build any part as the owner for your Fairchild. You duplicate that part via by comparsion or by eng data. You the owner will cert that part. But keep in mind, never tell the FAA you made the part better than the orginal, you will then be required to show how, what and why. Here comes the DER task. You build the part equal to the existing part, period....In addition, you the owner will be required to build the part with your hands or have someone build it for you, but you will be required to be envolved with the design and fab process. You will be required to prove that to the FAA. I, as an IA (its a fine line) cannot build a part from scratch and sell it to you as a cert part. The FAA rules have been rewritten and I believe much better. At one time I had a problem with the FAA in regard to Aeronca spars. They would not let me fabricate new spares out of new aircraft quality stock and return to service. I had to prove to them the the aircraft grade wood was in fact equal to the orgin
al manuf wood. Prove that by old Aeronca engineering data, stress and test data. I could not, therefore we ended up repairing the new spares. We took a small piece of old spar, glued and laminated it at the tip. Prepared an FAA form reflecting a repair. So what we ended up with was a new spar with a one inch splice at the tip near the bow. What a goat rope. Now you have to look at the Bogus parts issue. Technically, I can not go purchase a part from John Doe, will say a F-24 Hor Stab that has been sitting in his barn for 50 years. I know that it belongs to the F-24, it is in excellant shape and it would work better than the old rotten one on the existing airplane. But as an IA I have to show traceablity of that part in order to return it to service. I must show that that part is the correct part verified by P/N which will match the eng data. Now! the owner can purchase that part, hand it to me and tell me to install it. The owner in fact is certifying that part meets the above criteria.
What fun!
Jamie Treat'
What Mike says and more. The FAA hates the conversion of Cert aircraft to Exp.
Its a little more in depth. It is true an A&P can perform the Condition Inspection (Like and Annual), no need for an IA. The owner can assist and do certain preventive Maint items IAW FARs. If you the owner want to modify the airframe or engine that will effect airworthy factors, your AW cert is null and void. You will be required to go back to FAA or hire a DAR and or a DER to start the paperwork all over again. You may be required to fly a restricted flight time. And a DER starts at around $500.00 bucks and goes up. I wish I could make that kind of money filling out 337s.
This brings up the insurance issue. Most Insurance companies have restrictions, 25 hour and so on. So you may not have insurance for the first few hours, your risk. Also most companies will charge more for Exp aircraft. I had a Pitts Special for years and did I pay out the butt.
Also keep in mind you can build any part as the owner for your Fairchild. You duplicate that part via by comparsion or by eng data. You the owner will cert that part. But keep in mind, never tell the FAA you made the part better than the orginal, you will then be required to show how, what and why. Here comes the DER task. You build the part equal to the existing part, period....In addition, you the owner will be required to build the part with your hands or have someone build it for you, but you will be required to be envolved with the design and fab process. You will be required to prove that to the FAA. I, as an IA (its a fine line) cannot build a part from scratch and sell it to you as a cert part. The FAA rules have been rewritten and I believe much better. At one time I had a problem with the FAA in regard to Aeronca spars. They would not let me fabricate new spares out of new aircraft quality stock and return to service. I had to prove to them the the aircraft grade wood was in fact equal to the orgin
al manuf wood. Prove that by old Aeronca engineering data, stress and test data. I could not, therefore we ended up repairing the new spares. We took a small piece of old spar, glued and laminated it at the tip. Prepared an FAA form reflecting a repair. So what we ended up with was a new spar with a one inch splice at the tip near the bow. What a goat rope. Now you have to look at the Bogus parts issue. Technically, I can not go purchase a part from John Doe, will say a F-24 Hor Stab that has been sitting in his barn for 50 years. I know that it belongs to the F-24, it is in excellant shape and it would work better than the old rotten one on the existing airplane. But as an IA I have to show traceablity of that part in order to return it to service. I must show that that part is the correct part verified by P/N which will match the eng data. Now! the owner can purchase that part, hand it to me and tell me to install it. The owner in fact is certifying that part meets the above criteria.
What fun!
Jamie Treat'
The only thing I don't like about