On Tue, 27 Nov 2007 22:06:28 -0500, "Peter Dohm"
wrote:




From all I've read, the "51% Rule" is "clear as mud."

The owner/builder/applicant must have learned/demonstrated 51% of the
necessary tasks to assemble/build the aircraft. That might leave room for a
fascinating variety of imaginative interpretations.

Generally, I have read that the owner/builder/applicant should have
personally built/constructed at least one of 51% of the diferent items
specifically built for the aircraft. In other words; bolts, washers, and
rivets would not count. OTOH; ribs, gussets, and rivets that have been
pulled/driven would count.


many years ago a judge was making a determination in a case where he
needed to establish whether the chap had an interest in an aircraft.
as i recall a feature in the case was proven if the guy had built most
of the aircraft. the judge made an off the cuff decision that if the
chap had built more than half his case was accepted.
a deciding majority legally is 51%.

51% has actually no more significance than something established as
part of a case many years ago.

what is actually required is structurally safe aircraft.

the fact that 51% has taken such hold in the environment is just
nonsense. The FAA should really get some focus back in the
environment.

"51%" is a silly distraction in the world of aviation safety.

Stealth Pilot