![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I've got what may be a dumb question (since I suspect the answer is
obvious), but here it goes: If I am looking at buying an experimental homebuilt with a retractable conventional gear; BUT under 200hp and a fixed pitch prop, do I need a complex endorsement to legally fly, or is that just with regards to aircraft with standard airworthiness certificates (factory built)? I'm having an argument on FAR trivia, and was curious what people thought. Cheers! Ryan in Madison |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
It doesn't matter whether the airplane is storebought or homebuilt; a
complex airplane is a complex airplane -- and the one you're describing isn't. It needs retractable gear, flaps and a controllable- pitch propeller to be complex. It doesn't need more than 200 hp -- that would make it a high-performance airplane, requiring a different endorsement. But you'll need the appropriate endorsement(s) to fly a plane regardless of its registration category. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
14CFR61.31(e) makes no distinction of factory built or home built
experimental. It just says "airplane". It is not complex, as another stated you need flaps, controllable prop and gear, or if a sea plane, flaps and controllable prop. Engine Size (HP) does not make any contribution to the complex aspect. BT "soaringpilot2" wrote in message ps.com... I've got what may be a dumb question (since I suspect the answer is obvious), but here it goes: If I am looking at buying an experimental homebuilt with a retractable conventional gear; BUT under 200hp and a fixed pitch prop, do I need a complex endorsement to legally fly, or is that just with regards to aircraft with standard airworthiness certificates (factory built)? I'm having an argument on FAR trivia, and was curious what people thought. Cheers! Ryan in Madison |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
soaringpilot2 wrote:
I've got what may be a dumb question (since I suspect the answer is obvious), but here it goes: If I am looking at buying an experimental homebuilt with a retractable conventional gear; BUT under 200hp and a fixed pitch prop, do I need a complex endorsement to legally fly, or is that just with regards to aircraft with standard airworthiness certificates (factory built)? I'm having an argument on FAR trivia, and was curious what people thought. Cheers! Ryan in Madison Retractable gear, by itself, does not a complex aircraft make. You must have flaps, retractable gear AND an adjustable prop to have a complex landplane. The answer to that question is no. The answer to the other question, does this complex endorsement apply to standard certificates? I cannot speak with authority, but i've been led to believe if you are flying solo, you dont have to have category, class or endorsements pertinent to the experimental airframe. In the past few years I believe the Feds wanted folks carrying passengers in experimentals to have category and class ratings and applicable endorsements.. I'm sure if im mistaken, the corrections will be quick and merciless :P Dave |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Nov 14, 2:55 pm, soaringpilot2 wrote:
I've got what may be a dumb question (since I suspect the answer is obvious), but here it goes: If I am looking at buying an experimental homebuilt with a retractable conventional gear; BUT under 200hp and a fixed pitch prop, do I need a complex endorsement to legally fly, or is that just with regards to aircraft with standard airworthiness certificates (factory built)? I'm having an argument on FAR trivia, and was curious what people thought. Cheers! Ryan in Madison Which airplane are you talking about? There was some discussion around this topic regarding the Europa, which has a partially retracting monowheel. Some argued it was complex, some said no. It turned out that the insurance companies insisted that it was a complex aircraft, so whether or not it was really complex under FAA rules became a moot point (unless you are self-insured). |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Europa - partially retracting gear, flaps? and a feathering prop? sounds
complex to me. BT "Andrew Sarangan" wrote in message ... On Nov 14, 2:55 pm, soaringpilot2 wrote: I've got what may be a dumb question (since I suspect the answer is obvious), but here it goes: If I am looking at buying an experimental homebuilt with a retractable conventional gear; BUT under 200hp and a fixed pitch prop, do I need a complex endorsement to legally fly, or is that just with regards to aircraft with standard airworthiness certificates (factory built)? I'm having an argument on FAR trivia, and was curious what people thought. Cheers! Ryan in Madison Which airplane are you talking about? There was some discussion around this topic regarding the Europa, which has a partially retracting monowheel. Some argued it was complex, some said no. It turned out that the insurance companies insisted that it was a complex aircraft, so whether or not it was really complex under FAA rules became a moot point (unless you are self-insured). |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Which airplane are you talking about? There was some discussion around
this topic regarding the Europa, which has a partially retracting monowheel. Some argued it was complex, some said no. I'm talking about the Cvjetkovich CA-65 Sky Fly (there's one on barnstormers right now). http://www.cvjetkovic-aircraft.com/ -Ryan in Madison |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
FADEC = complex | Bob Gardner | Piloting | 237 | November 29th 06 01:55 AM |
Is this a Complex Plane? | [email protected] | Piloting | 12 | December 7th 05 03:19 AM |
Engine with Complex History | Mike Granby | Owning | 4 | August 30th 04 02:48 AM |
The "Complex" TAS calculation | Arnold Pieper | Soaring | 2 | December 14th 03 12:22 PM |
Complex aircraft question | Robert M. Gary | Piloting | 5 | October 17th 03 12:25 PM |