A Call to Arms from Richard VanGrunsven

In rec.aviation.piloting WJRFlyBoy wrote:


Yet I can't buy a completely built kit/plans plane.

Sure you can.

See any airplanes for sale web site.

You just can't buy one and have the same privilges as the original builder.

--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

WJRFlyBoy wrote:
On Sat, 08 Mar 2008 02:50:33 GMT, Dale Scroggins wrote:


I realize this is probably an unpopular opinion among the majority of
armature aircraft builders, but emotional jealousy of those able to
afford commissioning the construction of an aircraft, I fail to find
an _objective_ reason for homebuilders' objections. What am I
missing?

Your frontal lobes, from all appearances...

Amusing Rich, sorta, but I find no argument that can untrack Larry's.

None.
--


How about this argument: Until a century or so ago, a landowner held rights
from the center of the earth to the heavens. Nothing could pass over his
land without his permission. Since there were no aircraft, the issue didn't
come up very often. When flight became possible, this property theory was
changed to allow overflight; however, overflight was not a right given by
God, but a negotiated privilege enforced by governments through legislation
and courts. Because flying over other people's property without permission
has never been a right, and certainly was not even a privilege at the time
the Constitution was written, how do you libertarians come up with any basis
for arguing that the government has limited authority in regulating
aviation? Aviation would not exist in this country without government
action.

In the U.S., with a few exceptions, flying machines need Airworthiness
Certificates to fly. Airworthiness Certificates are issued by the
government. They are not issued or denied arbitrarily. If you do not wish
to meet requirements for issue of an Airworthiness Certificate, your
home-built project could be a nice static display. That is the ultimate
penalty for ignoring or circumventing requirements.

Dale Scroggins


Thx, I understand the federal and statutory history but, I don't believe,
that is the issue here.

Here is my personal example. I don't have the expertise or time to kit or
plan build. These planes are, at least, the equivalent or superior to the
major manufacturers. If they are not, then I don't understand why the FAA
would allow them.

Yet I can't buy a completely built kit/plans plane. If this isn't to
control the entry plane market place (or the maj mfgs market), then why is
the restriction imposed. I understand all the philosophical and why ppl
have immense pride in their own-builds but that is not relevant to the
issue at hand.

Cessna goes to China to get the Skyscraper at a reasonable price. Yet we
have USA built planes off better value that are restricted from my purchase
because I can't flip fiberglass?





Actually, jst to keep the record straight, you CAN buy an X-AB airplane.
But the biulder can not build and register another of the same kind.

That puts him in unfair competition with the certified manufacturers
who went to the expense and trouble to certify their airplanes.

On Sat, 08 Mar 2008 06:45:03 GMT, wrote:

In rec.aviation.piloting WJRFlyBoy wrote:

Yet I can't buy a completely built kit/plans plane.

Sure you can.

See any airplanes for sale web site.

You just can't buy one and have the same privilges as the original builder.

--
Jim Pennino

Ok, what rights do I lose and why do I lose them?
--
Remove numbers for gmail and for God's sake it ain't "gee" either!

On Sat, 08 Mar 2008 00:46:47 -0600, cavelamb himself wrote:

Thx, I understand the federal and statutory history but, I don't believe,
that is the issue here.

Here is my personal example. I don't have the expertise or time to kit or
plan build. These planes are, at least, the equivalent or superior to the
major manufacturers. If they are not, then I don't understand why the FAA
would allow them.

Yet I can't buy a completely built kit/plans plane. If this isn't to
control the entry plane market place (or the maj mfgs market), then why is
the restriction imposed. I understand all the philosophical and why ppl
have immense pride in their own-builds but that is not relevant to the
issue at hand.

Cessna goes to China to get the Skyscraper at a reasonable price. Yet we
have USA built planes off better value that are restricted from my purchase
because I can't flip fiberglass?


Actually, jst to keep the record straight, you CAN buy an X-AB airplane.
But the biulder can not build and register another of the same kind.

That puts him in unfair competition with the certified manufacturers
who went to the expense and trouble to certify their airplanes.

Appreciate the comment. If certification has value, why does this put him
in unfair competition?
--
Remove numbers for gmail and for God's sake it ain't "gee" either!

WJRFlyBoy wrote:
On Sat, 08 Mar 2008 00:46:47 -0600, cavelamb himself wrote:


Thx, I understand the federal and statutory history but, I don't believe,
that is the issue here.

Here is my personal example. I don't have the expertise or time to kit or
plan build. These planes are, at least, the equivalent or superior to the
major manufacturers. If they are not, then I don't understand why the FAA
would allow them.

Yet I can't buy a completely built kit/plans plane. If this isn't to
control the entry plane market place (or the maj mfgs market), then why is
the restriction imposed. I understand all the philosophical and why ppl
have immense pride in their own-builds but that is not relevant to the
issue at hand.

Cessna goes to China to get the Skyscraper at a reasonable price. Yet we
have USA built planes off better value that are restricted from my purchase
because I can't flip fiberglass?


Actually, jst to keep the record straight, you CAN buy an X-AB airplane.
But the biulder can not build and register another of the same kind.

That puts him in unfair competition with the certified manufacturers
who went to the expense and trouble to certify their airplanes.


Appreciate the comment. If certification has value, why does this put him
in unfair competition?


Because it takes time and money.

Appreciate the comment. If certification has value, why does this put him
in unfair competition?



Because it takes time and money.



Replying to myself (because it's late)...


Ok first:

Certifications says that the airplane meets minimum standards for
controlability and performance. That is not the case with X-AB.

The airplane can be manufactured in quanity and sold freely.
But the design is then frozen.
No changes are allowed without recertification.

Experimental amateur built allows you to build an airplane for your own
education and recreation.

It does not have to meet FAA standards of any kind.

Usually the neophyte builder has some tool skills - but no where near
what he (or she!) will have when finished.
That's part of the education part.

But one who says he can't - before trying - is usually right.


Second:

Fiberglass is laid, not flipped.
And dog gone near anybody can learn to do it.
It's not magic.
Just messy.


And Lastly:

I humbly suggest that if you are going to come in here with that handle,
you need to make a much more active effort at educating yourself.

This is a very technical forum.

And there are some very talented and knowledgable people who hang here.

They mostly don't care for trolls.

For what it's worth...

Richard

On Mar 8, 5:36*am, Gig 601XL Builder
wrote:

He got his money back in the deal after his lawyer made it very clear
that there would either be a wire in the buyers account that day or a
call would be made to the FAA.- Hide quoted text -

Isn't that blackmail?

Cheers

"cavelamb himself" wrote

Actually, jst to keep the record straight, you CAN buy an X-AB airplane.
But the biulder can not build and register another of the same kind.

Really? Where did you get that information? Do you know of a case where a
builder was denied the second airplane's airworthiness permit?
--
Jim in NC

WJRFlyBoy wrote in
:

On Sat, 08 Mar 2008 02:50:33 GMT, Dale Scroggins wrote:

I realize this is probably an unpopular opinion among the majority
of armature aircraft builders, but emotional jealousy of those
able to afford commissioning the construction of an aircraft, I
fail to find an _objective_ reason for homebuilders' objections.
What am I missing?

Your frontal lobes, from all appearances...

Amusing Rich, sorta, but I find no argument that can untrack
Larry's.

None.
--


How about this argument: Until a century or so ago, a landowner held
rights from the center of the earth to the heavens. Nothing could
pass over his land without his permission. Since there were no
aircraft, the issue didn't come up very often. When flight became
possible, this property theory was changed to allow overflight;
however, overflight was not a right given by God, but a negotiated
privilege enforced by governments through legislation and courts.
Because flying over other people's property without permission has
never been a right, and certainly was not even a privilege at the
time the Constitution was written, how do you libertarians come up
with any basis for arguing that the government has limited authority
in regulating aviation? Aviation would not exist in this country
without government action.

In the U.S., with a few exceptions, flying machines need
Airworthiness Certificates to fly. Airworthiness Certificates are
issued by the government. They are not issued or denied arbitrarily.
If you do not wish to meet requirements for issue of an
Airworthiness Certificate, your home-built project could be a nice
static display. That is the ultimate penalty for ignoring or
circumventing requirements.

Dale Scroggins

Thx, I understand the federal and statutory history but, I don't
believe, that is the issue here.

Here is my personal example. I don't have the expertise or time to kit
or plan build. These planes are, at least, the equivalent or superior
to the major manufacturers. If they are not, then I don't understand
why the FAA would allow them.


Which airplane?

Yet I can't buy a completely built kit/plans plane. If this isn't to
control the entry plane market place (or the maj mfgs market), then
why is the restriction imposed. I understand all the philosophical and
why ppl have immense pride in their own-builds but that is not
relevant to the issue at hand.

Cessna goes to China to get the Skyscraper at a reasonable price. Yet
we have USA built planes off better value that are restricted from my
purchase because I can't flip fiberglass?


So, if someone builds a BD% on commision for you you think that's safer
than a 172?

That's what we're talking about.


Bertie

WJRFlyBoy wrote in
:

On Sat, 08 Mar 2008 06:45:03 GMT, wrote:

In rec.aviation.piloting WJRFlyBoy
wrote:

Yet I can't buy a completely built kit/plans plane.

Sure you can.

See any airplanes for sale web site.

You just can't buy one and have the same privilges as the original
builder.

--
Jim Pennino

Ok, what rights do I lose and why do I lose them?

the origianl builder is the manufacturer. He can effect any maintenance
or repeair on the airplane he likes...You buy it , you can't.


Th ereason is pretty obvious. He has demonstrated he knows what he is
doing and has effectively been issued a resticted airframe or airframe
and powerplant licence.


Bertie