DG "service contract" revisited

On Friday, October 21, 2011 11:03:46 AM UTC-4, John Carlyle wrote:
John,



Going from Standard to Experimental for my old ASW-19 was very simple.

I needed to fill out an 8130-6 form, write a program letter, and then

have the FSDO rep check the actual airframe for serial number match

and display of the Experimental placard. It did not affect the resale

value in the slightest. The ease of the process might depend on your

FSDO, though.



As Dan said above, having an Experimental airworthiness allows us to

do more with our aircraft. That's why my LS8 is Experimental, even

though it's eligible to be Standard.



-John



On Oct 21, 9:48 am, ContestID67 wrote:

I live in fear that one day I will need some semi-trivial inexpensive

part (i.e. springs in the airbrakes) for my glider and have to pay the

"DG-ransom" to obtain said part, back dated to time immemorial.



On top of that my glider has a Standard Airworthiness Certificate

(rather than Experimental*) which limits what I can do to replace that

semi-trivial inexpensive part. Any thoughts on conversion from

Standard to Experimental? Does that help me in any way? Or is there

a downside such as lowering the resale value?



Thanks, John

hi,

I know this is an old post but I have a DG 400 (experimental) and think there might be fundamental misunderstanding of experimental aircraft and maintenance practices. In the USA there in NO difference regarding standard or experimental aircraft regarding 'owner accomplished' maintenance unless the owner also built the aircraft. Unless you built your ship (I don't know of any owner built glass ships) you fall under identical maintenance FAR 43 requirements as a standard airworthiness aircraft regarding owner done maintenance, there are 31 items an owner can accomplish. Experimental none owner built doesn't really do much as far as maintenance practices.. it just really means your annual is called a condition inspection and can be done by a AP not an IA... that's about all it does.