Aluminum instrument panel finish?

"Ron Natalie" wrote in message
. ..

"Tarver Engineering" wrote in message
...

"Marco Leon" mleon(at)optonline.net wrote in message
...
As long as he doesn't plan on selling it anytime soon...

Selling a homebuilt is not consistent with the regulatory advantages
provided to those building their own airplane, that they intend to
operate.
That Authority belongs at a DAS.

More drivel. The only thing that a builder is afforded over anyone else
who owns a homebuilt is eligibility to sign off the annuals.

Of course, that from Natalie, who doesn't even know a homebuilt is an
experimantal.

If you build it to sell, you are outside the regulatory intent of a
homebuilt.

(Daniel) wrote in message . com...

After that much effort, why finish it off with the same methods used
by every other aircraft on the line? You should go for something
unique. Something that really sets your plane apart. Something that
says "I just gotta be me!":

http://panel.notlong.com


Just stay away from the one called "Classic Fruit". How'd you like
to repeat that everytime someone asks about the panel? :-)

John Galban=====N4BQ (PA28-180)

"Tarver Engineering" wrote in message ...
More drivel. The only thing that a builder is afforded over anyone else
who owns a homebuilt is eligibility to sign off the annuals.

Of course, that from Natalie, who doesn't even know a homebuilt is an
experimantal.

If you build it to sell, you are outside the regulatory intent of a
homebuilt.

I very much know it is certificated in "Experimental -- Amateur Built." The
only thing the rules say is that it must be CONSTRUCTED FOR EDUCATION
OR RECREATION. It doesn't say anything about what it is used for afterwards.
There is no restriction on selling homebuilts or maintaining and operating them after
they are sold.

"Ron Natalie" wrote in message
. ..

"Tarver Engineering" wrote in message
...
More drivel. The only thing that a builder is afforded over anyone
else
who owns a homebuilt is eligibility to sign off the annuals.

Of course, that from Natalie, who doesn't even know a homebuilt is an
experimantal.

If you build it to sell, you are outside the regulatory intent of a
homebuilt.

I very much know it is certificated in "Experimental

You wrote that you didn't know that, not very long ago.

Are you now claiming that I am correct and you have no businees discussing
regulatory issues, Natalie?

-- Amateur Built." The
only thing the rules say is that it must be CONSTRUCTED FOR EDUCATION
OR RECREATION. It doesn't say anything about what it is used for
afterwards.
There is no restriction on selling homebuilts or maintaining and operating
them after
they are sold.

There are several regulatory differences between homebuilts WRT
maintainance. As to building a homebuilt to sell, that alone invalidates
all that AEA has done. A DAS is required to build kit airplanes and sell
them.

Perhaps you would like to post up one of the archive trolls and remove any
doubt of your idiot status, Nesbitt?

"Tarver Engineering" wrote:

Selling a homebuilt is not consistent with the regulatory advantages
provided to those building their own airplane, that they intend
to operate.

Nothing in the CFR about "intent to operate." If a person
builds an airplane "for education or recreation" there
is nothing in the CFR that prevents them from selling it.

Hired guns or building for the express purpose of resale
are other matters altogether.

Dave 'twist and crawl' Hyde

"nauga" wrote in message
ink.net...
"Tarver Engineering" wrote:

Selling a homebuilt is not consistent with the regulatory advantages
provided to those building their own airplane, that they intend
to operate.

Nothing in the CFR about "intent to operate." If a person
builds an airplane "for education or recreation" there
is nothing in the CFR that prevents them from selling it.

That is correct.

Hired guns or building for the express purpose of resale
are other matters altogether.

Yes.

Something that really sets your plane apart. Something that
says "I just gotta be me!":

http://panel.notlong.com

I just never get tired of touting Neal's plane. I'm his biggest fan!

http://www.alioth.net/flying/flying/...heckerbird.jpg

From: (StellaStar)


I just never get tired of touting Neal's plane. I'm his biggest fan!

http://www.alioth.net/flying/flying/...heckerbird.jpg


If it ever becomes unflyable he can use it as an end of runway shack with that
paint scheme. I got a chuckle out of it.

Just a matter of curiosity how visible is it in flight?

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

(StellaStar) wrote in message ...

I just never get tired of touting Neal's plane. I'm his biggest fan!

http://www.alioth.net/flying/flying/...heckerbird.jpg

Me too. I've never felt more visible in the traffic pattern.

John Galban=====N4BQ (PA28-180)

"nauga" wrote in message link.net...

Nothing in the CFR about "intent to operate." If a person
builds an airplane "for education or recreation" there
is nothing in the CFR that prevents them from selling it.

Uh oh. My buddy sold his RV-6 and I'm currently helping him with
the RV-10 project. I don't think he's building it for "education or
recreation". I'm pretty sure he's building it so that he'll have a
kick-ass 4-place airplane to fly around in for less than 1/4 million
dollars.

I suppose the fallback position is that we're getting educated
whether we intend to or not :-)

John Galban=====N4BQ (PA28-180)