Experimental/Exhibition

"Ron Wanttaja" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 31 Dec 2004 01:15:23 -0400, "Juan Jimenez"
wrote:

"Ron Wanttaja" wrote in message
. ..

BTW, I'm presuming you're shooting for Experimental/Exhibition so the
BD-5
can be used for airshow work....

Well, yes and no. Regardless of what I want to do with the plane, I don't
have a choice. The original builder in Australia did not keep a builder's
log nor did he compile photographs of the work in progress, so I cannot
submit evidence that it was amateur-built. And the only group I fit into
in
exhibition is group IV.

Doggone it, Juan, I hate to see you get trapped in Exp/Exh unless that's
the category you want.

Well, I'm not so sure that exp/exh will be a bad thing. The process to get
the a/w certificate in the first place has been tedious and drawn out, but
the mission profile of the airplane does fit the exp/exh rules for Group IV,
and Exp/Exh does allow the a/c to be used for pay in air shows. There's not
much more that you can use a BD-5J for, other than the military cruise
missile surrogate work Bobby Bishop is doing, and my airplane is not really
well equipped for that.

Will you be able to receive the Repairman Certificate for the plane?

Are you kidding?

I note that wording of 14CFR 65.104 does NOT limit it to
amateur-built ("Repairman Certificate - Experimental Aircraft Builder")
but I
don't know how the local FSDOs interpret it. And there's the
more-stringent
operational limitations as well.

Well... these folks are so behind the curve they even asked me for all 337's
for major alterations (such as my upgrade of the landing gear from
fiberglass to metal) and A&P signoffs for all work done since 2001. Of
course, I told them there would be no such things forthcoming for an
experimental homebuilt aircraft, other than a signoff for the condition
inspection prior to issuing the airworthiness certificate. I don't really
hold it against them because they do so few of these, and mine is certainly
a different proposition with it being a homebuilt turbine aircraft, but
you'd think the basics would be covered... But a Repairman certificate? With
no proof of the original construction? Woof. They did suggest that I bring
in my military records to see if I qualify to take the A&P tests, which I
thought was thoughtful of them. However, I doubt I will qualify that way.

How far have you explored the possibility of getting Experimental
Amateur-Built with your DAR?

There are no DAR's here and I can't afford to bring one from the mainland,
pay hotel, car, airfare plus fees, etc.

Could you get a letter from the Aussie builder, where he attests that he
did the original work for recreation/education?

Yes, but that still won't change anything experimental/exhibition.

How much was actually done when you received it?

Most of the structural work was done.

If I recall your past postings, it sounds like you did most of the engine
installation work,
which probably will impress the FAA guy.

No, the engine was installed, but I changed the sensors, worked out a custom
N1 monitoring scheme, complete redid the ignition system, finished the fuel
systems, reworked most of the electrical, etc. The FSDO is impressed with my
work but not enough to issue me a repairman certificate. I'm not so
concerned about that, I have good relationships with A&P's and IA's here who
are willing to signoff on work, mostly because they know that I will not get
mad if they tell me that something needs to be fixed before they sign.

ISTR that you did a lot of rework of some rather odd practices by the
original builder, as well.

Yes.

But from your comments about fighting this since last summer, I expect you
probably have already exhausted most of these channels. But it seems like
you
should be able to convince a reasonable DAR.

As I said, there are no DAR's here.

If all else fails, post the address of your DAR and all us on RAH will
write
testimonials to your character. :-)

Ha! Yeah, right, I can already see the result of _that_! hehehehe...

Juan