Experimental or not?

Ron Wanttaja wrote in message . ..

Sorry for being late. I was busy during the last days so I couldn't
answer.

There are two main airworthiness categories: Standard and Special.

Standard airworthiness aircraft are proven to meet certain FAA standards, and
they must be maintained to ensure their continued compliance with those
standards. At given intervals they must be inspected to ensure they still
conform to the Type Certificate they receive. Since these aircraft are known
quantities, they may be placed into commercial service with no further FAA
certification action (although some additional equipment may be required for
some operation).

Standard airworthiness includes normal, aerobatic, utility, transport, commuter,
and transport categories.

Special airworthiness is used for airplanes that either have not undergone the
FAA certification process, or specific changes are made to them that take them
outside the limits established by their type certificate. Operation of Special
airworthiness aircraft is basically governed on a *per aircraft* basis. The FAA
assigns operations limitations to each aircraft, and these limitation are not
blanket to a given aircraft type nor are they transferrable to an identical
aircraft.

Ok. So that means if I build a kitplane and get an airworthiness
certificate this doesn't necessarily mean that my neighbour building
the exactly same kit with exactly the same parts. Understandable, as
even with the same parts the quality of work may differ.

Special airworthiness categories include Limited, Primary, Restricted, Special
Light Sport, and Experimental. Commercial operations are *not* prohibited, but
they require specific FAA approval. The degree to which the FAA grants such
permission varies.

Ok. So if I want to use my experimental commercially I need to get FAA
approval first.

The Experimental category under the Special Airworthiness includes a number of
categories, such as racing, market survey, R&D, Exhibition, experimental LSA,
and amateur-built.

Racing is clear. What is the difference between the other categories?
I assume amateur-built means a plane built by hobbyists. R&D probably
is something like an experimental airplane from a plane manufacturer
like the YF-22, right? What is experimental LSA?

I also wonder when a plane is amateur-built. I assume it's the case if
someone without special knowledge builts a plane by itself. What about
if he does that commercially (building planes and selling them)? Or
what about if a aircraft construction engineer builds a plane? He
probably can't be considered as amateur?

The FAA's *policy* may be to deny permission for these
aircraft to operate commercially, but such policies can be waived. You just
have to give the FAA a good reason why the waiver is a good idea.

So in the end that means it's basically not allowed to use them
commercially, but this can be overcome by a waiver.

As others have described very nicely, the L-39 Albatross may be a safe,
professionally-designed aircraft, but it never was awarded a US type
certificate, nor any similar type certificate that the US is treaty-bound to
honor. Hence, it can never be operated normal or any other Standard category.
That tosses it into the Special airworthiness category, and the category it
apparently best fits into the Experimental/Exhibition one.

I understand.

Obviously, with dozens L-39s being imported to the US, having a school that can
check folks out in them is a real good idea. So the FAA will issue a waiver
allowing them to operate one or several aircraft to train folks. Similarly,
having a school for training civilian test pilots is also beneficial to
aviation, hence a waiver was possible. Similarly, manufacturers of
high-performance homebuilts have received waivers allowing them to provide
training in a company-built example.

I understand

The FAA waiver usually demands that these planes receive professional-type
maintenance similar to that of standard airworthiness aircraft (e.g., the L-39
instructor won't be allowed the maintain the plane himself unless he has an A&P
license).


So basically if You maintain Your plane according to the manufacturer
standards and if You have a valid reason chances are good that You can
get a waiver to allow commercial operation.

Thank You very much for your very detailed explanation. And of course
to everyone here that answered to my (probably somehwat stupid)
questions.

JJ.

On 12 Apr 2005 10:35:47 -0700, (John D. Abrahms) wrote:

Ron Wanttaja wrote in message . ..

Ok. So that means if I build a kitplane and get an airworthiness
certificate this doesn't necessarily mean that my neighbour building
the exactly same kit with exactly the same parts. Understandable, as
even with the same parts the quality of work may differ.

Yep! As far as the FAA is concerned, the two aircraft aren't even related to
each other.

The Experimental category under the Special Airworthiness includes a number of
categories, such as racing, market survey, R&D, Exhibition, experimental LSA,
and amateur-built.

Racing is clear. What is the difference between the other categories?

They're spelled differently. :-)

I assume amateur-built means a plane built by hobbyists. R&D probably
is something like an experimental airplane from a plane manufacturer
like the YF-22, right? What is experimental LSA?

FAR 21.191:

Experimental certificates are issued for the following purposes:

(a) Research and development. Testing new aircraft design concepts, new aircraft
equipment, new aircraft installations, new aircraft operating techniques, or new
uses for aircraft.

(b) Showing compliance with regulations. Conducting flight tests and other
operations to show compliance with the airworthiness regulations including
flights to show compliance for issuance of type and supplemental type
certificates, flights to substantiate major design changes, and flights to show
compliance with the function and reliability requirements of the regulations.

(c) Crew training. Training of the applicant's flight crews.

(d) Exhibition. Exhibiting the aircraft's flight capabilities, performance, or
unusual characteristics at air shows, motion picture, television, and similar
productions, and the maintenance of exhibition flight proficiency, including
(for persons exhibiting aircraft) flying to and from such air shows and
productions.

(e) Air racing. Participating in air races, including (for such participants)
practicing for such air races and flying to and from racing events.

(f) Market surveys. Use of aircraft for purposes of conducting market surveys,
sales demonstrations, and customer crew training only as provided in § 21.195.

(g) Operating amateur built aircraft. Operating an aircraft the major portion of
which has been fabricated and assembled by persons who undertook the
construction project solely for their own education or recreation.

(h) Operating kit-built aircraft. Operating a primary category aircraft that
meets the criteria of § 21.24(a)(1) that was assembled by a person from a kit
manufactured by the holder of a production certificate for that kit, without the
supervision and quality control of the production certificate holder under §
21.184(a).

(i) Operating light-sport aircraft. Operating a light-sport aircraft that-
(1) Has not been issued a U.S. or foreign airworthiness certificate and does
not meet the provisions of §103.1 of this chapter. An experimental certificate
will not be issued under this paragraph for these aircraft after August 31,
2007;
(2) Has been assembled-
(i) From an aircraft kit for which the applicant can provide the information
required by §21.193 (e); and
(ii) In accordance with manufacturer's assembly instructions that meet an
applicable consensus standard; or
(3) Has been previously issued a special airworthiness certificate in the
light-sport category under §21.190.

I also wonder when a plane is amateur-built. I assume it's the case if
someone without special knowledge builts a plane by itself. What about
if he does that commercially (building planes and selling them)? Or
what about if a aircraft construction engineer builds a plane? He
probably can't be considered as amateur?

Correct, and the plane can't be registered as Experimental Amateur-Built.

The FAA's *policy* may be to deny permission for these
aircraft to operate commercially, but such policies can be waived. You just
have to give the FAA a good reason why the waiver is a good idea.

So in the end that means it's basically not allowed to use them
commercially, but this can be overcome by a waiver.

Pretty much. Note, though, that it's up to the FAA discretion. Unless a formal
policy letter has been published (like for homebuilts), the limitations imposed
on Special airworthiness category aircraft is set by the individual FAA
inspector. If he doesn't want to risk his career....

So basically if You maintain Your plane according to the manufacturer
standards and if You have a valid reason chances are good that You can
get a waiver to allow commercial operation.

As mentioned above, though, you are not *guaranteed* a waiver. If the FDSO guy
is having a bad morning, you may find yourself denied. Often, some FSDOs are
more lenient that others...folks may actually apply to FSDOs outside their own
districts.

Finally, it should be noted that many of the Experimental airworthiness
certificates are only good for a single year. At the end of the year, you have
to re-apply for it, and if you get a different inspector, your new operating
limitations may be much more strict. Experimental Amateur-Built airworthiness
certificates are at least permanent.

Ron Wanttaja

"John D. Abrahms" wrote in message
om...

I know that all the airplanes that people build by themselves fall
into the experimental category, because they are not factory-made,
serialized products but individually built with different quality and
with different modifications.

Not really. You can restore a certified airplane from a dataplate and a
single piece of metal and build everything yourself. If you can get an IA to
sign off on it, and the FAA to agree, it doesn't have to be experimental.

I also know that GA airplanes made of
composites usually fall into the experimental class category, too.

No. Cirrus, Lancair and a few others are composites and they are certified
aircraft.

What really annoyed me is that there also are planes that are not
composite and also are factory-made in high numbers that fall into
experiemnat category, like the Aero L-39 Jet airplane.

That's because it's an ex-military airplane that was never put through
normal certification. In order to fly in private hands it has to have an
experimental airworthiness certificate.

From what I know a pilot who wants to fly a L-39 jet airplane needs
1000hrs of PIC time, and after that needs a Letter of Authorization to
be able to fly the L-39.

Correct.

What if the L-39 would not be registered as
experimental but as normal/utility/aerobatic airplane?

The manufacturer, as far as I know, has no interest in spending the oodles
of money required to achieve this. And most likely you wouldn't be able to
afford the airplane if they did.

Would this also require 1000hrs of PIC time before someone can fly with
this L-39?

It would require a type rating.

Are there any PIC hours required to be allowed to fly turbine airplanes?

To my knowledge, that is only the case on the few ex-military experimentals
being sold out there.

I also heard that it's not possible to use an experimental plane for
training (PPL, CPL, IFR, whatever).

No. A CFI can use your experimental to train you to fly it.

Juan

Used to be ex military aircraft were in the Restricted category. I
dealt with a Grumman Goose and a Lodestar years ago where that was the
case. Is that no longer true or are fighters and trainers different?

The way I remember it was the FAA came out with the hours and LOA
requirement because there were too many doctors and lawyers that had
more money than brains and got out of their Bonanza and into a P-51
and killed themselves.


Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com

The LOA is no longer called an LOA, but from what the FSDO told me about
the requirements, it is still a rose by another name.



Don Hammer wrote:
Used to be ex military aircraft were in the Restricted category. I
dealt with a Grumman Goose and a Lodestar years ago where that was the
case. Is that no longer true or are fighters and trainers different?

The way I remember it was the FAA came out with the hours and LOA
requirement because there were too many doctors and lawyers that had
more money than brains and got out of their Bonanza and into a P-51
and killed themselves.


Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com

LOA's are still around. For the ex-mil's now they have a weird
pseudo-type-rating system that shows up on your license. But that applies
only to ex-mil on that AC that's been recently updated. For my BD-5J, for
example, I was told to apply for an LOA, and that's what the FSDO will issue
me if aero-medical ever gets around to handling my special issuance renewal.

"AINut" wrote in message
...
The LOA is no longer called an LOA, but from what the FSDO told me about
the requirements, it is still a rose by another name.

Don Hammer wrote:
Used to be ex military aircraft were in the Restricted category. I
dealt with a Grumman Goose and a Lodestar years ago where that was the
case. Is that no longer true or are fighters and trainers different?

The way I remember it was the FAA came out with the hours and LOA
requirement because there were too many doctors and lawyers that had
more money than brains and got out of their Bonanza and into a P-51
and killed themselves.


Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com

"Don Hammer" wrote in message
...
Used to be ex military aircraft were in the Restricted category. I
dealt with a Grumman Goose and a Lodestar years ago where that was the
case. Is that no longer true or are fighters and trainers different?

Don't know about the Goose or Lodestar but the ex-mil fighters are covered
by an AC, can't remember the number.

The way I remember it was the FAA came out with the hours and LOA
requirement because there were too many doctors and lawyers that had
more money than brains and got out of their Bonanza and into a P-51
and killed themselves.

Still applies.

"Don Hammer" wrote in message
...
Used to be ex military aircraft were in the Restricted category. I
dealt with a Grumman Goose and a Lodestar years ago where that was the
case. Is that no longer true or are fighters and trainers different?


Flavors and trends do change over time. It did indeed, used to be the case
that most warbirds that didn't have a civilian type certificate were
certified in the "Restricted" category with the specific restrictions
determined on a case by case basis.
As I recall there were also some in the "Limited" category, with the
specific limitations also determined on a case by case basis.

At that time it was also true that the "certificate" given to an amateur
built aircraft was only valid for one year. Every year you had to have the
FAA come out and inspect the airplane to renew it. Then the FAA figured out
that they were in the business of giving free annuals for homebuilts and
instituted the present permanent "certificate" that must be inspected every
year by a certified mechanic. Note that a "repairman certificate" holder is
a "certified mechanic" whose "certification" extends only to one specific
airplane. :-)

Nowadays most of the warbirds are finding their certification easier in the
"Exhibition" category. This category generally allows some radius of
operation, of several hundred nautical miles, for "pilot proficiency
maintenance" where you can fly pretty much as you please. Trips outside of
that radius require that the FAA be "notified" prior to the trip. Generally
you can fax the FAA office a "notification." You can also send them a list
of the shows and flyins that you plan to attend once a year.

Much of this change is because of the changing view of warbirds. At one
time they were just big, expensive, impractical airplanes. Now they are
antiques and collectors items and people pay money to see them up close and
see them fly.

I can remember when you could buy a surplus fighter for a couple of thousand
bucks because nobody wanted the headaches. I just wish I had bought a few
dozen of them an stored them in the back of my hangar! :-) I did meet one
older gentleman down in Louisiana who had thirty Stearman trainers brand new
in the crate stored in the back of his hangar. He said whenever he needs a
little extra money he puts one together and sells it. Since that was back
in the sixties, I doubt that any of them are left in the hangar. He was in
his sixties then as well and may not need extra money anymore!

Highflyer
Highflight Aviation Services
Pinckneyville Airport ( PJY )

On Thu, 7 Apr 2005 16:36:28 -0500, "Highflyer" wrote:

I can remember when you could buy a surplus fighter for a couple of thousand
bucks because nobody wanted the headaches. I just wish I had bought a few
dozen of them an stored them in the back of my hangar! :-)

Dunno, HF...I've *seen* your hangar. Sure there ain't a couple of P-40s stashed
in back? :-)

Ron Wanttaja

"Ron Wanttaja" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 7 Apr 2005 16:36:28 -0500, "Highflyer" wrote:

I can remember when you could buy a surplus fighter for a couple of
thousand
bucks because nobody wanted the headaches. I just wish I had bought a few
dozen of them an stored them in the back of my hangar! :-)

Dunno, HF...I've *seen* your hangar. Sure there ain't a couple of P-40s
stashed
in back? :-)

Ron Wanttaja

No P-40s Ron. However, there ARE a couple of Vultees. :-/ Back behind the
Stinson and the Pietenpol and the Cavalier and the Apache. It is getting
crowded in there. One of these days I will get ALL of them together and
flying. Then I WILL have a parking problem! :-)

Highflyer
Highflight Aviation Services
Pinckneyville Airport ( PJY )