A Call to Arms from Richard VanGrunsven

On Sat, 8 Mar 2008 10:18:02 +0000 (UTC), Bertie the Bunyip 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.

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 cost many millions to certify an airplane. It doesn;'t cost
anything to kit a homebuilt. We're not just talking about RVs here. There
are some major crooks and nutjobs out there selling dreams. Peopkle have
died in them. Now, if you want to build one of these yourself, and you can
build anything you want, BTW, the FAA really only looks to see if it was
put together properly, then off you go and more power to you. That's
experimenting. But to try and sell some of these things as capable
airplanes would be criminal. I think some of the kitplanes around are
crimes against nature as it is, but there ya go..

OK, so the FAA allows these planes under the guise of "experimental" they
certify planes and then there are experimental planes that are as good or
better than the certified planes (not talking engines whose
"certifications" are all over the place).

Is that about right?

If so, 1) where do you find the output which points to "good" kit/plan
planes and 2) what good is the FAA doing (other than restricting the good
builds for market related purposes)?

The RVs could probably be certified pretty easily. A couple of air forces
are even using them as trainers and there have been thousands built, so a
lot of th eR&D is already done.


--
Remove numbers for gmail and for God's sake it ain't "gee" either!

WJRFlyBoy wrote in
:

On Sat, 8 Mar 2008 10:18:02 +0000 (UTC), Bertie the Bunyip 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.

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 cost many millions to certify an airplane. It doesn;'t
cost anything to kit a homebuilt. We're not just talking about RVs
here. There are some major crooks and nutjobs out there selling
dreams. Peopkle have died in them. Now, if you want to build one of
these yourself, and you can build anything you want, BTW, the FAA
really only looks to see if it was put together properly, then off
you go and more power to you. That's experimenting. But to try and
sell some of these things as capable airplanes would be criminal. I
think some of the kitplanes around are crimes against nature as it
is, but there ya go..

OK, so the FAA allows these planes under the guise of "experimental"
they certify planes and then there are experimental planes that are as
good or better than the certified planes (not talking engines whose
"certifications" are all over the place).

Is that about right?

If so, 1) where do you find the output which points to "good" kit/plan
planes and 2) what good is the FAA doing (other than restricting the
good builds for market related purposes)?


The FAA made the rules in the late forties to accomodate guys who wanted
to make little putt putts like Piets and Longsters in their garages. The
rules haven;t changed significantly since then. You can draw out any
kind of airplane powered by any kind of engine you like on the back of a
napkin, go out and get material to build it from anywhere you like. you
can make it out of old beer cans if you like. The design can be as nutty
as you like. You're unlikely to get anything too stupid past them, but
you're pretty much given Carte Blanche in the design and matrials
department. So, you start to build it and then you can decide , before
you've even got a couple of opieces glued togethether you decide you
want to share this marvelous beast with the world. You advertise it on
the net and before you know it people ( crazy ones) are throwing money
at you asking you to build one for them. Lots of people have been burned
in many ways through this sort of activity over the years and there's
nothing to distinguish a VanGruven airplane from one of these things
legally.



Bertie

On Sat, 8 Mar 2008 21:01:53 +0000 (UTC), Bertie the Bunyip wrote:

OK, so the FAA allows these planes under the guise of "experimental"
they certify planes and then there are experimental planes that are as
good or better than the certified planes (not talking engines whose
"certifications" are all over the place).

Is that about right?

If so, 1) where do you find the output which points to "good" kit/plan
planes and 2) what good is the FAA doing (other than restricting the
good builds for market related purposes)?

The FAA made the rules in the late forties to accomodate guys who wanted
to make little putt putts like Piets and Longsters in their garages. The
rules haven;t changed significantly since then. You can draw out any
kind of airplane powered by any kind of engine you like on the back of a
napkin, go out and get material to build it from anywhere you like. you
can make it out of old beer cans if you like. The design can be as nutty
as you like. You're unlikely to get anything too stupid past them, but
you're pretty much given Carte Blanche in the design and matrials
department. So, you start to build it and then you can decide , before
you've even got a couple of opieces glued togethether you decide you
want to share this marvelous beast with the world. You advertise it on
the net and before you know it people ( crazy ones) are throwing money
at you asking you to build one for them. Lots of people have been burned
in many ways through this sort of activity over the years and there's
nothing to distinguish a VanGruven airplane from one of these things
legally.

Bertie

Thx for that.
--
Remove numbers for gmail and for God's sake it ain't "gee" either!