![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Well, as someone else pointed out, at least in America, you might have
trouble with this approach - because you didn't MAKE those parts. They were made by a manufacturer who was not making KIT parts, but certified aircraft. ***I can't see where the trouble would be regarding the "- because you didn't MAKE those parts" as if you would tear down the entire aircraft and just have a pile of pre-punched sheets of aluminium, is the same a a kit supplied by a kit manufacturer. It is identical. In the kit or quickbuild -I didn't make those parts either. Rob. "cavelamb" wrote in message m... Fonz wrote: I find that amazing. If you totally disassembled the aircraft, cleaned all parts/fittings etc back to bare aluminium, recoated with zinc-chromate or whatever, photographed it as evidence, it is basically a kit. It wouldn't even be a quickbuild, and would come in at over 75% or higher. I can't see how anyone could challenge it, as the aircraft is constructed by the builder from parts, for his own education or enjoyment, to a proven design. Even in Australia, CASA seem to have a mind of their own, making their own rules, and not being challenged. I believe things are generally OK so far as the SAAA basically monitor everything. As part of my previous occupation I was involved in the legal system (I'm not a defence lawyer by the way, but rather the other side of the fence), and I believe it would be a very short hearing in the lower court, but winning that battle doesn't mean you'll win the war. I think I'm starting to answer my own original question here. Is there anyone from the SAAA technical side of the fence that would like to share an opinion? Any annon reply would also be taken in good faith. Thanks in advance, Rob. Melbourne Australia. Well, as someone else pointed out, at least in America, you might have trouble with this approach - because you didn't MAKE those parts. They were made by a manufacturer who was not making KIT parts, but certified aircraft. YMMV in other countries? |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
World's First Certified Electrically Propelled Aircraft? | Larry Dighera | Piloting | 2 | September 22nd 06 01:50 AM |
Web Seminar: The FAA Has Certified the Adam Aircraft A500 | Valerie L Magee | Piloting | 0 | June 1st 05 03:36 PM |
Web Seminar: The FAA Has Certified the Adam Aircraft A500 | Valerie L Magee | General Aviation | 0 | June 1st 05 03:36 PM |
Web Seminar: The FAA Has Certified the Adam Aircraft A500 | Valerie L Magee | Owning | 0 | June 1st 05 03:36 PM |
Accident Statistics: Certified vs. Non-Certified Engines | Ron Wanttaja | Home Built | 23 | January 18th 04 05:36 PM |