Non certified engines.

Quite a few Rotax engines are water cooled, and some of those are
certificated.

FAA rules stipulate that a homebuilt must complete a 40 hours testing
phase before it can be operated as a "normal" airplane. Before you can
even begin that it has to be approved by an FAA inspector who will
confirm that it's airworthy.

So if you can do that, it does't matter if you want an "airplane", car,
motorcycle, lawnmower, or boat engine powering it. If it will fly and
fly safely, then you're good to go.

Personally, I'll be using a Corvair auto conversion in my project when
the time comes.

Michael Gaskins
Stuart Grey wrote:
Okay, I don't know diddly; I've just caught the airplane bug. So, I'm
asking...

My buddy went out and spent multi tens of thousands of dollars on an
airplane engine. Lycoming, I think it was. Seems kinda pricy, but I
understand that most of that cost is testing, no iron.

I note that there was a lot of talk in the newsgroup and some books out
on Amazon.com on using non-certified engines.

How wise is that? The FAA really allows that, huh? If I had a noose in a
tree, and called it an experimental airplane, would the FAA let me fly
it? Probably not if the nose was over a populated area, huh? Just wondering.

VW engines are mentioned, I suspect because water cooled engines would
be too heavy for small airplanes, and it would introduce additional
cooling failure modes.

I guess I'm not smart enough to even know what questions to ask. So,
please discuss engines, so I can read the thread.

Is there a FAQ for this newsgroup?

"Mike Gaskins" wrote in message
oups.com...

FAA rules stipulate that a homebuilt must complete a 40 hours testing
phase before it can be operated as a "normal" airplane. Before you can
even begin that it has to be approved by an FAA inspector who will
confirm that it's airworthy.

This is not true. The FAA does not certify airworthiness. The manufacturer
(you) does that. The FAA only checks to see if its requirements are met in
regards to registration, placarding, N numbers, etc.

Rich S.

"Rich S." wrote in message
. ..
"Mike Gaskins" wrote in message
oups.com...

FAA rules stipulate that a homebuilt must complete a 40 hours testing
phase before it can be operated as a "normal" airplane. Before you can
even begin that it has to be approved by an FAA inspector who will
confirm that it's airworthy.

This is not true. The FAA does not certify airworthiness. The manufacturer
(you) does that. The FAA only checks to see if its requirements are met in
regards to registration, placarding, N numbers, etc.

Rich S.


If that is the case then why do they want be to have all of the access ports
open on the aircraft? I ask this because I've not yet been through an
inspection.

"Gig 601XL Builder" wrDOTgiaconaATcox.net wrote in message
...

If that is the case then why do they want be to have all of the access
ports open on the aircraft? I ask this because I've not yet been through
an inspection.

This dates back to the days when they had the budget to allow time for a
proper inspection - and they had the knowledgeable personnel who cared
enough to make one. It is a real shame that there isn't that interaction
between FAA people and the users of the system - the citizens who pay the
taxes. I knew inspectors forty years ago who really cared about such things.

In today's world, here's what happens. The inspector shows up and spends
about five minutes arranging the papers on his clipboard and then carefully
dons his hermetically-sealed FAA ID card on a chain about his neck. He
introduces himself and asks for your paperwork. The next half-hour is spent
verifying that you have crossed your "T"'s and dotted your "I"'s. He will
look at your registrations numbers, measuring their size and judging their
color. He will inspect the data plate (if any) on your engine. He will check
your placards in the cockpit.

Then he fills out your certificate. You ask him if he would like to look in
the inspection hole in your wing, knowing full well the aileron cables are
not safety wired (you're going to do that at the airport during final
assembly). He squats down and looks up under your wing, the inspection hole
a "Black Hole" in the bright sunlight. He says, "Looks good!" and gives you
a beaming smile. He hands you your certificate. He doesn't even know what
safety wire is.

This is the real world of federal bureaucracy. It's not pretty. Perhaps a
DAR inspection is different.

Rich

"Rich S." wrote in message
...
"Gig 601XL Builder" wrDOTgiaconaATcox.net wrote in message
...

If that is the case then why do they want be to have all of the access
ports open on the aircraft? I ask this because I've not yet been through
an inspection.

I forgot - if you have applied for a repairman certificate, he will check
your builder's log and photos for that purpose.

Rich S.

Regarding the data plate on your homebuilt...

When I built my RV-6 the requirement for location of the data plate was
that it be on the empennage and "visible from the ground". Well, I
didn't really want a dataplate detracting from my beautiful paint job so
I put the data plate on the bottom of the empennage.

I had a real honest to goodness FAA inspector check my airplane out for
its certificate and he couldn't find my dataplate on first go around...
so, he asked where it was... I said on the bottom of the empennage and
you'll have to lay on the ground to read it. He went to his book of
regs and found the pertinent paragraph for location of the data plate...
found that I was in compliance with the wording of the regs.

A couple years later, I noticed that the wording for location of the
data plate now read, "visible to a person standing on the ground".

John

Rich S. wrote:
"Gig 601XL Builder" wrDOTgiaconaATcox.net wrote in message
...

If that is the case then why do they want be to have all of the access
ports open on the aircraft? I ask this because I've not yet been through
an inspection.


This dates back to the days when they had the budget to allow time for a
proper inspection - and they had the knowledgeable personnel who cared
enough to make one. It is a real shame that there isn't that interaction
between FAA people and the users of the system - the citizens who pay the
taxes. I knew inspectors forty years ago who really cared about such things.

In today's world, here's what happens. The inspector shows up and spends
about five minutes arranging the papers on his clipboard and then carefully
dons his hermetically-sealed FAA ID card on a chain about his neck. He
introduces himself and asks for your paperwork. The next half-hour is spent
verifying that you have crossed your "T"'s and dotted your "I"'s. He will
look at your registrations numbers, measuring their size and judging their
color. He will inspect the data plate (if any) on your engine. He will check
your placards in the cockpit.

Then he fills out your certificate. You ask him if he would like to look in
the inspection hole in your wing, knowing full well the aileron cables are
not safety wired (you're going to do that at the airport during final
assembly). He squats down and looks up under your wing, the inspection hole
a "Black Hole" in the bright sunlight. He says, "Looks good!" and gives you
a beaming smile. He hands you your certificate. He doesn't even know what
safety wire is.

This is the real world of federal bureaucracy. It's not pretty. Perhaps a
DAR inspection is different.

Rich

"Rich S." wrote in message
...

snip


This is the real world of federal bureaucracy. It's not pretty. Perhaps a
DAR inspection is different.

Rich

Not in my experience. Other than the fact that hiring the DAR cost $300....

KB

Mike Gaskins wrote:
Quite a few Rotax engines are water cooled, and some of those are
certificated.

FAA rules stipulate that a homebuilt must complete a 40 hours testing
phase before it can be operated as a "normal" airplane. Before you can
even begin that it has to be approved by an FAA inspector who will
confirm that it's airworthy.

So if you can do that, it does't matter if you want an "airplane", car,
motorcycle, lawnmower, or boat engine powering it. If it will fly and
fly safely, then you're good to go.

Personally, I'll be using a Corvair auto conversion in my project when
the time comes.

Corvair?! Wouldn't that make the engine at least 40 years old? Do you
trust that?

How did you even find such an engine?

Michael Gaskins
Stuart Grey wrote:

Okay, I don't know diddly; I've just caught the airplane bug. So, I'm
asking...

My buddy went out and spent multi tens of thousands of dollars on an
airplane engine. Lycoming, I think it was. Seems kinda pricy, but I
understand that most of that cost is testing, no iron.

I note that there was a lot of talk in the newsgroup and some books out
on Amazon.com on using non-certified engines.

How wise is that? The FAA really allows that, huh? If I had a noose in a
tree, and called it an experimental airplane, would the FAA let me fly
it? Probably not if the nose was over a populated area, huh? Just wondering.

VW engines are mentioned, I suspect because water cooled engines would
be too heavy for small airplanes, and it would introduce additional
cooling failure modes.

I guess I'm not smart enough to even know what questions to ask. So,
please discuss engines, so I can read the thread.

Is there a FAQ for this newsgroup?

So what if it's 40 years old. What do you think an engine out of
a 1960's cessna 150 will be? If it's rebuilt properly it should be a
good engine.

There are plenty of certified engines flying around that are much older
than that (and I would trust those too). Do you think Contintental is
still making A-65's to throw into the Cubs and Champs that so many
people still fly? Given that a Corvair conversion done according to
established plans (by William Wynne) will be completely rebuilt and
with many new/specialized parts, it's largely a new engine. There are
a LOT of them flying in experimentals these days. There have been a
few issues with the crankshafts (no major accidents have resulted from
this), but with nitriding the shaft it should be fine.

As to finding one, as is often pointed out, GM made more (several times
more) Corvair engines back in the 60's than Lycoming has made of any
engine during it's whole history. Finding them is quite easy. The
usually sell for $300 or less. You'll have to dump another $3k or so
into it to get it airworthy though.