Experimental/Exhibition

Is there anyone here who has gone through the process of getting an
airworthiness certificate for a homebuilt aircraft as an experimental,
exhibition in group IV? I'd like to compare notes with someone who has
already done it. I had no idea what was involved when I went into it. Heck
of a way to learn... Mine's a turbine aircraft but I just want to compare
notes regardless of the type of aircraft.

On Wed, 29 Dec 2004 22:08:13 -0400, "Juan Jimenez" wrote:

Is there anyone here who has gone through the process of getting an
airworthiness certificate for a homebuilt aircraft as an experimental,
exhibition in group IV? I'd like to compare notes with someone who has
already done it. I had no idea what was involved when I went into it. Heck
of a way to learn... Mine's a turbine aircraft but I just want to compare
notes regardless of the type of aircraft.

Jim Pratt might be able to give you some help. He's got a sample of Exp/Exhib
operations limitations:

http://www.provide.net/~pratt1/ambuilt/exhibyak.htm

It's for a Group I, but I suspect he should be able to help on a IV. His web
page shows his email as [his last

Ron Wanttaja

Thanks. I have already been shown my draft operating limitations, and
they're pretty much the same as his, except that I may be required to do
more test flight hours (way above the guidelines, which I have already told
them I object to). What I really want to talk about with someone who has
already gone through this is what the FSDO folks asked for during the
process, what roadblocks people have run into and how they were surmounted,
etc. For example, 8130.2F says that you must provide a letter stating all
air shows and other exhibition activities, including "static displays" in
which the aircraft will participate, and lists the letter as a mandatory
requirement. However, it doesn't say what happens when no plans have yet
been made to attend any exhibition activities. Also, 8130.2F mentions
homebuilt aircraft only in passing as virtually a sidebar in the Group IV
definition, but the rest of the document pretty much assumes the aircraft
was not homebuilt. In particular, it would be great to find someone who went
through the wringer with a homebuilt aircraft that someone else built, or
even better, a foreign amateur-built aircraft that was imported to the US
(yes, I know, kinda like trying to find that proverbial left-handed albino
lesbian dentist who voted for Bush.... but I don't lose anything by asking
if someone knows anyone else that's already been through what I have been
going through since _June_, believe it or not.

"Ron Wanttaja" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 29 Dec 2004 22:08:13 -0400, "Juan Jimenez"
wrote:

Is there anyone here who has gone through the process of getting an
airworthiness certificate for a homebuilt aircraft as an experimental,
exhibition in group IV? I'd like to compare notes with someone who has
already done it. I had no idea what was involved when I went into it. Heck
of a way to learn... Mine's a turbine aircraft but I just want to compare
notes regardless of the type of aircraft.

Jim Pratt might be able to give you some help. He's got a sample of
Exp/Exhib
operations limitations:

http://www.provide.net/~pratt1/ambuilt/exhibyak.htm

It's for a Group I, but I suspect he should be able to help on a IV. His
web
page shows his email as [his last

Ron Wanttaja

On Thu, 30 Dec 2004 08:38:48 -0400, "Juan Jimenez" wrote:
"Ron Wanttaja" wrote in message
.. .
On Wed, 29 Dec 2004 22:08:13 -0400, "Juan Jimenez"
wrote:

Is there anyone here who has gone through the process of getting an
airworthiness certificate for a homebuilt aircraft as an experimental,
exhibition in group IV?

Jim Pratt might be able to give you some help. He's got a sample of
Exp/Exhib operations limitations:

Thanks. I have already been shown my draft operating limitations, and
they're pretty much the same as his, except that I may be required to do
more test flight hours (way above the guidelines, which I have already told
them I object to). What I really want to talk about with someone who has
already gone through this is what the FSDO folks asked for during the
process, what roadblocks people have run into and how they were surmounted,
etc.

I flipped through my registration database and came up with three BD-5s with
Experimental/Exhibition licensing. The only names actually listed were Michael
Watkins of Temecula, CA, and Dave "Hammer" Harris, a fellow Seattle-area EAAer.
I've got an email address for Harris, if you haven't talked to him already.

Another possibility would be Classic Fighter Industries in Everett,
Washington... they're the folks scratch-building the ME-262s. Dave Hammer (no,
NOT the same guy as "Hammer" Harris) is in charge. The outfit has a "contact"
page at:

http://www.stormbirds.com/project/common/contact.htm

I also took a general look at all the Experimental/Exhibition category aircraft.
Homebuilt types popped up to some extent. Several of the recent Wright Flyer
replicas are in this category, 'though I suspect the owners didn't worry about
trying to get loose limitations. The Europa folks had three Exp/Exh planes;
maybe there's still someone you can talk to at Lakeland.

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

Ron Wanttaja

"Ron Wanttaja" wrote in message
...

I flipped through my registration database and came up with three BD-5s
with
Experimental/Exhibition licensing. The only names actually listed were
Michael
Watkins of Temecula, CA, and Dave "Hammer" Harris, a fellow Seattle-area
EAAer.
I've got an email address for Harris, if you haven't talked to him
already.

I know Dave, and I've talked extensively with Bob Bishop, whose panel
upgrade I designed for all three of his -5J's. He did his airworthiness
years ago, though, and things have changed. He's been a lot of help for some
key issues, though.

Another possibility would be Classic Fighter Industries in Everett,
Washington... they're the folks scratch-building the ME-262s. Dave Hammer
(no,
NOT the same guy as "Hammer" Harris) is in charge. The outfit has a
"contact"
page at:

http://www.stormbirds.com/project/common/contact.htm

Hmm... now there's an interesting idea. I think I will contact them.

I also took a general look at all the Experimental/Exhibition category
aircraft.
Homebuilt types popped up to some extent. Several of the recent Wright
Flyer
replicas are in this category, 'though I suspect the owners didn't worry
about
trying to get loose limitations. The Europa folks had three Exp/Exh
planes;
maybe there's still someone you can talk to at Lakeland.

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.

Juan

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

How far have you explored the possibility of getting Experimental Amateur-Built
with your DAR? Could you get a letter from the Aussie builder, where he attests
that he did the original work for recreation/education? How much was actually
done when you received it? If I recall your past postings, it sounds like you
did most of the engine installation work, which probably will impress the FAA
guy. ISTR that you did a lot of rework of some rather odd practices by the
original builder, as well.

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.

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

Ron Wanttaja

Earlier, Juan Jimenez wrote:

...For example, 8130.2F says that you
must provide a letter stating all air
shows and other exhibition activities,
including "static displays" in which
the aircraft will participate, and
lists the letter as a mandatory
requirement. However, it doesn't say
what happens when no plans have yet
been made to attend any exhibition
activities...

Ah, the infamous "program letter." My suggestion would be to talk to
the kinds of people who routinely file program letters and have no
problems with them at all: competition sailplane pilots. There are
probably more than a thousand European competition sailplanes in the US
being operated on Experimental/Exhibition or Experimental/Racing
certificates, and I've heard of very few complaints about their
operating limitations or program letters.

I think that the most common approach is to include on the program
letter any contest or event that you might possibly attend, and then
add some extra verbiage about proficiency flights.

If you search rec.aviation.soaring on the phrase "program letter"
you'll find a lot of general advice, but probably few concrete examples
of complete program letters.

Thanks, and best regards to all
Bob K.
http://www.hpaircraft.com/hp-24

"Bob K." wrote in message
ups.com...
Earlier, Juan Jimenez wrote:

...For example, 8130.2F says that you
must provide a letter stating all air
shows and other exhibition activities,
including "static displays" in which
the aircraft will participate, and
lists the letter as a mandatory
requirement. However, it doesn't say
what happens when no plans have yet
been made to attend any exhibition
activities...

Ah, the infamous "program letter." My suggestion would be to talk to
the kinds of people who routinely file program letters and have no
problems with them at all: competition sailplane pilots. There are
probably more than a thousand European competition sailplanes in the US
being operated on Experimental/Exhibition or Experimental/Racing
certificates, and I've heard of very few complaints about their
operating limitations or program letters.

Interesting, I hadn't thought of that. I will look into that. Thanks!

I think that the most common approach is to include on the program
letter any contest or event that you might possibly attend, and then
add some extra verbiage about proficiency flights.

Kinda hard to do that when you're sitting on an island in the Caribbean more
than 1k miles from the nearest airshow, and the plane doesn't have anywhere
near the range to get there.

If you search rec.aviation.soaring on the phrase "program letter"
you'll find a lot of general advice, but probably few concrete examples
of complete program letters.

I think what I will do is state that I have no plans as of yet to attend any
specific airshows because there are none on the island, but I am pursuing
sponsors, will do static displays and perhaps some solo flybys over the
beach to entertain people.

Thanks, and best regards to all
Bob K.
http://www.hpaircraft.com/hp-24

Thanks for your help!

Juan

I fly a racing sailplane under Exp/Exh and it has not been a problem at all.
Actually, this is the second glider I have owned that is Exp/Exh. The first
one was built in the early '80's and was very generous WRT operating
limitations. The current one, bought new in 2001, was still pretty lenient
WRT operating limitations. This was after the fall of the Soviet bloc and
the importing of military aircraft had become a bit of a problem, making the
FAA more nervous.

The FSDO came out to the local airport to look at the aircraft and its
paperwork. My partner and I gave him our program letter stating the events
that we _PLANNED_ to attend. We listed our bases of operation (all the
gliderports in three states that we might ever fly out of). He offered us a
flight radius of 300 nm from our 'bases'. We countered that we would be
attempting SSA badge and record flights that may go father than that
regularly and were able to get the radius increased to 500 nm. He told us
that if we wanted to fly from other bases or farther than the 500 mile
radius that we could fax a note to the FSDO explaining what we were planning
to do.

The only part of our Exp/Exh certificate that could be much of much concern
is the prohibition from flying over congested areas.

We are able to do all the repairs and minor modifications to the aircraft
that we wish. We need an A&P to sign off the annual condition inspection.

For single seat aircraft that will not be flown over urban areas, Exp/Exh is
a good way to go. Our insurance company has been fine with it, too. For
more than one seat or flying in and out of large airports in big cities you
may have a problem. Insurance companies may have a problem with it , too.
Experimental/amateur built would of course be better, if it is possible.

Juan, I think the source of your problem is a turbine engine. The FAA
relates turbine Exp/Exh to Mig 15/17's and a F-86 burning in a ice cream
parlor. Make sure that you understand the meaning of "conservative" when
you deal with them.
-Bob Korves

"Juan Jimenez" wrote in message
...

"Bob K." wrote in message
ups.com...
Earlier, Juan Jimenez wrote:

...For example, 8130.2F says that you
must provide a letter stating all air
shows and other exhibition activities,
including "static displays" in which
the aircraft will participate, and
lists the letter as a mandatory
requirement. However, it doesn't say
what happens when no plans have yet
been made to attend any exhibition
activities...

Ah, the infamous "program letter." My suggestion would be to talk to
the kinds of people who routinely file program letters and have no
problems with them at all: competition sailplane pilots. There are
probably more than a thousand European competition sailplanes in the US
being operated on Experimental/Exhibition or Experimental/Racing
certificates, and I've heard of very few complaints about their
operating limitations or program letters.

Interesting, I hadn't thought of that. I will look into that. Thanks!

I think that the most common approach is to include on the program
letter any contest or event that you might possibly attend, and then
add some extra verbiage about proficiency flights.

Kinda hard to do that when you're sitting on an island in the Caribbean
more
than 1k miles from the nearest airshow, and the plane doesn't have
anywhere
near the range to get there.

If you search rec.aviation.soaring on the phrase "program letter"
you'll find a lot of general advice, but probably few concrete examples
of complete program letters.

I think what I will do is state that I have no plans as of yet to attend
any
specific airshows because there are none on the island, but I am pursuing
sponsors, will do static displays and perhaps some solo flybys over the
beach to entertain people.

Thanks, and best regards to all
Bob K.
http://www.hpaircraft.com/hp-24

Thanks for your help!

Juan