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 |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
airworthiness certificate
Thanks for the explanation, I was curious since the gliders mentioned in the thread 304, Kestrel and Discus 2, after manufacture certification do not any further testing in Europe, just the usual annual with ARC (Airworthiness Review Certificate) which is a document check, and any mandatory inspection. Vernon At 22:25 10 February 2017, Del Jensen wrote: Vernon, From AC No: 20-27G: "14. Phase I Flight Testing. a. Flight Tests. Section 91.319(b) requires you to show that your aircraft = is controllable at all its normal speeds during all the maneuvers you might= expect to execute. You also need to show that your aircraft has no hazardo= us operating characteristics or design features. b. Number of Flight Test Hours. The number of hours depends on your aircraf= t=E2=80=99s characteristics. See table 7 below for specific requirements. T= he FAA may decide you need additional hours of flight testing beyond those = shown in the table to comply with =C2=A7 91.319(b)." & etc. This is primarily directed at home built, but many gliders in the US are ce= rtified as experimental. I'm not sure why that is so, but I suspect that i= f for some reason the feds revoke your standard certification, is is much e= asier to make mods under the experimental cert (as opposed to the standard = cert) in order to get your machine back up in the air. Just changing out y= our variometer for something new can invalidate your certificate if the fac= tory originally stipulated a particular vario. As to what kind of mods can require you to redo phase I and II, I get the i= mpression that it is up to the local FSDO, who acts as the regional interpr= eter of the federal regs. Del |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
airworthiness certificate
Question: If a glider is imported into the US prior to the FAA issues a standard airworthiness cert to the manufacture for the type, is that glider experimental and will always be experimental or can it be shown that the glider is the same type? Or say if a manufacture makes a glider in say 1975 and then the FAA issues a standard type cert in 1976 to the manufacture for that type glider and then a 1975 glider is imported into the US; could that glider be grandfathered under the standard type even though it was manufactured prior to the standard cert issued?
|
#23
|
|||
|
|||
airworthiness certificate
My Stemme was imported into Mexico when new. The model has a US type
certificate. When I brought it into the USA, I had to have a DAR perform a conformity check and issue a US Standard Airworthiness Certificate. On 2/10/2017 4:57 PM, Casey wrote: Question: If a glider is imported into the US prior to the FAA issues a standard airworthiness cert to the manufacture for the type, is that glider experimental and will always be experimental or can it be shown that the glider is the same type? Or say if a manufacture makes a glider in say 1975 and then the FAA issues a standard type cert in 1976 to the manufacture for that type glider and then a 1975 glider is imported into the US; could that glider be grandfathered under the standard type even though it was manufactured prior to the standard cert issued? -- Dan, 5J |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
airworthiness certificate
At 23:57 10 February 2017, Casey wrote:
Question: If a glider is imported into the US prior to the FAA issues a st= andard airworthiness cert to the manufacture for the type, is that glider e= xperimental and will always be experimental or can it be shown that the gli= der is the same type? Or say if a manufacture makes a glider in say 1975 a= nd then the FAA issues a standard type cert in 1976 to the manufacture for = that type glider and then a 1975 glider is imported into the US; could that= glider be grandfathered under the standard type even though it was manufac= tured prior to the standard cert issued? Casey, I have had a number of gliders which fit your question. All of them were early serial numbers in their production run. The JAR 22 reciprocal certification process takes time to make it's way through all of the bi-lateral red tape, so the first bunch of new design gliders when imported to the USA are usually given Experimental Airworthiness Certificates. The understanding is that usually, when the JAR 22 reciprocal approvals are finalized, the owner can then get the Airworthiness Certificate changed from Experimental to Standard if so desired. I made the change on one of the gliders I had before I sold it, but the others, I just left Experimental. My present Discus-2b is serial number 50, and was built in 1999. The reciprocal Standard Airworthiness was not granted until the USA FAA issued TCDS (Type Certificate Data Sheet) G17CE in 2003. Under the "Import Requirements" in the TCDS, it specifically lists the serial numbers of the gliders that are grandfathered to be eligible for a certificate change from Experimental to Standard, provided the glider still meets the TCDS (no modifications outside of those the factory approves) and has had all AD's and TN's complied with. I have not opted to change my D-2's certificate yet, but my local FAA MIDO has checked everything, and has advised me that they can easily do it for me in conjunction with an annual inspection, should I so desire to have it done. So, the bottom line is to check the USA FAA TCDS for the glider in question. If you find that the serial number is listed in the TCDS as grandfathered, then (unless there have been major non-factory authorized modifications) it most probably can be changed to a Standard certificate. If the serial number is not grandfathered, then my FAA MIDO says that the chances of getting a Standard certificate issued in place of an Experimental one are not very good at all....basically slim to none.... See the FAA website for a TCDS search: http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Gu.../rgMakeModel.n sf/Frameset?OpenPage RO |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
airworthiness certificate
On 2/10/2017 4:57 PM, Casey wrote:
Question: If a glider is imported into the US prior to the FAA issues a standard airworthiness cert to the manufacture for the type, is that glider experimental and will always be experimental or can it be shown that the glider is the same type? Or say if a manufacture makes a glider in say 1975 and then the FAA issues a standard type cert in 1976 to the manufacture for that type glider and then a 1975 glider is imported into the US; could that glider be grandfathered under the standard type even though it was manufactured prior to the standard cert issued? The answer to Q1 is, any glider imported into the U.S. prior to the FAA jumping through their own paper hoops designed to ultimately-via-reciprocity-agreement recognizing the country-of-origin's "approved type certificate" (exact verbiage dependent upon country of origin), will be granted some form of "Experimental" airworthiness certificate. It likely will be, "Experimental, Factory-Built, Exhibition and Racing." The "importation certification" will remain in force until the owner of said glider takes it upon him/herself to "upgrade" to an ATC (once "reciprocal recognition" occurs). This is common with (e.g.) gliders of German origin. Using the ubiquitous ASW-20 as an example, I wouldn't bet my life on there not being a number of such ships in the U.S. still registered as "Experimental" despite a "reciprocal-ATC" almost certainly (so I presume) having been granted decades ago. FAA "reciprocal-ATC-issuance" does not happen coincident with the country of origin's issuing their equivalent of an ATC; so far as I'm aware there's always been a paperwork-related (not U.S.-based, testing-related) delay. I don't know the answer to Q2, though I would *guess* that any ship capable of being shown to the FAA's satisfaction as meeting the design criteria associated with that ship's ATC would be eligible for a "reciprocal-ATC." In any event, Joe Owner of such a ship is pretty much guaranteed at least a minor adventure in interfacing with (FSDO/FAA), and, paperwork. Somewhat tangentially, there may be some RASidents unaware the FAA has multiple "Experimental" buckets. Five, sez ancient recall. Common in the general aviation arena is "Experimental, Amateur Built." My HP-14 was in that category. My C-70 and Zuni were registered "Experimental, Factory Built, Exhibition and Racing." I can't offhand remember the exact wording, but there's also an Experimental bucket used by manufacturers (e.g. Cessna) when they do development work, while the remaining Experimental buckets presently aren't coming to mind. Over the decades, the FAA's view on owners moving ATC-registered gliders into an "Experimental" bucket (for whatever reason) has varied, unsurprisingly tending (so I've been reliably, though not-recently, told) toward being less willing. Hearsay suggests they presently won't let Joe Owner make such a change simply "because J.O. wants to," though if you want to (say) develop your own self-launching option, a "type-certificate-related mechanism" to do so still exists. Bob W. |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
airworthiness certificate
At 03:34 11 February 2017, Bob Whelan wrote:
On 2/10/2017 4:57 PM, Casey wrote: Question: If a glider is imported into the US prior to the FAA issues a standard airworthiness cert to the manufacture for the type, is that glider experimental and will always be experimental or can it be shown that the glider is the same type? Or say if a manufacture makes a glider in say 1975 and then the FAA issues a standard type cert in 1976 to the manufacture for that type glider and then a 1975 glider is imported into the US; could that glider be grandfathered under the standard type even though it was manufactured prior to the standard cert issued? Using the ubiquitous ASW-20 as an example, I wouldn't bet my life on there not being a number of such ships in the U.S. still registered as "Experimental" Bob, If you look up the FAA TCDS website, you will find that there is no TCDS for the ASW-20, so all will still be registered as Experimental in the USA. That paperwork was never done. I also had the specific discussion with one of our local FAA MIDO inspectors about getting a Standard certificate issued after an Experimental one was already in place. His view was that if the glider was not grandfathered in the TCDS, the FAA would assume that the importer had been trying to "back door" the established system by not going through the proper procedures (ie Export C of A, etc), and therefore the FAA would be extremely reluctant to allow that aircraft a status change from Experimental to Standard. If the aircraft happened to come through a "3rd country" (exported from country of manufacture to another country, before being exported from the second country to the USA), then it depends on if the USA FAA has a reciprocal 3rd country licensing agreement with that specific country. If so, one can get a 3rd country Export C of A, and then get a USA Standard C of A. If there is no 3rd country reciprocal agreement, then the options upon USA entry are (like Dan) to hire a DAR and have a thorough condition inspection done for a Standard certificate, or just slap an Experimental certificate on it. Once the experimental certificate goes on though, it will be nigh on impossible to change it to Standard later. RO |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
airworthiness certificate
If there is no 3rd country
reciprocal agreement, then the options upon USA entry are (like Dan) to hire a DAR and have a thorough condition inspection done for a Standard certificate, or just slap an Experimental certificate on it TYPO... Conformity inspection - which is much more exhaustive than the annual Experimental Condition inspection. RO |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
airworthiness certificate
On 2/11/2017 7:00 AM, Michael Opitz wrote:
At 03:34 11 February 2017, Bob Whelan wrote: Snip... Using the ubiquitous ASW-20 as an example, I wouldn't bet my life on there not being a number of such ships in the U.S. still registered as "Experimental" Bob, If you look up the FAA TCDS website, you will find that there is no TCDS for the ASW-20, so all will still be registered as Experimental in the USA. That paperwork was never done. I also had the specific discussion with one of our local FAA MIDO inspectors about getting a Standard certificate issued after an Experimental one was already in place. His view was that if the glider was not grandfathered in the TCDS, the FAA would assume that the importer had been trying to "back door" the established system by not going through the proper procedures (ie Export C of A, etc), and therefore the FAA would be extremely reluctant to allow that aircraft a status change from Experimental to Standard. If the aircraft happened to come through a "3rd country" (exported from country of manufacture to another country, before being exported from the second country to the USA), then it depends on if the USA FAA has a reciprocal 3rd country licensing agreement with that specific country. If so, one can get a 3rd country Export C of A, and then get a USA Standard C of A. If there is no 3rd country reciprocal agreement, then the options upon USA entry are (like Dan) to hire a DAR and have a thorough condition inspection done for a Standard certificate, or just slap an Experimental certificate on it. Once the experimental certificate goes on though, it will be nigh on impossible to change it to Standard later. RO Thanks for correcting and clarifying things, Mike. Obviously, I had no idea the "dirt common" ASW 20 had never received a U.S. ATC/TCDS. Despite the largely post-Sacramento-tragedy-associated creation of Experimental-category-related operating limitations hoops through which owners must now jump, I remain a fan of the Experimental registration approach to airworthiness certification. Kinda-sorta related to this thread's topic, I neglected to mention in my previous post there are significant category-related operating restriction differences between the various Experimental categories...point being that "Experimental registration" is far from a universal catchall. By way of emphasizing this point, the operating restrictions of (say) an unlimited category Reno racer are quite different (more restrictive) than those of today's average "Exhibition, Factory-Built, Exhibition and Racing" sailplane, which in turn are quite different (more onerous in a paperwork sense, in my view) than those of my 1981- registered same-category Zuni. Bob W. |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
airworthiness certificate
today's average "Exhibition, Factory-Built, Exhibition and Racing"
sailplane, which in turn are quite different (more onerous in a paperwork sense, in my view) than those of my 1981- registered same-category Zuni. Bob, I just send out a letter to our local FAA office early every year detailing which contests I might fly, and where they will be located during the upcoming season. Then, I list all of the local area sites I might fly out of and state that training for the upcoming contests may occur at any of these sites. After the dates of the last contest of the year, the training will be for contests occurring in the next year's time frame. I have the master copy of this letter in my PC, and I just change the contest locations and dates to match on a yearly basis. It doesn't take up much of my time at all to do this and send it to my local FAA MIDO, so it has just been convenient to keep the glider in Experimental registry for now. RO |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
airworthiness certificate
On my program letter, I write 'TBD' for activities, and 'US Territories' for areas of operation.
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
FAA Revoking Standard Airworthiness Certificate DG-505 | NG | Soaring | 32 | February 16th 17 02:23 PM |
Export certificate of airworthiness | Greg Arnold[_2_] | Soaring | 2 | December 27th 10 06:10 AM |
Airworthiness Certificate Replacement? | [email protected] | Soaring | 6 | June 26th 08 07:11 PM |
USA Glider Experimental Airworthiness Certificate | charlie foxtrot | Soaring | 4 | April 15th 06 05:04 AM |
Exhibition/Racing Airworthiness Certificate Question | bsquared | Soaring | 5 | June 22nd 04 06:24 PM |