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
|
|||
|
|||
Experimental Catagory: Pros and Cons?
What are the pros and cons of putting my Schweizer glider under the
Experimental Catagory? With recent trouble in getting parts etc., it seems to me that is might make some things easier. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Experimental Catagory: Pros and Cons?
I don't think it's necessary to register an aircraft as experimental in
order to legally owner/manufacture parts for it. There's a section of the FARs that allows for owner built parts. This section allows orphaned classic and antique aircraft to keep flying. bumper wrote in message oups.com... What are the pros and cons of putting my Schweizer glider under the Experimental Catagory? With recent trouble in getting parts etc., it seems to me that is might make some things easier. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Experimental Catagory: Pros and Cons?
I did not think you could take a type certificated aircraft and change
category from standard to experimental. Any "thought" good DAR can certify "home made" parts as suitable and place into service. BT wrote in message oups.com... What are the pros and cons of putting my Schweizer glider under the Experimental Catagory? With recent trouble in getting parts etc., it seems to me that is might make some things easier. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Experimental Catagory: Pros and Cons?
Earlier, wrote:
What are the pros and cons of putting my Schweizer glider under the Experimental Catagory? With recent trouble in getting parts etc., it seems to me that is might make some things easier. First off, realize that there's not one big happy "Experimental" category. FAR 21.191divides Experimental into several sub-categories, each with its own purpose and limitations. A few of the more common ones a Racing and Exhibition - Like it sounds; operation of the aircraft is limited to races, shows, transport to and from said events, and also practice for those events. Fortunately, soaring being what it is, almost every flight can be said to be "practice." Oh - and every year you have to send the FAA a program letter that states what events and practice flights you're going to do (it's easier than it sounds). All ASW-20, Zunis, and Russias (for example) in the US are licensed as either Experimental Racing or Experimental Exhibition. Amateur built - You demonstrate that most of the aircraft was built for the purposes of education and recreation. After that, you get assigned a test period (usually 25 or 40 hours) during which you can only fly it so it drops pieces over sparsely populated areas. If the test period goes well, you receive operating limitations that are pretty much no more restrictive than a certificated glider. You can also get a nifty Repair(perspon)s certificate, unsuitable for framing, that allows you the dubious priviledge of performing your own annual Condition inspections. Research and development - You are testing a prototype aircraft. The FAA looks quite askance at what you're doing unless you're serious about the testing. For all of these Experimental certificate types, the basic ground rules are that you can do any maintenance or repair work yourself, either the repair(person) or an A&P does the annual condition inspection, and you must carry a copy of the Operating Limitations document that says what you can do with the aircraft, and where. Anyhow, if your Schweizer is a two-seater, realize that if you really want to certify it as (for example) Experimental Racing or Experimental Exhibition, the FAA might hand you OpLims that say that only required flight crew members can fly. The way I understand it, that's what has happened to virtually every Antonov AN-2 biplane that has reached the US - a pity; as otherwise they'd make great skydiving jump planes. Furthermore (and this is probably the important paragraph for you), note that buried in the FARs (I think it's 21.303) are rules that allow the owner of a type certificated aircraft to make their own replacement parts for the aircraft. Note that the owner can't install the parts, just make them. That might not sound like much, but it is what keeps many many little puddle-jumping Aeroncas in the air. Here's a neat article by Don Dodge on the topic: http://150cessna.tripod.com/parts.html Also, most of that is from memory; if I've gotten something wrong I hope somebody will chime in with corrections. Thanks, and best regards to all Bob K. http://www.hpaircraft.com/hp-24 |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Experimental Catagory: Pros and Cons?
I put my standard category Salto into experimental
exhibition category a few years ago to be able to fly it at night. I still have to do a 337 for major alterations, but I had some latitude in establishing new operating limitations. In this case I am able to fly at night under certain conditions, which was prohibited under the original certification. I still must comply with ADs, and I have to submit an annual program letter. Certificate changes are done through a MIDO office, not a FSDO. A DAR can do the inspection and paperwork. But then a DAR can inspect and approve the manufactured parts. Bob At 03:30 08 March 2006, Btiz wrote: I did not think you could take a type certificated aircraft and change category from standard to experimental. Any 'thought' good DAR can certify 'home made' parts as suitable and place into service. BT wrote in message roups.com... What are the pros and cons of putting my Schweizer glider under the Experimental Catagory? With recent trouble in getting parts etc., it seems to me that is might make some things easier. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Experimental Catagory: Pros and Cons?
I don't think it's necessary to register an aircraft as experimental in
order to legally owner/manufacture parts for it. There's a section of the FARs that allows for owner built parts. This section allows orphaned classic and antique aircraft to keep flying. The rule is interesting. Owners can make their own replacement parts. But there are guidelines. My friend owns a Funk airplane that had rusty struts. After researching the rules, he learned that in order to manufacture the replacement part, he had to have the blueprints for that part. He could not simply remove the old part and make a copy of the part. He had to locate a place that had the blueprints, then purchase a copy of that part of the blueprint that had that part on it. Once he had that, he could legally make a replacement part. Colin |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Experimental Catagory: Pros and Cons?
Bob, where in the FAR's (or whatever they are really called these days)
does it state the requirement for an annual program letter to be sent to the FAA if your glider is EXPERIMENTAL - RACING AND EXHIBITION? Kirk 66 |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Experimental Catagory: Pros and Cons?
Kirk,
The requirement for me to submit an annual program letter is specified in para 35 of my Operating Limitations. Andy |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Experimental Catagory: Pros and Cons?
I think it changed a few years ago as my 84 Ventus
is Racing and exihibition limited to the 48 continental US states and no program letter, very liberal compared to the later ones that I have seen. At 14:00 08 March 2006, Andy wrote: Kirk, The requirement for me to submit an annual program letter is specified in para 35 of my Operating Limitations. Andy |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Experimental Catagory: Pros and Cons?
Andy,
That's what I thought - my LS6's Operating Limitations does not have any requirement for a program letter, and very liberal limits. So it seems to be up to the local FAA dude to impose program requirements on new gliders. I was curious if any of the new requirements were codified in the "FARs", or were imposed via internal FAA "guidelines". Tom Knauff says he has picked up a contract to train FAA examiners - let's hope he can explain to them that the program letters are pretty much useless. Good thing my Ops limit letter doesn't have an expiration date! Kirk 66 |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Long Tow Rope Pros & Cons | chris | Soaring | 7 | December 10th 03 02:30 PM |
Aluminum vs Fiberglass landing gear - Pro's and cons. | Bart Hull | Home Built | 1 | November 24th 03 02:46 PM |
Aluminum vs Fiberglass landing gear - Pro's and cons. | Bart Hull | Home Built | 0 | November 24th 03 03:52 AM |
Aluminum vs Fiberglass landing gear - Pro's and cons. | Bart D. Hull | Home Built | 0 | November 22nd 03 06:24 AM |
GPS Models -- Pros and Cons | Aviv Hod | Piloting | 22 | July 22nd 03 10:35 PM |