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?