REFLECTOR: Aircraft Condition Notice

Tue Mar 7 07:14:11 CST 2006

Andrew,

A while back I went through a similar exercise and spoke with the FSDO.
His take was if the power plant/prop combo didn't change and no flight
surfaces were affected (aileron, rudder, wing) that he saw no reason for
inspection nor an abbreviated test flight program.

If major (as defined above)changes were made, he wasn't even
particularly interested in hearing/seeing that either, though he thought
it prudent that an IA/A&P type guy look at it.  He was less definite
about a new flight test program though he also thought that prudent.

It's an overstatement that the FAA and their inspectors don't care what
Experimentals do, but most see little upside to a high level of
intervention (note, 'most' means both us and the FAA).  The FAA is good
at catching paperwork and niggling items, but rarely are they proficient
at the intense hand-over-hand inspection that a good Flight Advisor or
other party can do for us.

With that said, there is a wide variation between FAA field offices, so
do as much as you feel comfortable and obligated to do.  We will only be
held to the strictest letter of the law in case of an accident---by both
the FAA and insurance company.

Chuck

-----Original Message-----
From: reflector-bounces at tvbf.org [mailto:reflector-bounces at tvbf.org] On
Behalf Of Andrew Ellzey
Sent: Tuesday, March 07, 2006 2:49 AM
To: Velocity Aircraft Owners and Builders list
Subject: Re: REFLECTOR: Aircraft Condition Notice

Ok, I will retract my statement for the need for a 337 and an IA for
return 
to service. I still stand on my statement that a major alteration to
your 
type design as applied for when your experimental airworthiness
certificate 
was issued as defined under FAR 21.93 (prop change) could require
inspection 
by the FAA prior to further flight. The details of the change would need
to 
be reported to the FAA in writing to determine if another inspection
would 
be required. (It would have been easier to use the 337 and IA) See page
4 of 
the attached article from 1997 Sport Aviation (Normal Operation of your 
Amateur-built). This is a very good article that everyone if interested 
should read when they have time. I also found that my copy of the FAR's
has 
had a lot of changes since its printing in 2002. It is also possible
that 
the FAR's have been revised since the publication of this 1997 article,
to 
remove any further need to ever tell the FAA of major alterations to our

experimental aircraft. If so, this is out of character to the FAA as I
know 
it. If you know this for a fact, please state the FAR and I will buy the

latest copy  to verify.

 I just returned from a two day DER Standardization Seminar presented by
the 
FAA, and the key statement that was repeated every day, is that they
retain 
the exclusive rite to determine that you are not endangering the general

public. You can kill yourself but not anyone else.

Transportation Laws Codified at Title 49 United States Code sec. 44701
(a) 
The administrator of the FAA shall promote safe flight of civil aircraft
in 
air commerce by prescribing minimum standards required in the interest
of 
safety for appliances and for the design, material, construction,
quality of 
work, and performance of aircraft, aircraft engines, and propellers.

Andy Ellzey

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Scott Derrick" <scott at tnstaafl.net>
To: "Velocity Aircraft Owners and Builders list" <reflector at tvbf.org>
Sent: Monday, March 06, 2006 9:50 AM
Subject: Re: REFLECTOR: Aircraft Condition Notice

> Andrew Ellzey wrote:
>> I agree, if this prop was approved for operation without safety wire 
>> following the manufactures torque instructions when the aircraft was 
>> given its experimental type certificate, this gives you the
authorization 
>> to continue to use this prop. If however this prop wasn't installed
on 
>> your aircraft at the time of certification, this is considered a
major 
>> alteration and a form 337 with IA return to service would need to be 
>> filed with the FAA. The aircraft would then not be legal to fly until
the 
>> FAA signed copy of the 337 returns. Read Appendix A & B of FAR Part
43.
>>
> Andy,  I think your confusing type certified requirements and
experimental 
> certified requirements.  Form 337 is used "Only" for type certified 
> airplanes, and never for experimental homebuilts.  If you read the
first 
> paragraph of Part 43 it will clarify this for you.
>
> The requirements for a major change in our experimental aircraft are 
> spelled out in your Operating Limitations.  I can emphatically tell
you 
> that in my O/L's I must do two things.
>
> 1.) I as the owner must put my plane back into phase one flight
testing 
> for a period specified by me.  Test the airplane to insure it is still
in 
> a condition for safe operation.
>
> 2.) After completion of #1 above, I as the owner must log the change,
log 
> the phase one testing, state the plane is in a condition for safe 
> operation and now in phase two operating requirements.
>
> I don't fill out a 337, I don't require an AI or A&P.
>
> A homebuilt airplane never requires the use of an IA, ever.  If you
did 
> not build your homebuilt experimental certified airplane,  you will
need 
> an A&P(not an IA) to sign of the yearly inspection. This is not an
annual 
> inspection as required in Part 43, but a yearly inspection as required
in 
> your O/L's
>
> Scott
> _______________________________________________
> To change your email address, visit 
> http://www.tvbf.org/mailman/listinfo/reflector
>
> Visit the gallery!  www.tvbf.org/gallery
> user:pw = tvbf:jamaicangoose
> Check new archives: www.tvbf.org/pipermail
> Check old archives:
http://www.tvbf.org/archives/velocity/maillist.html 