REFLECTOR: New vs. Old Operating Limitations

[Scott Derrick]

this is almost the exact wording in my new OL regarding a major change.

It was easy to get my old OL updated. Took one phone call to the local 
FSDO.  It was actually a pleasant experience.  On the phone the 
inspector said he would not be inspecting my plane like I was getting 
the original OL but he might want to verify it had all the placards and 
wanted to see my AROW documents.

He never even looked at the plane before having me read the new OL and 
agree it was what "I" wanted.  Then he signed  them and  I gave him my 
old  one which he  said would be  filed  locally.   Then he said,  "OK,  
I'm done  being the FAA inspector, I'm on my lunch break and would love 
to  see your Velocity,  as a prospective homebuilder!"

We looked, poked and gabbed for over an hour.  He was salivating over 
the RV series..

no problemo.

I was under the impression that the FAA went back on their word to the 
EAA and resurrected some of the old requirements  when issuing  new OL's 
now, as  evidenced by order  81302e.  Supposedly they are  in the 
process of  emending that wording again back to the wording described 
below.  Who knows when it will be official. You can always  call your 
FSDO and talk to the inspector that handles homebuilts.  Some times 
you'll get good guys and bad guys in the same FSDO so if you can scout 
around for the most reasonable one its a good idea.

Scott


Chuck Harbert wrote:
> Guys, I'm not very good at the regs, but I know a builder (Cozy) who 
> is, and he told me that the Operating Limitations covers this 
> situation (see below). My original OL didn't come with this new clause 
> #15 (in 2000), but I'm hopingto have it amended to the new wording 
> http://4dw.net/marcborom/AirworthinessAmended_2000.htm, so I don't 
> have to get the FAA involved when I make a major change.
>
>
>
> I'm suppose to send in a request for this OL change of wording. My old 
> wording required that I advise the FAA of the major change (per 14CFR 
> 21.93) and get concurrence for the proposed test area. Sometimes  they 
> might want to come out and inspect the change.
>
> Has anyone else had their original OL amended to the new wording?
>
>
>
> 15.       After incorporating a major change as described in §2.93, 
> the aircraft owner is required to re-establish compliance with 
> §91.319(b). All operations will be conducted VFR, day only, in a 
> sparsely populated area. The aircraft must remain in flight test for a 
> minimum of 5 hours. Persons non-essential to the flight shall not be 
> carried. The aircraft owner shall make a detailed log book entry 
> describing the change prior to the test flight. Following satisfactory 
> completion of the required number of flight hours in the flight test 
> area, the pilot shall certify in the records that the aircraft has 
> been shown to comply with §91 .319(b). Compliance with §91.319(b) 
> shall be recorded in the aircraft records with the following or a 
> similarly worded statement: "I certify that the prescribed flight test 
> hours have been completed and the aircraft is controllable throughout 
> its normal range of speeds and throughout all maneuvers to be 
> executed, has no hazardous operating characteristics or design 
> features, and is safe for operation. The following aircraft operating 
> data has been demonstrated during the flight testing:
>
> Vso________, Vx_________, and Vy________, and
>
> the weight________,
>
> and CG location ________at which they were obtained."
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
>
>