|
"Orval Fairbairn" <orfairbairn@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:orfairbairn-390ADE.23122905062006@news.west.earthlink.net...
> In article <wY5hg.2201$LN1.46@trndny01>,
> "mark" <usenet1958@verizon.net> wrote:
>
>> "JP" <hypercycle1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:7B_gg.247$VW4.189@read3.inet.fi...
>> > The main idea seems to be to build an amateur built aircraft using
>> > MOSTLY
>> > certified aircraft components. Such a project is a kind of balancing
>> > act I
>> > suppose?
>> >
>> > In such a case, you remove the original manufacturer identification
>> > plate.
>> > The process involves other things too. Basicly you have to rename the
>> > plane.
>> >
>> > Here's some information about the matter:
>> >
>> > http://www.v8seabee.com/aircraft_usa_regulations.asp
>> >
>> > Here's the FAA (51% rule) check list.
>> >
>> > http://www.airweb.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgAdvisoryCircular
>> > .nsf/0/3209fec2139ccb3f862569af006ab9e9/$FILE/AC20-139.pdf
>> >
>> > JP
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > "150flivver" <timothywitt@hotmail.com> wrote in
>> > message:1149529705.384038.55660@f6g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>> >> On the AOPA board an individual is rebuilding a Bellanca Viking and
>> >> claims that as long as he can show he rebuilt 51% of the aircraft, he
>> >> can relicense it as a homebuilt experimental. Is this so? Seems like
>> >> all the basket cases that I have seen rebuilt from the ground up are
>> >> still certified as manufactured aircraft. Why wouldn't you see more
>> >> experimental Cessnas, Pipers and such?
>> >>
>> >
>>
>> It also depends on what class of experimental you are seeking. A long
>> time
>> ago they used to have a category called something that allowed you to
>> modify
>> a certificated aircraft with things like different engines, prop wings
>> ect.
>> You could modify pretty much anyway you wanted, but you lost the standard
>> airworthiness. That category of experimental in the US was eliminated
>> many
>> years ago.
>> >
>
> No -- it still exists -- and is called "Experimental-R&D" and carries a
> lot more restrictions than "Experimental-Homebuilt." Basically, it
> carries a set time of validity and requires either going toward a STC or
> restoration to the type-certificated version and carries flight area
> rrestrictions.
Yep R&D still exists, but the time limit makes if very unattractive for many
reasons. It would only be pratical if you are developing a new airplane for
certification or an STC. In the old days it had no time limit.
|
|
Re: Rebuilding to Experimental
