Matronics Email Lists :: View topic - Conversion to Experimental

Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists

Get Email Distribution Too! FAQ Search Memberlist Usergroups Register

Profile Log in to check your private messages Log in

Conversion to Experimental
Goto page 1, 2 Next

Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> AeroElectric-List

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author Message

cjensen(at)dts9000.com
Guest

Posted: Tue Dec 12, 2006 5:12 am Post subject: Conversion to Experimental

In reading about conversion of six-packs and  upgrading panels in older planes, et al, if a person wants to upgrade to a glass  panel, is there a reason more people don't just slap an "Experimental" label on  the certified plane and put in a non-certified panel, such as GRT, TruTrak, et  al.  It's understood that the plane is devalued by making it "Experimental"  but then, the value is also increased with the upgraded panel.  And, with  the difference between a certified glass panel and a very good, but  non-certified glass panel, you can stick the difference ($30,000 - $50,000?) in  your pocket and buy a lot of gas.

  

 Since it doesn't seem to be done by many  people, I must be missing something?

  

 Chuck Jensen 

Do Not  Archive 

  [quote][b]

AV8ORJWC

Joined: 13 Jul 2006
Posts: 1149
Location: Aurora, Oregon "Home of VANS"

Posted: Tue Dec 12, 2006 5:40 am Post subject: Conversion to Experimental

Mike Dennis of Oregon  Aero did exactly that with one of his two Pilatus PC-12s. No small chunk of  change.  Kind of reminds me of Malcolm Forbes corporate jet.  Mike  wanted IR forward looking video.  Almost lives in the plane, growing his  business.  The plane is beautiful and his IA did not have a problem doing  the Annual Inspection on a Certified Aircraft with a Leading Edge electronic  device installed under the "Experimental" tag. At some point the equipment can  come out of the increase in value is greater being back to Certified.   Commercial use is the stumbling block with an "Experimental" tag.

  

 

John Cox 

  



 [quote]         From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com    [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of    Chuck Jensen

Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2006 5:13    AM

To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com

Subject:    Conversion to Experimental

   

   In reading about conversion of six-packs    and upgrading panels in older planes, et al, if a person wants to upgrade to a    glass panel, is there a reason more people don't just slap an "Experimental"    label on the certified plane and put in a non-certified panel, such as GRT,    TruTrak, et al.  It's understood that the plane is devalued by making it    "Experimental" but then, the value is also increased with the upgraded    panel.  And, with the difference between a certified glass panel and a    very good, but non-certified glass panel, you can stick the difference    ($30,000 - $50,000?) in your pocket and buy a lot of gas.

    

   Since it doesn't seem to be done by many    people, I must be missing something?

    

   Chuck Jensen 

Do Not    Archive 

 	  Quote: 	
		  



href="http://www.aeroelectric.com">www.aeroelectric.com

href="http://www.buildersbooks.com">www.buildersbooks.com

href="http://www.kitlog.com">www.kitlog.com

href="http://www.homebuilthelp.com">www.homebuilthelp.com

href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/chref="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List



	
[b]

n395v

Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 450

Posted: Tue Dec 12, 2006 6:01 am Post subject: Re: Conversion to Experimental

All right I am confused.



It is my impression that you can put non certified equipment in a panel if it is not there to replace a required item. It is also my impresion tht this requires a 337?



I am not aware of a reg that allows you to just slap a unit in a plane and tag it experimental.



I also no of no regs that allow you to convert a production plane to experimental with out severe restrictions that would render the plane useless  for most purposes.



Am I incorrect?



Do not archive

_________________
Milt

rtitsworth

Joined: 16 Jan 2006
Posts: 76
Location: Detroit, Mi

Posted: Tue Dec 12, 2006 6:26 am Post subject: Conversion to Experimental

Chuck asked…In reading about conversion of six-packs and upgrading panels in older planes, et al, if a person wants to upgrade to a glass panel, is there a reason more people don't just slap an "Experimental" label on the certified plane and put in a non-certified panel, such as GRT, TruTrak, et al….  

   

Some investigation of the FARs will show that it is not nearly that simple (rather it is nearly impossible).  To begin with, an airplane’s experimental status is granted by the FAA via it’s airworthiness certificate (it is not created by an owner adding an “experimental” label/placard).  Changing an A/W cert is not easy to get the FAA to do.  Furthermore, there are different types of “experimental” airworthiness certificates and rules/limitations that apply to each (such as experimental - amateur built, experimental – research and development, experimental – exhibition, etc.)  For reference, see documents at:   

   

http://www.faa.gov/aircraft/air_cert/airworthiness_certification/sp_awcert/experiment/  

http://www.faa.gov/aircraft/air_cert/airworthiness_certification/sp_awcert/sp_awcert_regs/  

   

In (gross) summary…  

An “experimental amateur built” plane needs to be built for educational and recreational purposes and the builder has to show he/she did more than 51% of the work.  

An “experimental – research and development” airplane is typically limited to test flights (very limited distance and flight conditions).  

An “experimental – exhibition” airplane is typically limited to specific events (i.e. only flight to/from and at pre-specified airshows).  

None of those typically apply and/or are very appealing.  

   

The FAA has two processes that allow alteration of a type certificated aircraft (in addition to the AD process which might mandate it).  The first is a STC (supplemental type certificate which is approval granted to a specific alteration for a specific make/model (usually granted to the manufacturer of the modified part).  The second is the field alteration process (typically called a 337 based on the associated FAA form) which allows owners to have mechanics alter (add avionics, etc) to a type certificated airplane.  337 alterations are approved by the local FAA FSDO (field standards district office).  Ref: http://forms.faa.gov/forms/faa337.pdf  

   

Rick  

   

         

  

From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Chuck Jensen

 Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2006 8:13 AM

 To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com

 Subject: AeroElectric-List: Conversion to Experimental  

  

     

  It's understood that the plane is devalued by making it "Experimental" but then, the value is also increased with the upgraded panel.  And, with the difference between a certified glass panel and a very good, but non-certified glass panel, you can stick the difference ($30,000 - $50,000?) in your pocket and buy a lot of gas.  

    

   

    

Since it doesn't seem to be done by many people, I must be missing something?  

    

   

    

Chuck Jensen 

 Do Not Archive[b] [/b]  

   	  Quote: 	
		    www.aeroelectric.com 	
0 	  Quote: 	
		   	
1 	  Quote: 	
		   	
2 	  Quote: 	
		   	
3 	  Quote: 	
		   	
4 	  Quote: 	
		   	
5 	  Quote: 	
		   	
6 	  Quote: 	
		   	
7 	  Quote: 	
		   	
8 	  Quote: 	
		   	
9 	  Quote: 	
		  	
0 	  Quote: 	
		  	
1 	  Quote: 	
		  	
2 	  Quote: 	
		  	
3 	  Quote: 	
		  	
4 	  Quote: 	
		  	
5

        [quote][b]

pilot4profit(at)sbcglobal
Guest

Posted: Tue Dec 12, 2006 6:29 am Post subject: Conversion to Experimental

I’ve been told by aircraft sales people that a certified aircraft gone experimental is the equivalent of aeronautical leprosy. They say the value is severely impacted, and the aircraft can not be used for any commercial purpose (flight training, aerial photography, SAR, CAP, etc.). In addition, restoring one to certified status is supposed to be tough. Now whether you buy those arguments or not, is up to you, but the FARs are pretty clear about the commercial use thing. It may just be another excuse to say your airplane is worthless so they can steal it from you at a fraction of it’s worth. I don’t trust sales people anymore.  

CS  

         

  

From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Chuck Jensen

 Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2006 8:13 AM

 To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com

 Subject: AeroElectric-List: Conversion to Experimental  

  

     

In reading about conversion of six-packs and upgrading panels in older planes, et al, if a person wants to upgrade to a glass panel, is there a reason more people don't just slap an "Experimental" label on the certified plane and put in a non-certified panel, such as GRT, TruTrak, et al.  It's understood that the plane is devalued by making it "Experimental" but then, the value is also increased with the upgraded panel.  And, with the difference between a certified glass panel and a very good, but non-certified glass panel, you can stick the difference ($30,000 - $50,000?) in your pocket and buy a lot of gas.  

    

   

    

Since it doesn't seem to be done by many people, I must be missing something?  

    

   

    

Chuck Jensen 

 Do Not Archive[b] [/b]  

  [quote] [b]

cjensen(at)dts9000.com
Guest

Posted: Tue Dec 12, 2006 6:41 am Post subject: Conversion to Experimental

Rick,

  

 Oh.  Maybe  that's why its not done more!!  That's kind of a shame.

  

 Chuck Jensen 

Do Not Archive

   

 

 --

oldbob(at)BeechOwners.com
Guest

Posted: Tue Dec 12, 2006 6:44 am Post subject: Conversion to Experimental

Good Morning Milt,



Your interpretation of the rules matches mine.



Having said that, I guess we have to admit that each

Experimental Certification is an individual

negotiation between the applicant and the responsible

FAA inspector who issues the certificate.



The primary exception is for those aircraft which meet

the amateur built sub provision of experimental

certification.



There are other provisions which are somewhat

restrictive that apply to various other special

conditions.



If the rules, as we interpret them, are followed, any

experimental, other than for an amateur built

aircraft, must delineate the conditions under which it

may be operated so as to prove or disprove the

efficacy of the project being experimented with or to

comply with the special operations that are approved.



I have seen a couple of experimentally licensed

aircraft with operating limitations so loose that the

aircraft could be operated almost as freely as one

that had a standard certificate.



It was my personal opinion that those certificates did

not meet the intent of the regulations, but, until

such time that some FAA official felt the same, the

certificate remains in effect.



I am not sure what was meant by the reference to one's

IA. An A&P holding an Inspection Authorization does

NOT have the power to approve experimental operations.

It really does ---- All Depend!



Do we still agree?



Happy Skies, 



Old Bob

AKA

Bob Siegfried

Downers Grove Illinois



--- N395V <n395v(at)hughes.net> wrote:



 	  Quote: 	
		   

 <n395v(at)hughes.net>

 

 All right I am confused.

 

 It is my impression that you can put non certified

 equipment in a panel if it is not there to replace a

 required item. It is also my impresion tht this

 requires a 337?

 

 I am not aware of a reg that allows you to just slap

 a unit in a plane and tag it experimental.

 

 I also no of no regs that allow you to convert a

 production plane to experimental with out severe

 restrictions that would render the plane useless 

 for most purposes.

 

 Am I incorrect?

 

 Do not archive

 

 --------

 Milt

 N395V

 F1 Rocket

 

 

 

 

 Read this topic online here:

 



http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=80992#80992
	


 	  Quote: 	
		   

 

 

 

 

 

 



 Click on

 about

 provided

 www.buildersbooks.com

 Admin.



 browse

 Subscriptions page,

 FAQ,

 http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List

LloydDR(at)wernerco.com
Guest

Posted: Tue Dec 12, 2006 6:56 am Post subject: Conversion to Experimental

He also changed an air  inlet for one of the generators, and is working with Pilatus to get the mod to  everyone. His family lives near 4G1 in PA, so he is out here all the time. A  couple of months ago we had a Lobster flyin. The FBO coordinated it, and Mike  flew the Pilatus to Maine to get the lobsters, at least they had a sweet ride  before they got the boiling pot!

 Dan



   From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com  [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of John  W. Cox

Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2006 8:40 AM

To:  aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com

Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List:  Conversion to Experimental

 

 Mike Dennis of Oregon  Aero did exactly that with one of his two Pilatus PC-12s. No small chunk of  change.  Kind of reminds me of Malcolm Forbes corporate jet.  Mike  wanted IR forward looking video.  Almost lives in the plane, growing his  business.  The plane is beautiful and his IA did not have a problem doing  the Annual Inspection on a Certified Aircraft with a Leading Edge electronic  device installed under the "Experimental" tag. At some point the equipment can  come out of the increase in value is greater being back to Certified.   Commercial use is the stumbling block with an "Experimental" tag.

  

 

John Cox 

  



 [quote]         From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com    [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of    Chuck Jensen

Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2006 5:13    AM

To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com

Subject:    Conversion to Experimental

   

   In reading about conversion of six-packs    and upgrading panels in older planes, et al, if a person wants to upgrade to a    glass panel, is there a reason more people don't just slap an "Experimental"    label on the certified plane and put in a non-certified panel, such as GRT,    TruTrak, et al.  It's understood that the plane is devalued by making it    "Experimental" but then, the value is also increased with the upgraded    panel.  And, with the difference between a certified glass panel and a    very good, but non-certified glass panel, you can stick the difference    ($30,000 - $50,000?) in your pocket and buy a lot of gas.

    

   Since it doesn't seem to be done by many    people, I must be missing something?

    

   Chuck Jensen 

Do Not    Archive 

 	  Quote: 	
		  



href="http://www.aeroelectric.com">www.aeroelectric.com

href="http://www.buildersbooks.com">www.buildersbooks.com

href="http://www.kitlog.com">www.kitlog.com

href="http://www.homebuilthelp.com">www.homebuilthelp.com

href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/chref="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List



	




href="http://www.aeroelectric.com">www.aeroelectric.com

href="http://www.buildersbooks.com">www.buildersbooks.com

href="http://www.kitlog.com">www.kitlog.com

href="http://www.homebuilthelp.com">www.homebuilthelp.com

href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/chref="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List



[b]

nuckollsr(at)cox.net
Guest

Posted: Tue Dec 12, 2006 7:20 am Post subject: Conversion to Experimental

 	  Quote: 	
		  

----------

From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com 

[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Chuck 

Jensen

Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2006 5:13 AM

To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com

Subject: Conversion to Experimental

In reading about conversion of six-packs and upgrading panels in older 

planes, et al, if a person wants to upgrade to a glass panel, is there a 

reason more people don't just slap an "Experimental" label on the 

certified plane and put in a non-certified panel, such as GRT, TruTrak, et 

al.  It's understood that the plane is devalued by making it 

"Experimental" but then, the value is also increased with the upgraded 

panel.  And, with the difference between a certified glass panel and a 

very good, but non-certified glass panel, you can stick the difference 

($30,000 - $50,000?) in your pocket and buy a lot of gas.



Since it doesn't seem to be done by many people, I must be missing something?


	




       Yeah, it's called the FAA. I've placed many an x-ticket

       on a certified ship for the purpose of conducing engineering

       research. But the FAA's stance x-ed TC aircraft for

       the purpose of conducing engineering  tests and the

       airplane cannot be used as a standard TC aircraft until

       restored to certified condition. We have a small fleet

       of experimental aircraft used for research and development

       but these aircraft cannot be used for anything except

       company engineering business.



       The "experimental" tag on OBAM aircraft gives rise to a lot

       of mis-understanding. 99% of the OBAM aircraft flying

       are obviously not experimental but Owner Build and/or

       Maintained. In Canada, you can de-certify an older out-of-

       production aircraft and begin to own, operate, modify and

       maintain it as if it were an RV or Kitfox. These

       aircraft are far from "experimental" in the engineering

       and development sense of the word. The owners are simply

       attempting to breath new life into older airplanes by modernizing

       some of its features.



       Converting an older airplane to a new 6-pack or glass-panel

       configuration is often done by qualified shops under a

       337. The gentleman who initially inquired about this can

       enlist the help of an AI, local flying-fuzz and install any

       new gear and panel arrangements that have been used on

       other aircraft with no more than the usual bureaucratic

       difficulties. It's done all the time.

        Bob . . .

      ---------------------------------------------------------

      < What is so wonderful about scientific truth...is that >

      < the authority which determines whether there can be   >

      < debate or not does not reside in some fraternity of   >

      < scientists; nor is it divine. The authority rests     >

      < with experiment.                                      >

      <                            --Lawrence M. Krauss       >

      ---------------------------------------------------------

LloydDR(at)wernerco.com
Guest

Posted: Tue Dec 12, 2006 7:23 am Post subject: Conversion to Experimental

Yes, you are incorrect, you can take a certified aircraft, and

re-register it from the standard category or whatever  it is in and

designate the entire craft experimental. Then you can do what you want

with it, but you will not hold the repairman's certificate unless you

built it, so you would still need an A&P to do the annual. At least this

is how I understand it from talking with the local FSDO.

Dan Lloyd 



--

Earl_Schroeder(at)juno.co
Guest

Posted: Tue Dec 12, 2006 7:55 am Post subject: Conversion to Experimental

Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:



In Canada, you can de-certify an older out-of-

      production aircraft and begin to own, operate, modify and

      maintain it as if it were an RV or Kitfox.



I'm wondering if this 'de-certified' aircraft can then be moved to the 

US and that designation remains?



If so, perhaps I can take my 'ol C-150 up there for a visit and upgrade??

mlas(at)cox.net
Guest

Posted: Tue Dec 12, 2006 8:44 am Post subject: Conversion to Experimental

To all,  

   

Rick was right on the money.  If and when you convert an airplane’s airworthiness from Standard to Experimental many things change.  The first issue is what type of Experimental Certificate will you apply for and be approved for?  In order to convert an airplane you must have a new Airworthiness Certificate issued which will be accompanied by a list of Limitations for operation.  The list of limitations are covered by Advisory Circulars which are generally not regulatory for part 91 operations but the limitations issued with the new airworthiness certificate will change that.  The list of limitations issued are derived from the AC’s that cover these types of conversions.  There is some latitude with these limitations but you never know until you do it.  Unless you get an FAA inspector or DAR if authorized to issue an Experimental Exhibition Certificate (many are not) to cope a previously issued set of limitations without question, you will be subjected to their interpretation of the AC’s in question.  

   

As for valuation, that is very subjective.  If you take a new $1,000,000 Baron and are able to convert it to an Experimental certificate I would think you would loose as much as 75% or more of the original value due to the new limitations and insurance issues.  But if you take an old Cherokee 140 and upgrade it with a bigger engine, new glass panel, IR video, ect. The overall selling amount would improve but would most likely not cover the cost of the improvements and therefore the value would remain close to the same..  

   

Here is a different view, what if you bought an old Cherokee 140 for $10,000 with an old panel and run out engine.  Your good with you hands and can do good work that an A&P would like.  Let’s assume that you were able to convert the aircraft Certification to Experimental Exhibition with very relaxed limitations.  You and you’re A&P friend overhaul the engine, repair cracks, corrosion, broken parts (for example: door handles, head liners, switches, lighting, seats), up graded the avionics to a new glass panel, and certify during the condition inspection the aircraft airworthy.  You would be able to do this any way you would like within the scope of the newly issued limitations.  If you had to do this with a Standard Airworthiness Certificate this could be cost prohibitive if you had to meet part 43 with a $10,000 airplane that is only worth $20,000 in good condition with a Standard Certificate.  This example would be one reason I would consider a conversion to Experimental.  But as mentioned above you would have to have a good handle on the re-certification process or one might find them selves with a 1500 pound paper weight at the end of the day.  

   

   

            Mike Larkin  

              

     

  

--

 11/22/2006

  

  

--

 11/22/2006

     [quote][b]

AV8ORJWC

Joined: 13 Jul 2006
Posts: 1149
Location: Aurora, Oregon "Home of VANS"

Posted: Tue Dec 12, 2006 10:27 am Post subject: Conversion to Experimental

Our ole C-421C with Riley conversion with Lyco turbines (under a STC)

was converted for MaxViz. Just like Mike Dennis did for his PC-12.  It

is easy to misunderstand when dealing with Certified and rolling out new

avionics onboard.  The bird gets reconstructed under a 337 back to

certified configuration at the end of the trial period. It receives a

new annual and a trip back to the FSDO in hopes that the MIDO doesn't

want more to reissue a Standard Certificate.



John Cox

Do not archive

--

Kellym

Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 1700
Location: Sun Lakes AZ

Posted: Tue Dec 12, 2006 1:25 pm Post subject: Conversion to Experimental

Hi John,

Let's not confuse the troops too much.  There is not an Experimental

category for "I don't want to follow the TC rules and want to do whatever

hits my fancy, with a TC production aircraft" crowd.

The most common available categories, as Bob pointed out are

Experimental, R&D, where you get approval from FSDO for specific

modification development towards 337, STC, TC, etc. with very specific

operating limitations and time limits. Don't get it done in time, beg for

extension at FSDO, but it will never be for unlimited time and uses.

Amateur built...persuade FSDO that you are building 51% of the aircraft,

that just happens to also use portions of a TC aircraft, and then you get

the privileges that go with that category.

Experimental Exhibition, limited to flying to airshows, exhibitions, etc

which have to be reported, may be restricted, no flight over congested

areas, etc. Probably prohibits pax beyond "required" crew as well.

[quote] 

 <johnwcox(at)pacificnw.com>



 Our ole C-421C with Riley conversion with Lyco turbines (under a STC)

 was converted for MaxViz. Just like Mike Dennis did for his PC-12.  It

 is easy to misunderstand when dealing with Certified and rolling out new

 avionics onboard.  The bird gets reconstructed under a 337 back to

 certified configuration at the end of the trial period. It receives a

 new annual and a trip back to the FSDO in hopes that the MIDO doesn't

 want more to reissue a Standard Certificate.



 John Cox

 Do not archive

 --

_________________
Kelly McMullen
A&P/IA, EAA Tech Counselor # 5286
KCHD

khorton01(at)rogers.com
Guest

Posted: Tue Dec 12, 2006 6:24 pm Post subject: Conversion to Experimental

On 12 Dec 2006, at 10:53, Earl_Schroeder wrote:



 	  Quote: 	
		   

 <Earl_Schroeder(at)juno.com>



 Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:



 In Canada, you can de-certify an older out-of-

      production aircraft and begin to own, operate, modify and

      maintain it as if it were an RV or Kitfox.



 I'm wondering if this 'de-certified' aircraft can then be moved to  

 the US and that designation remains?



 If so, perhaps I can take my 'ol C-150 up there for a visit and  

 upgrade??




	


Nope, once an aircraft is moved to the Owner Maintenance category,  

you can't even cross the border into the US.  The Owner Maintenance  

category is not recognized by ICAO, so it is not recognized by any  

other country.



Kevin Horton         RV-8 (finishing kit)

Ottawa, Canada

http://www.kilohotel.com/rv8

Bob McC

Joined: 09 Jan 2006
Posts: 258
Location: Toronto, ON

Posted: Tue Dec 12, 2006 6:34 pm Post subject: Conversion to Experimental

Bob is correct in his interpretation of Canadian regulation, but in answer

to your question, my understanding is NO! And not only that, but the FAA has

apparently also decided that planes which have followed this procedure are

no longer even allowed to fly into the US at all, even when still registered

in Canada and flown by a Canadian pilot. There are no such exclusions on

Canadian OBAM aircraft which are welcomed across the border with very little

hassle. Go figure. This fact has put a considerable damper on the

desirability of this conversion. Also under Canadian law, once the plane has

been de-certified under this rule it is then ineligible to ever be converted

back into the TC category.



Bob McC

Toronto, Canada

---

_________________
Bob McC
Falco #908
(just starting)

echristley(at)nc.rr.com
Guest

Posted: Tue Dec 12, 2006 8:13 pm Post subject: Conversion to Experimental

Kelly McMullen wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		   Experimental Exhibition, limited to flying to airshows, exhibitions, etc

 which have to be reported, may be restricted, no flight over congested

 areas, etc. Probably prohibits pax beyond "required" crew as well.

   

"Limited" is a subjective term in this case.
	




First, you're given a practice area that is something line 100 mile 

radius or so.  The category includes a lot of fast airplanes, and the 

pilots really do need a large area to practice for proficiency.  This is 

actually a good provision.



Then at the beginning of each year, you tell the FAA all the flyins that 

you might want to attend.  No need to restrict yourself, just tell them 

you might want to go to all of 'em.  There's also no penalty if you 

don't quite make it there and have to stop somewhere short of the 

destination. 



Finally, for the most part, there is no restriction on passengers just 

for it being an exhibition plane.



I've heard that the FAA is cracking down on this category, but 

historically the restrictions have been a paper tiger.  You can pretty 

much do whatever a normal GA pilot would do, you just have to take a 

couple more steps to cover your tracks.

ainut(at)hiwaay.net
Guest

Posted: Tue Dec 12, 2006 9:27 pm Post subject: Conversion to Experimental

If you're ONLY adding some non-certificated instrumentation, you could 

use the loophole that allows us to add non-certificated GPS's without 

damaging the craft's certs.  You'd still have to keep all the 

certificated minimum required instruments though.



David M.

Lloyd, Daniel R. wrote:



[quote]



Yes, you are incorrect, you can take a certified aircraft, and

re-register it from the standard category or whatever  it is in and

designate the entire craft experimental. Then you can do what you want

with it, but you will not hold the repairman's certificate unless you

built it, so you would still need an A&P to do the annual. At least this

is how I understand it from talking with the local FSDO.

Dan Lloyd 



--

richard(at)RILEY.NET
Guest

Posted: Tue Dec 12, 2006 10:46 pm Post subject: Conversion to Experimental

At 01:09 AM 12/13/2006, you wrote:



 	  Quote: 	
		  Then at the beginning of each year, you tell the FAA all the flyins 

that you might want to attend.  No need to restrict yourself, just 

tell them you might want to go to all of 'em.  There's also no 

penalty if you don't quite make it there and have to stop somewhere 

short of the destination.


	


You can also update your list at any time.  Like, for instance, the 

night before you fly off across country, you fax them an update to 

include your cross country proficiency flight.  

--

cjensen(at)dts9000.com
Guest

Posted: Wed Dec 13, 2006 6:04 am Post subject: Conversion to Experimental

Given the many postings about all the hurdles to conversions, one comes

away with the over-mastering impression that the FAA is THE hurdle.  Not

that it's unsafe, unwise or stupid, but it's a bad idea because the FAA

says so.  I can understand the FAA being control freaks for commercial

aviation--a lot of traveling people are involunatarily putting

themselves in situation out of their control and they deserve protection

from unscrupulous, unsafe operators.  Whether the FAA accomplishes that

or not, some may argue with, but the intent is clear.



But as we step down the aviation food chain, why the FAA feels the need

to obsess over control of personal aircraft is less understandable.  Is

it so outrageous an idea that if someone wants to put 6" letters

EXPERIMENTAL on an aircraft, that they shouldn't have great leeway in

what they do...much as the OBAM does?  Owning a C150 that was not owner

built and is subsequently converted to Experimental is no different than

owning an RV that was built by someone else.  Both have to be inspected

by an A&P.  How is one more, or less, safe than the other?



With that said, and given the personality of the FAA, I stand amazed

(and thankful) that the 51% rule was reviewed and the repercussions seem

to have been minimal--to date.  This initially looked very much like the

proverbial 'camel's nose under the tent' problem, but the FAA seemed to

show considerable restraint in reining in the most egregious examples

that were pushing the boundaries without going on a boundless witch

hunt.



Gads, if only the world were perfect!!



Chuck Jensen

Display posts from previous:

	Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> AeroElectric-List	All times are GMT - 8 Hours Goto page 1, 2 Next
Page 1 of 2

Jump to:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum