Total rebuild of experimental & repairman’s cert?

455 Bravo Uniform

455 Bravo Uniform

Final Approach
Joined
Aug 18, 2015
Messages
5,343
Location
KLAF
Display Name
Display name:
455 Bravo Uniform
If someone buys a built experimental, and takes it apart to some parts-n-pieces level to essentially rebuild it like one would to restore a classic car, could they get the repairman’s certificate? Redo all the serial numbers and registration and take it all back through initial testing? I could see this with an older built experimental, especially one in which you had low confidence that the original builder got everything right, or at least to your level of perfection, and wanted to inspect every last rivet. Not looking for clever way to get a repairman’s cert, if anyone was wondering. Just curious.
 
455 Bravo Uniform said:
If someone buys a built experimental, and takes it apart to some parts-n-pieces level to essentially rebuild it like one would to restore a classic car, could they get the repairman’s certificate? Redo all the serial numbers and registration and take it all back through initial testing? I could see this with an older built experimental, especially one in which you had low confidence that the original builder got everything right, or at least to your level of perfection, and wanted to inspect every last rivet. Not looking for clever way to get a repairman’s cert, if anyone was wondering. Just curious.
Click to expand...
Nope. But you can do anything you want to it, short of the condition inspection, with no certificate.
 
I don't think so. I am under the impression that those things are only given once to the original builder. That said, if you do that much to rebuild and aircraft perhaps your experience will quality you for the A&P. With that yo ucando anything to an experimental aircraft you want including annual it.
 
steingar said:
I don't think so. I am under the impression that those things are only given once to the original builder. That said, if you do that much to rebuild and aircraft perhaps your experience will quality you for the A&P. With that yo ucando anything to an experimental aircraft you want including annual it.
Click to expand...
That exact question was actually answered in an issue of KitPlanes; essentially, you cannot rebuild an existing plane and call it a new plane regardless of how much work you do, and, with that, you cannot then apply for a repairman's certificate.
 
Kenny Phillips said:
That exact question was actually answered in an issue of KitPlanes; essentially, you cannot rebuild an existing plane and call it a new plane regardless of how much work you do, and, with that, you cannot then apply for a repairman's certificate.
Click to expand...
Nice to get it right now and again.
 
The previous answers are correct. However....

Back when ADS-B compliance was estimated to cost 75% of the value of my airplane, I contemplated using my current Fly Baby as a "kit" to produce a new-and-improved version without a generator on the engine. So I wouldn't need a transponder or ADS-B within the Mode C Veil, and would earn my own Repairman Certificate.

The Fly Baby is wood and fabric, and I anticipated building a new airplane using all the metal bits from the old one (FWF, various brackets, compression ribs, wheels, control system, etc.). The fuselage would have had all-new wood (and several improvements I've been thinking about over the years). I anticipated re-using the landing gear legs and tail surfaces, instruments, etc.

Also considered re-using the wings, although they'd be relatively easy to build anew with a re-use of the metal parts and laminated wingtips. New fabric all over, of course, painted with Latex house paint.

Figured this would qualify as a new homebuilt. Cost of the wood would have been ~half what ADS-B Out was going for back then. With fabric, paint, and other stuff it would have come to the approximate $6,000 people were talking about for installing ADS-B. But I'd end up with a new airplane with some comfort modifications...and I'd have the Repairman Certificate.

As it was, I decided $2,000 for a Skybeacon was an acceptable alternative.

This approach probably wouldn't work for many older homebuilt designs. Can't see how you'd do with with an all-metal airplane like a Midget Mustang or T-18. However, I could see doing this with a steel-tube-fuselage airplane like a Kitfox. Strip it down to the bare fuselage, sand and powder-coat it, build it up again, and build new wings using new spar tubes and much of the existing hardware.

Ron Wanttaja
 
Checkout_my_Six said:
If you can document "fabricating" +51%....then you might have a case for the repairman's cert.
Click to expand...

Why 51%? 51% is the major portion rule percentage to qualify a build for an E-AB AWC. There's no percentage tied to obtaining a Repairman's cert--plenty of group builds as examples. The FAA is looking for the person who signed the 8130-6 as the "primary builder" to be the one who applies for the cert.
 
You'd have to scrap the original identity and build a new E-AB using the 51% checklist in order to get a repairman cert. Honestly? That would be simple to do.
 
tsts4 said:
Why 51%? 51% is the major portion rule percentage to qualify a build for an E-AB AWC. There's no percentage tied to obtaining a Repairman's cert--plenty of group builds as examples. The FAA is looking for the person who signed the 8130-6 as the "primary builder" to be the one who applies for the cert.
Click to expand...
ok.... 50.9%
 
To be clear I think we're all talking the same thing just a bit obtusely. To be eligible for an E-AB airworthiness cert the project has to meet the major portion rule (aka the 51% rule). To be eligible for an repairman's cert you have to be listed as the "primary builder" on said project regardless of your level of participation -- there's no official definition of what constitutes "primary builder". So, the 51% rule has nothing directly to do with eligibility for the repairman's cert. Group projects do this all the time, typically going to the group leader or whomever has the requisite knowledge to best maintain the aircraft as long as they are listed on the 8130-6 as the primary builder regardless as to how much they actually participated in the build.
 
If no one has ever been issued the repairman's certificate for an amateur built airplane that you purchased already built, there is nothing to prevent you from applying for the certificate provided you can convince the FAA that you are familiar with all aspects of its construction. You needn't have bucked a single rivet or formed a single rib on that airframe.
 
Good luck with that interview! My repairman cert interview was damn thorough!
 
Witmo said:
If no one has ever been issued the repairman's certificate for an amateur built airplane that you purchased already built, there is nothing to prevent you from applying for the certificate provided you can convince the FAA that you are familiar with all aspects of its construction. You needn't have bucked a single rivet or formed a single rib on that airframe.
Click to expand...
Document "primary builder" and you're in. But you can't. And many FSDOs won't grant one, it seems to be highly discretionary.
 
455 Bravo Uniform said:
If someone buys a built experimental, and takes it apart to some parts-n-pieces level to essentially rebuild it like one would to restore a classic car, could they get the repairman’s certificate? Redo all the serial numbers and registration and take it all back through initial testing? I could see this with an older built experimental, especially one in which you had low confidence that the original builder got everything right, or at least to your level of perfection, and wanted to inspect every last rivet. Not looking for clever way to get a repairman’s cert, if anyone was wondering. Just curious.
Click to expand...
I think YES, it would be like a newly built EAB. You would require a complete removal of all serial components.
 
Tom-D said:
I think YES, it would be like a newly built EAB. You would require a complete removal of all serial components.
Click to expand...
Other than the engine bits under the cowling, and maybe the wheels, there's only one serial number on my homebuilt: the one on the data plate on the tail.

Ron Wanttaja
 
wanttaja said:
Other than the engine bits under the cowling, and maybe the wheels, there's only one serial number on my homebuilt: the one on the data plate on the tail.

Ron Wanttaja
Click to expand...
Are you saying that 1 serial number is enough to the FAA to say it does not meet the rules to issue a new set of paper works?

I see lots of serial numbers swapping all the time, both in the certificated and Exp.
We see aircraft that are re-cycled all the time. junk yards are full of parts.
 
I know it has been done a few times successful with wrecked Rotorway helicopters. You tear them down to the bare components, replace or rebuild the frame, fabricate a new tail boom, blades and reassemble the pieces. I can imagine it would be a lot harder to do with a aircraft where a lot of the parts are fabricated as part of the build.
 
Take it apart, put it back together. All that matters is the 51% checklist and the DAR's sign-off of the AW cert. At that point you ARE the builder.
 
Tom-D said:
Are you saying that 1 serial number is enough to the FAA to say it does not meet the rules to issue a new set of paper works?
Click to expand...
Nope. Merely responding to your use of "all" (e.g., "all serial components") when there aren't multiple serial-numbered parts involved. Certainly one of one is "all", but that's rather pedantic.

The data tag on my airplane shows serial number 620. It's meaningless, as the builder only constructed one airplane. Any such serial on a homebuilt is immaterial, other than on components like engines that are produced by a commercial manufacturer.

The serial number of those parts don't really matter, either, when it comes down to either the 51% rule or award of the Repairman Certificate. If Continental engine S/N 100051 is used on a given Fly Baby, it can be later transferred to any other homebuilt aircraft without affecting its EAB status or the owner's Repairman Certificate. Might have to go back into Phase 1, at the most.

Ron Wanttaja
 
Stewartb said:
Guys who haven't built an E-AB usually don't have a clue about how it's really done. Just sayin'.
Click to expand...
I own experimental and don't have a clue.

What about the experimentals where the owner removes the data plate, documents, and sells the plane as a bunch of "parts" in attempt to reduce his liability. Can the purchaser of those parts get a new airworthiness certificate and repairmans cert? How?
 
FORANE said:
I own experimental and don't have a clue.

What about the experimentals where the owner removes the data plate, documents, and sells the plane as a bunch of "parts" in attempt to reduce his liability. Can the purchaser of those parts get a new airworthiness certificate and repairmans cert? How?
Click to expand...

No. Not legally, anyway, though that's not to say there aren't DARs who've signed off on such things.

At one time using major components (e.g. used wings, etc.) from other planes was common in the homebuilt world. The FAA put a stop to that, possibly to prevent people from rebuilding, say, Cessnas and calling them homebuilts. Nowadays, there's a checklist, you have to show that you (or another amateur builder) completed enough of those tasks to represent the "major portion" of the build. Used parts don't qualify, so if you use part of another plane, you don't get credit for it, and you need more checked items on other portions to reach 51%.

It's going to be obvious to the DAR if it's a bunch of used parts. If it's not obvious, then you probably did as much work as building a new plane anyway.
 
Groups of builders build aircraft and register the aircraft to one builder all the time.
There is no restriction with who builds the parts.

the problem becomes one of paperwork, and who can prove who built what.
 
Dana said:
No. Not legally, anyway, though that's not to say there aren't DARs who've signed off on such things.

At one time using major components (e.g. used wings, etc.) from other planes was common in the homebuilt world. The FAA put a stop to that, possibly to prevent people from rebuilding, say, Cessnas and calling them homebuilts. Nowadays, there's a checklist, you have to show that you (or another amateur builder) completed enough of those tasks to represent the "major portion" of the build. Used parts don't qualify, so if you use part of another plane, you don't get credit for it, and you need more checked items on other portions to reach 51%.

It's going to be obvious to the DAR if it's a bunch of used parts. If it's not obvious, then you probably did as much work as building a new plane anyway.
Click to expand...

That's incorrect. For example, my Cub began as a kit. The airframe, wings, and control surfaces were completely assembled my the mfgr. I couldn't score fabrication points for those but I did score assembly points. In my case I used the kit and had professional assistance and still easily made better than 51% of the builder tasks using the FAA checklist and the prescribed scoring formula. Truth is it doesn't matter who made those assembled components. It could have been Piper. There is no restriction for using certificated parts or requirement to use exp parts. The end result is the same. If a guy bought an assembled exp airplane he could disassemble it and make his own "kit" and go about building an airplane. He may be well advised to get his kit plan approved by a DAR ahead of the build but that isn't required. The DAR won't see the airplane until the plane's finished and ready to fly and he's called to sign it off and issue an airworthiness cert. Have a builder log and lots of pictures to document the build, provide the required paperwork including the 51% tally sheet, and away you go.
 
I am in the process of doing this with a Mustang II. The plane was registered and flew for 250 hours. It had a ground loop accident and then was converted to tri-gear. The owner then died (not aviation related) and the plane was de-registered, engine and avionics removed. I bought the fuse, wings, etc. and am "redoing it" under a new experimental registration. The EAA told me that all I need do is show that all the parts were amateur built (I can) and since I will be the last (first listed) builder on the 'new' registration, I get the repairman cert. This is how guys get the repairman cert on those 'built-in-a-week' projects at Osh where a hoard of amateurs build the aircraft.
 
The EAA told you wrong. You need to get familiar with the 51% checklist. If you comply with the requirements you apply for the repairman certificate. The FAA will interview you as part of the approval process.
 
Two separate issues, airplane cert and repairman's cert. The "51% rule" is derived from part 21.191 which is airplane certification and states that "major portion [...] has been fabricated and assembled by persons [emphasis added] who undertook the construction project solely for their own education or recreation," and the repairman cert is from part 65.104, which does not require 51% of anything, only that the holder be the 'primary builder.'

AC 20-27G does a halfway decent job of discussing the use of salvage parts in a 'new build'.

Nauga,
who has both
 
Stewartb said:
Good luck with that interview! My repairman cert interview was damn thorough!
Click to expand...

Mine too! A little slow at the FSDO that day, and the guy looked at each photo in my build log for what seemed like 30 seconds. The DAR inspection was thorough, but much more relaxed.
 
I guess I was lucky, I had a really nice guy from the mido do my inspection, he handed me a pink slip, my op specs, and a authorization letter for my repairman cert. still have it as I never got a repairman cert fort it.
 
My situation was a little different, since it's an E-LSA. I took the Rainbow Aviation two-day inspection class, took that paperwork to the FSDO, had a 15-minute paperwork exercise with a (very) few questions asked, and left with the paper repairman's cert.

On the way out one of the FAA guys "helpfully reminded" me that the cert was valid only to inspect the airplane, not to perform any maintenance or repairs. I didn't argue the point with him. He was technically correct... the certificate only authorizes me to inspect the airplane. No certificate at all is required to do any maintenance, repairs, or alterations.
 
Although it apparently rarely happens, you can petition the FAA for a repairman's certificate on an E/AB aircraft you didn't build. I know a guy who did it and got the certificate for the airplane he rebuilt. The details are fuzzy but I believe he had to produce documentation that proved he rebuilt enough of the airplane to qualify.

The builder on record of his airplane remains the original guy. He didn't simply reapply for a new airworthiness certificate listing himself as the constructor.
 
Kenny Phillips said:
That exact question was actually answered in an issue of KitPlanes; essentially, you cannot rebuild an existing plane and call it a new plane regardless of how much work you do, and, with that, you cannot then apply for a repairman's certificate.
Click to expand...

If I recall that letter in KitPlanes, it was explicitly presented as a rebuild. My reading here is that the question is, if you tear the airplane down to component bits and build a new airplane out of some or all of the parts, is it still a rebuild? In that case, I would say no, you've built a new airplane. You would present it as a new build, get a new certificate on it, and the builder's log would reflect the build work that you did.
 
I guess it depends on how much of the original aircraft is used, and how cooperative the DAR is.

On the other hand there are the data plate "restorations" where you start with an old wreck and jack the data plate up, slide the wreck out and slide a new airframe under it...
 
Seems scary that one could strip an airplane down to components, put it all back together and (if done within a year), go out and fly it without any other inspection.
 
bflynn said:
Seems scary that one could strip an airplane down to components, put it all back together and (if done within a year), go out and fly it without any other inspection.
Click to expand...
Happens all the time. owner conditional inspects.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top