To that point.. if you ultimately replace all the critical components who's to say how old it actually is?
And it follows the same tack on how "critical components" are defined. From my point its the "consumable" parts that get replaced and in a perfect world that includes the rotating parts of the engine. Regardless, with high time aircraft it can conceivably still have all its original sheetmetal, interior, instruments, etc. So while a critical engine piston may be replaced due to wear, i.e., consumption, the critical wings or tail feather don't get replaced. I've had this conversation with many people over the years especially on the helicopter side when comes to high TT vs value. But with the right mindset and scenario I've seen a number of people come away with an excellent aircraft even though it had high TT.
Yes. But it is very specific to the aircraft model. For example, Cirrus have life limits but Cessna 172s do not.
I think some Piper Malibus have a 15000 hr life limit on the wings, but I'm not sure.
Normally you replace the item that is limited or follow some sort of recertification process if one exists.
What kind of experimental? Experimental Exibition, maybe. Experimental Research & Development, sure. Experimental Amateur Built, no.
I know of no Arrow with an Airworthiness Limitation or any other comparable small single recip regardless of OEM: Mooney, Cessna, etc. Got a reference?
As mentioned above, what type of experimental category? There are several.
Not really. The determining factor is whether the aircraft is certified under Part 23 not what date. For example, Cirrus and several other "newer" aircraft were certified under Part 23 which now has a life cycle requirement on certain structural components. The Piper Malibu was another. For comparison, the Cessna T182T which is about to hit the market again will probably still retain most of its CAR3 certification and will not require any life-cycle limits. But if Cessna decides to upgrade the engine in that new 182 to a TEO-540 that new variant engine will come with an Airworthiness Limitations Section which makes the 500hr mag inspection and a couple other inspections mandatory vs previous 540s. Regardless all Piper Arrows I'm familiar with were certified under CAR3 and not Part 23 so no life-limits.
FYI: If you are referring to the Cessna SID limit that came out in the '90s for the 100/200 series aircraft you'll find that is not a regulatory limit but only a recommendation. No different than the overhaul recommendations put out by Lycoming and TCM and not enforceable in most cases. And if you look hard enough you'll find a number of 100/200 series aircraft still flying that are in excess of 30k to include some under 135.
Google Braniff's N601BN. They put 30,500 flight hrs on the airplane in 6 yrs.
nope.
That could be Canadian dollars. What is that converted to USD? Oh, $37,690. Still not a great deal.
