Experimental Aircraft End

Status
Not open for further replies.
Tom-D said:
There ya go, thinking I said it was harmful, where did ya get that? that is the restriction I referred to, you must do the paper work, you must know the rules, many who buy don't, those who build do.
Click to expand...

This is the problem. No matter how hard you try Tom, paper work doesn't make a plane fly, doesnt make it safer, or prevent stupid airplane owners from doing stupid pilot tricks. It is the false belief that paperwork saves lives or airplanes that keeps you going, it doesn't.
 
Last edited:
jesse said:
They can just not do the inspection, many choose that route. Others do things and don't tell the IA, I've seen PLENTY of that, and I've never seen one of them not get their inspection completed.

I honestly can't think of a single case of an experimental owner that I've seen break the regulations about what they can and can't do as far as maintenance goes. I absolutely cannot say that about the certified owners I know, by an enormous margin.
Click to expand...

+1 :yes:

Funny how certified plane owners cheat the system then turn around and complain when EAB owners do what is common sense, and legal.
 
Neal Howard said:
I have never met an experimental aircraft builder, or E-AB owner who didn't build their plane, who isn't a 200% stickler for following the rules and keeping their airplane in tip top airworthy condition legal-wise or mechanical-wise. When you put your own life/safety on the line every time you hop in an aircraft you personally maintain yourself and take off into the sky.... well, that provides an extremely strong motivating factor for protecting your bacon unlike any bureaucratic rules can.

I can't say the same about all the owners of factory built aircraft I've ever met however. More than a few of them consider the existing rules to be too obtuse.

As to the experimental op lims requirements to file a new 8130-6 for change of engine type or FP to/from CS propeller, it is no longer considered "re-certifying" an E-AB, it is used merely as a conveyance to update your existing aircraft records and you're supposed to accompany it with a letter stating such. Nobody ever changes between a turbine and a reciprocating engine so that's a moot point anyway, but this practice is still in common use today for those who change their propeller types. BTW, changing to a new prop of the same type (FP-FP or CS-CS) does not trigger this requirement, and ground adjustable props are considered FP since you cannot change their pitch in flight.

And Brien23's pulling up of that ancient Bill Lawrence document cleverly leaves out the fact that this article was from 1996 and is WAY out of date and was superseded by newer policies starting in 1999 (a decade and a half ago).

Even the venerable Joe Norris's Tales from the DAR Side article has a couple mistakes in it too.

And Tom, you asked "why did those rules change so many times?" Well hopefully you did notice that, with the exception of the last change, that with each change made, the rules get more and more lenient for the E-AB owner, and each change made for *less* involvement of the FAA.... except for the last change when all they wanted back was the need to be involved for determining your chosen Phase-1 flyoff area, and that one actually makes some common sense for helping enhance the safety of performing your test flights in an agreed-upon, known area.

And now I present to everyone here this link... sure to make owners of antique/vintage planes drool in anticipation, and to also make the heads of some rulemongers explode in exasperation: http://macsblog.com/2014/03/could-your-airplane-be-a-pnc/
Click to expand...


I sure hope I can get the PNC thing going on our 180.

Just to add some fuel to the debate, the problem isn't planes, it's pilot's.

I don't care if he see's this, but my next door T-hangar neighbor is a lawyer with a mooney. I'm not exaggerating when I say in his T-hangar, there is a plane, and nothing else. And I mean nothing else. Who keeps a T-hangar without so much as even a rag? When he shows up to go somewhere, he's always in a hurry, I've seen him push the plane out, get in it, and go. No pre-flight, no walk around, just go. He's the odd's on favorite next statistic in our airport pool. :rolleyes2:
 
Tom-D said:
we have a inspections that the owner can't influence, no so the EXP aircraft.
Click to expand...

Buyers of EXP aircraft have to go through the same 3rd party annual inspection that certified do.

The original builder can do his own annual inspection as long as he still owns the aircraft - and this is only right and proper, since there is nobody else that knows that particular aircraft as well as the original builder.

But you already knew that... :nono::yes:
 
Last edited:
kyleb said:
Can't influence? Really? You've NEVER been swayed by an owner asking "Can we defer that for a year?" and flip-flopped on something that was on the margin of needing to be addressed?
Click to expand...

The inspection is for airworthiness and compliance. If an item can be deferred then it can be deferred, if it's "on the margin" that means it is still airworthy. You don't deny airworthiness over items that do not make the aircraft un-airworthy. We're not looking for factory new perfection here.
 
Actually a builder of an experimental airplane who holds an inspection certificate can do the annual condition inspections even after he/she sells the plane to other owners if he/she chooses...I doubt that charging for that service would be proper, but I if wanted to do so I could, because my inspection authorization is for THAT ONE airplane, no matter who owns it.
 
JohnWF said:
Actually a builder of an experimental airplane who holds an inspection certificate can do the annual condition inspections even after he/she sells the plane to other owners if he/she chooses...I doubt that charging for that service would be proper, but I if wanted to do so I could, because my inspection authorization is for THAT ONE airplane, no matter who owns it.
Click to expand...

Correct, the builder of my RV-6 still does them for me.
 
Also, may have already been mentioned but any A&P can do it, doesn't require an IA.
 
airguy said:
Buyers of EXP aircraft have to go through the same 3rd party annual inspection that certified do.
If they know enough to actually do the inspections

The original builder can do his own annual inspection as long as he still owns the aircraft - and this is only right and proper, since there is nobody else that knows that particular aircraft as well as the original builder.

But you already knew that... :nono::yes:
Click to expand...

yes I knew that.
I no longer do conditional inspections, both of my EXP customers were buyer types, and have moved on.

I do watch what is happening in the hangar across the way from mine, (a group of builders) It appears to be a circus more than a structured builder program.

Some wander over to see my 170, so I ask questions, as I do here to see what answers I can get. but for the most part I get more blank stares than answers.

The group as a whole seems to be very uninformed but I'll not judge the other EXP builder/owners by this bunch.
 
N801BH said:
Well.... We are very sure brien23 ain't doing them either...:no:.....;)
Click to expand...

yep, he's too busy repairing a PA 28 spar, to be bothered with toy aircraft.
 
Tom-D said:
well one lost his medical, and the other got a job and now can afford a real airplane.
Click to expand...

No, this is the reason why. Your lousey attitude towards experimentals as "the red headed step child" of GA.

I can afford many, if not any certified piston airplanes. Why would I waste my money? :dunno:

You just don't get what the word "VALUE" means. The last thing I would ever want owning an airplane is someone like you working on it.
 
Last edited:
Geico266 said:
No this is the reason why. Your losey attitude towards experimentals as "the red headed step child" of GA.

I can afford many, if not any certified piston airplanes. Why would I waste my money? :dunno:

You just don't get what the word "VALUE" means. The last thing I would ever want owning an airplane is someone like you working on it.
Click to expand...

Have you noticed how quickly you can turn a thread personal? This is why the other thread was started.

You have never seem any of my work or talked to any of my customers yet you are the expert on me and my work.

yet you can post shi- like that. and think its right.

get a grip.
 
Tom-D said:
Have you noticed how quickly you can turn a thread personal? This is why the other thread was started.

You have never seem any of my work or talked to any of my customers yet you are the expert on me and my work.

yet you can post shi- like that. and think its right.

get a grip.
Click to expand...

Tom, I have been reading your rants for damn near 6 years. I wouldn't let you put air in my tires. That's not a personal attack, that is common sense! You HATE experimentals.
 
Tom-D said:
yes I knew that.
I no longer do conditional inspections, both of my EXP customers were buyer types, and have moved on.

I do watch what is happening in the hangar across the way from mine, (a group of builders) It appears to be a circus more than a structured builder program.

Some wander over to see my 170, so I ask questions, as I do here to see what answers I can get. but for the most part I get more blank stares than answers.

The group as a whole seems to be very uninformed but I'll not judge the other EXP builder/owners by this bunch.
Click to expand...

Need I say more? You are a "know it all" airport hangar rat that can't stand to watch the world pass you by.
 
Last edited:
Geico266 said:
Tom, I have been reading your rants for damn near 6 years. I wouldn't let you put air in my tires. That's not a personal attack, that is common sense! You HATE experimentals.
Click to expand...

Hate is a waste of energy, not to be wasted on the likes of you.
 
Tom-D said:
Not really you've said enough for all to know you.
Click to expand...

Not even close!

But if you want to know me more just keep reading, I'll educate you. ;)

Business must be really good for you to come on here and bash Experimental ( the largest growing segment of piston GA). You are a marketing genius. :rofl:
 
Last edited:
This boys and girls is why experimentals win over certified aircraft. In Tom & Brien's minds there are some aircraft that are not worthy of their attention. I invited you to take a look at experimentals such as RVs and you decide. Experimentals are not for everyone, we all get that. If you can replace a light bulb and are willing to learn you can save a ton over money over certified planes. You might actually MAKE money by buying the right plane, flying it for a couple of hundred hours FREE, and reselling it...FOR A PROFIT! Heaven forbid if someone other than Tom & Brien make a profit in aviation.

Tom, I'll hand it to ya, ... you are the best advocate experimentals could have. :yes:
 
Last edited:
Geico266 said:
This boys and girls is why experimentals win over certified aircraft. In Tom & Brien's minds there are some aircraft that are not worthy of their attention.

Where did you get that idea? trying to spin the issues? I have built 1 warbird corsair kit, 1 Fisher celebrity, and a Murphy Rebel. all flew all are still flying.

I invited you to take a look at experimentals such as RVs and you decide. Experimentals are not for everyone, we all get that. If you can replace a light bulb and are willing to learn you can save a ton over money over certified planes. You might actually MAKE money by buying the right plane, flying it for a couple of hundred hours FREE, and reselling it...FOR A PROFIT! Heaven forbid if someone other than Tom & Brien make a profit in aviation.

Tom, I'll hand it to ya, ... you are the best advocate experimentals could have. :yes:
Click to expand...

Yep I know, I still build parts for the home builds around here simply because they want things done properly.
but many don't. The EXP side of the industry is plagued with the builder making an aircraft in their garage and not doing a great job at it.
 
DaleB said:
Where'd he get the idea? Seriously? Maybe he can remember things that were posted almost half an hour before.
Click to expand...

You ever been sarcastic before ? or haven't you realized I can give it back?
 
Tom-D said:
Yep I know, I still build parts for the home builds around here simply because they want things done properly.
but many don't. The EXP side of the industry is plagued with the builder making an aircraft in their garage and not doing a great job at it.
Click to expand...

Plagued? :rofl: I don't think so.

Experimentals are issued an airworthy certificate by the FAA. So now you don't recognize the FAA authority to issue AW certs? I thought you were the guy always spouting regs and what a great job the FAA is doing?

Seriously, did they legalize recreational pot in Washington?
 
Geico266 said:
Plagued? :rofl: I don't think so.

Experimentals are issued an airworthy certificate by the FAA. So now you don't recognize the FAA authority to issue AW certs? I thought you were the guy always spouting regs and what a great job the FAA is doing?

there ya go again, where did you ever see me say the fas was doing a good job..or are you just typing any thing you can to make there believe you are the sole authority on me.

Seriously, did they legalize recreational pot in Washington?
Click to expand...
Yes they did over my protest.

Did you know the DAR can't judge quality?
 
Tom-D said:
Yep I know, I still build parts for the home builds around here simply because they want things done properly.
but many don't. The EXP side of the industry is plagued with the builder making an aircraft in their garage and not doing a great job at it.
Click to expand...

Over 8000 RVs out there flying and how many have gone down due to building errors? Seriously, if we based aviation on a 170 we'd still be back in the stone age right along with ya. I've been immersed in the Experimental world for over 7 years now and have, to date, seen only one or two planes I wouldn't fly in. I've seen a couple ratty ones built by A&Ps tha had over 1000 hours on them and are going strong. Doing things "your way" doesn't make them the only way - get over yourself.

Thanks God for Van and Burt and Tom and Lance and, and, and....for modern, fast, well performing flying machines.

Actually a buddy has a 170 and I enjoy flying in it if we aren't going far. Would never spit on it like you do to our builds. Those guys across the way may be idiots and they may be just like me, learning as they go and asking a lot of questions. I'm overhauling right now and have learned more about a Lycoming than I ever wanted to know. When I'm done it will be built exceptionally well and I'll know it inside and out. Right now when someone asks me a question they probably get the same dumb look you get from your neighbors. Won't be that way long as I'll definitely know the answer next time you ask plus maybe more than you know about the subject.

Geico and I don't rag on folks for nothing - we rag on you because you are not kind to us and the know-it-all attitude is a total turnoff. Have met many A&Ps like you and I ignore them too. Fortunately I've several that help me and know my plane and appreciate my approach to the modification and maintenance of it. Thank God they don't have your lousy attitude. "... because they want things done properly....." Gees, what nonsense. :nono:
 
Last edited:
flyingriki said:
" Gees, what nonsense.
Click to expand...

yep here is some more nonsense. built to support my customers. both EXP and antique, that don't have a clue on how to build or repair the gear they use.
 

Attachments

  • DSCN3764.JPG
    DSCN3764.JPG
    2.3 MB · Views: 19
  • 20131022_094320.jpg
    20131022_094320.jpg
    1.3 MB · Views: 16
  • 20140122_204121.jpg
    20140122_204121.jpg
    589.4 KB · Views: 16
  • 20131120_144820.jpg
    20131120_144820.jpg
    1.5 MB · Views: 15
  • HPIM0684.jpg
    HPIM0684.jpg
    202 KB · Views: 17
  • HPIM0636.jpg
    HPIM0636.jpg
    187.9 KB · Views: 14
flyingriki said:
Over 8000 RVs out there flying and how many have gone down due to building errors? Seriously, if we based aviation on a 170 we'd still be back in the stone age right along with ya. I've been immersed in the Experimental world for over 7 years now and have, to date, seen only one or two planes I wouldn't fly in. I've seen a couple ratty ones built by A&Ps tha had over 1000 hours on them and are going strong. Doing things "your way" doesn't make them the only way - get over yourself.

Thanks God for Van and Burt and Tom and Lance and, and, and....for modern, fast, well performing flying machines.

Actually a buddy has a 170 and I enjoy flying in it if we aren't going far. Would never spit on it like you do to our builds.


where have I ever done that? I contend only that the EXP side of the industry has more owners that don't have a clew about the machines they are allowed to repair. I see them because they seek me out to build the stuff they need.


Those guys across the way may be idiots and they may be just like me, learning as they go and asking a lot of questions. I'm overhauling right now and have learned more about a Lycoming than I ever wanted to know. When I'm done it will be built exceptionally well and I'll know it inside and out. Right now when someone asks me a question they probably get the same dumb look you get from your neighbors. Won't be that way long as I'll definitely know the answer next time you ask plus maybe more than you know about the subject.

Geico and I don't rag on folks for nothing - we rag on you because you are not kind to us and the know-it-all attitude is a total turnoff.

That's an opinion that is not shared by any of the owners that I have as customers.

Have met many A&Ps like you and I ignore them too. Fortunately I've several that help me and know my plane and appreciate my approach to the modification and maintenance of it. Thank God they don't have your lousy attitude. "... because they want things done properly....." Gees, what nonsense. :nono:
Click to expand...

I don't believe the few here that share your opinion have a very wide view of the EXP side of the industry, they see what they like to see, and think it is the only thing there is to see.
 
Tom-D said:
I don't believe the few here that share your opinion have a very wide view of the EXP side of the industry, they see what they like to see, and think it is the only thing there is to see.
Click to expand...

It's a lot more than you've seen. Two canard fly-ins a year, plus Arlington, Golden West, Copperstate, Sun n' Fun, and Oshkosh. And no I don't sit around with a bunch of 40+ year old Cessnas. We are immersed in Experimentals and discuss every last detail from induction systems to flight controls to drag reduction to the latest developments in avionics, to the minute details of wingtip design, to, to, to....... yes, more than you've seen. :yesnod:

This is like typical arguing with a liberal. Doesn't address the points, just changes the subject or goes off on a tangent...I'm done. :mad2:
Geico, you're up!
 
Last edited:
flyingriki said:
It's a lot more than you've seen.
Click to expand...

that may be very true, but I have seen my share and have formed my opinion.

Just because I kicked your cat, doesn't mean I'm not an animal lover.

I've seen EXP aircraft that I thought were a waist of wood and glue and I've seen many I'd love to own.
I have also seen many production aircraft that the owners have allowed to go to a condition I'd never put my name on in any circumstances.

I've been repairing aircraft both EXP and production build for a very long time and have probably see .0000001% of the industry.

But I see you know every thing.
 
flyingriki said:
It's a lot more than you've seen. Two canard fly-ins a year, plus Arlington, Golden West, Copperstate, Sun n' Fun, and Oshkosh. And no I don't sit around with a bunch of 40+ year old Cessnas. We are immersed in Experimentals and discuss every last detail from induction systems to flight controls to drag reduction to the latest developments in avionics, to the minute details of wingtip design, to, to, to....... yes, more than you've seen. :yesnod:

This is like typical arguing with a liberal. Doesn't address the points, just changes the subject or goes off on a tangent...I'm done. :mad2:
Geico, you're up!
Click to expand...

You can't fix stupid. :no:
 
flyingriki said:
Over 8000 RVs out there flying and how many have gone down due to building errors? Seriously, if we based aviation on a 170 we'd still be back in the stone age right along with ya. I've been immersed in the Experimental world for over 7 years now and have, to date, seen only one or two planes I wouldn't fly in. I've seen a couple ratty ones built by A&Ps tha had over 1000 hours on them and are going strong. Doing things "your way" doesn't make them the only way - get over yourself.

Thanks God for Van and Burt and Tom and Lance and, and, and....for modern, fast, well performing flying machines.

Actually a buddy has a 170 and I enjoy flying in it if we aren't going far. Would never spit on it like you do to our builds. Those guys across the way may be idiots and they may be just like me, learning as they go and asking a lot of questions. I'm overhauling right now and have learned more about a Lycoming than I ever wanted to know. When I'm done it will be built exceptionally well and I'll know it inside and out. Right now when someone asks me a question they probably get the same dumb look you get from your neighbors. Won't be that way long as I'll definitely know the answer next time you ask plus maybe more than you know about the subject.

Geico and I don't rag on folks for nothing - we rag on you because you are not kind to us and the know-it-all attitude is a total turnoff. Have met many A&Ps like you and I ignore them too. Fortunately I've several that help me and know my plane and appreciate my approach to the modification and maintenance of it. Thank God they don't have your lousy attitude. "... because they want things done properly....." Gees, what nonsense. :nono:
Click to expand...

MIAMI NEWS TIMES "Home-built aircraft are five times as likely to crash as professionally made planes. And if an accident does happen, their pilots are seven times as likely to die, according to federal investigators. In 2011, 212 home-built aircraft have crashed around the United States, killing 63 people."
 
brien23 said:
MIAMI NEWS TIMES "Home-built aircraft are five times as likely to crash as professionally made planes. And if an accident does happen, their pilots are seven times as likely to die, according to federal investigators. In 2011, 212 home-built aircraft have crashed around the United States, killing 63 people."
Click to expand...


The "cut and paste" expert is back......:mad2::mad2::mad2:
 
According to the National Transportation Safety Board, which conducted an in-depth study in 2011, such aircraft make up almost 10% of all general aviation.
But the experimentals also accounted for about 15% of the accidents and 21% of fatalities in 2011.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top