Experimental Aircraft vs the AD

Tom-D

Tom-D

Taxi to Parking
Joined
Feb 23, 2005
Messages
34,740
Display Name
Display name:
Tom-D
While the Exp aircraft are exempt from part 43, by wording in the FAR, they are not exempt from Part 39.

Prove me wrong :)
39.1 Purpose of this regulation.
The regulations in this part provide a legal framework for FAA's system of Airworthiness Directives.

39.3 Definition of airworthiness directives.
FAA's airworthiness directives are legally enforceable rules that apply to the following products: aircraft, aircraft engines, propellers, and appliances.

39.5 When does FAA issue airworthiness directives?
FAA issues an airworthiness directive addressing a product when we find that:

(a) An unsafe condition exists in the product; and

(b) The condition is likely to exist or develop in other products of the same type design.


39.7 What is the legal effect of failing to comply with an airworthiness directive?
Anyone who operates a product that does not meet the requirements of an applicable airworthiness directive is in violation of this section.
39.9 What if I operate an aircraft or use a product that does not meet the requirements of an airworthiness directive?
If the requirements of an airworthiness directive have not been met, you violate
39.7 each time you operate the aircraft or use the product.
 
Last edited:
Tom-D said:
While the Exp aircraft are exempt from part 43, by wording in the FAR, they are not exempt from Part 39.

Prove me wrong :)
39.1 Purpose of this regulation.
The regulations in this part provide a legal framework for FAA's system of Airworthiness Directives.

39.3 Definition of airworthiness directives.
FAA's airworthiness directives are legally enforceable rules that apply to the following products: aircraft, aircraft engines, propellers, and appliances.

39.5 When does FAA issue airworthiness directives?
FAA issues an airworthiness directive addressing a product when we find that:

(a) An unsafe condition exists in the product; and

(b) The condition is likely to exist or develop in other products of the same type design.


39.7 What is the legal effect of failing to comply with an airworthiness directive?
Anyone who operates a product that does not meet the requirements of an applicable airworthiness directive is in violation of this section.
39.9 What if I operate an aircraft or use a product that does not meet the requirements of an airworthiness directive?
If the requirements of an airworthiness directive have not been met, you violate
39.7 each time you operate the aircraft or use the product.
Click to expand...

This is an ancient argument that was won a long time ago by the side you want to poo poo. I'm not going to waste time finding and quoting chapter and verse, have much better uses for my time, but it's out there.

Being in the Experimental groups it was very important to us and the rules, thought not clear, favor against your interpretation.

A lot of certified folks seem to think they know more about our world than we do, and don't hesitate to spout it....
 
Gotta explicitly say that it applies to experimental (non-TC'd) in the AD. Period.
 
I'm a certified aircraft owner (begrudgingly). I cannot for the life of me understand why anyone would want to cut at the experimental crowd. As it pertains to affordable recreational aviation, they're clearly in the lead. I would love to be able to join the ranks. Alas, theirs is a demographic of empty-nesters and so we young family types are excluded from their kin. Hopefully primary non-commercial brings affordable 4-seaters (read old spam cans) into the de facto experimental realm.
 
Rotor mentions two references, both of which are not regulatory in nature. one is a letter from an insurance agent. the other an AC. neither of which will over ride the regulation as written.

here is the paragraph that says it all:

The AD applicability statement will identify if the AD applies to non-TC’d aircraft or engines, propellers, and appliances installed thereon.

My contention is simple, you are running a lycoming engine with the data tag still in place, That is a type certified engine. and the AD says it applies to that engine you must comply. If you are using a transponder such as the old King that has an AD that is a type certified transponder and the AD applies no matter what aircraft it is installed in.
 
Last edited:
Tom-D said:
Rotor mentions two references, both of which are not regulatory in nature. one is a letter from an insurance agent. the other an AC. neither of which will over ride the regulation as written.
Click to expand...

Who said an AC can override a regulation?

The purpose of the AC is to clarify the regulations as written. What in this AC tries to "over ride" the regulation?

The insurance letter was an interesting perspective on the subject that brought up some interesting points.

I simply listed 2 references for the readers to see and draw their own conclusions. Please reference my post and show where my intent was to "over ride" the regulations.



Tom-D said:
My contention is simple, you are running a lycoming engine with the data tag still in place, That is a type certified engine. and the AD says it applies to that engine you must comply. If you are using a transponder such as the old King that has an AD that is a type certified transponder and the AD applies no matter what aircraft it is installed in.
Click to expand...

The data tag in place does not make it a certified engine, and what regulation states the data tag must be removed to make it experimental?

As far as the rest, I've never heard anyone dispute it. :dunno:
 
Last edited:
RotorAndWing said:
Who said an AC can override a regulation?
No one, unless you read that into what I wrote.

The purpose of the AC is to clarify the regulations as written. What in this AC tries to "over ride" the regulation?
Nothing simply pointing that out.
The insurance letter was an interesting perspective on the subject that brought up some interesting points.

I simply listed 2 references for the readers to see and draw their own conclusions. Please reference my post and show where my intent was to "over ride" the regulations.

Did insinuate you did?

The data tag in place does not make it a certified engine, and what regulation states the data tag must be removed to make it experimental?
Does the FAA use the data tag to identify the engine? isn't hat what it is for?

As far as the rest, I've never heard anyone dispute it. :dunno:
Click to expand...
IOWs I'm right. :)
 
RotorAndWing said:
Other than trying to infuriate the homebuilders here I really don't see the point of this thread.
Click to expand...

Certainly not infuriating to me. :dunno:

This argument was settled decades ago. There is simply no such thing as an AD for an experimental aircraft. Experimentals get SBs ( service bulletins) and they are recommendations only. It is up to the owner of the plane whether they will comply with the SB.
 
Last edited:
Tom-D said:
Rotor mentions two references, both of which are not regulatory in nature. one is a letter from an insurance agent. the other an AC. neither of which will over ride the regulation as written.

here is the paragraph that says it all:

The AD applicability statement will identify if the AD applies to non-TC’d aircraft or engines, propellers, and appliances installed thereon.

My contention is simple, you are running a lycoming engine with the data tag still in place, That is a type certified engine. and the AD says it applies to that engine you must comply. If you are using a transponder such as the old King that has an AD that is a type certified transponder and the AD applies no matter what aircraft it is installed in.
Click to expand...

While the engine may be type certified it no longer is in the same type certificated aircraft. It is now a certified engine in an experimental aircraft, now considered experimental . If the engine is removed from the experimental it would need to be updated with all the latest ADs to be put in service in a certificated airplane. As long as the certified engine is in an experimental it is exempt from ADs.
 
Last edited:
hindsight2020 said:
I'm a certified aircraft owner (begrudgingly). I cannot for the life of me understand why anyone would want to cut at the experimental crowd.
Click to expand...
I think there are two schools:
It's not fair. They are getting away with something.

and:
They don't have the proper certificates or training in making the log book entries that keep us safe. You have to believe in the system.
 
A few years back, didn't they ground all the CH 601s out there because the wing spars were failing and folding up? Wasn't that an AD, or was it something else? Did it only apply to the factory built LSAs?
 
Dav8or said:
A few years back, didn't they ground all the CH 601s out there because the wing spars were failing and folding up? Wasn't that an AD, or was it something else? Did it only apply to the factory built LSAs?
Click to expand...

Correct, if they were factory built they issued an AD grounding them. At the same time they put out an SB and modified the front and aft spars for homebuilt experimental versions.
 
Last edited:
Tom-D said:
While the Exp aircraft are exempt from part 43, by wording in the FAR, they are not exempt from Part 39.

Prove me wrong :)
39.1 Purpose of this regulation.
The regulations in this part provide a legal framework for FAA's system of Airworthiness Directives.

39.3 Definition of airworthiness directives.
FAA's airworthiness directives are legally enforceable rules that apply to the following products: aircraft, aircraft engines, propellers, and appliances.

39.5 When does FAA issue airworthiness directives?
FAA issues an airworthiness directive addressing a product when we find that:

(a) An unsafe condition exists in the product; and

(b) The condition is likely to exist or develop in other products of the same type design.


39.7 What is the legal effect of failing to comply with an airworthiness directive?
Anyone who operates a product that does not meet the requirements of an applicable airworthiness directive is in violation of this section.
39.9 What if I operate an aircraft or use a product that does not meet the requirements of an airworthiness directive?
If the requirements of an airworthiness directive have not been met, you violate
39.7 each time you operate the aircraft or use the product.
Click to expand...

You call yourself a FAA Licensed A&P /IA and don't know the correct and legal answer to this lame question...:mad2::mad2:.......:eek:...............:lol:
 
Geico266 said:
:eek:

Tom is just .......:stirpot:
Click to expand...

Naw...... he is just jeleous of all the experimental builders who have successfully built ,fly and maintain their own airworthy aircraft..:yes:..;)..

ps... and he sees the writing on the wall for IA's....:yikes:.............................:nono:
 
N801BH said:
Naw...... he is just jeleous of all the experimental builders who have successfully built ,fly and maintain their own airworthy aircraft..:yes:..;)..

ps... and he sees the writing on the wall for IA's....:yikes:.............................:nono:
Click to expand...

I think this issue is a study of how over regulation kill an industry, and how innovation and common sense rules the day... when allowed.
 
Last edited:
N801BH said:
You call yourself a FAA Licensed A&P /IA and don't know the correct and legal answer to this lame question...:mad2::mad2:.......:eek:...............:lol:
Click to expand...

Do you believe the EXP types are exempt from part 39? if so why?
 
Geico266 said:
I think this issue is a study of how over regulation kill an industry, and how innovation and common sense rules the day... when allowed.
Click to expand...

Kind of a smug response. I think you need to expand your thinking and try to understand how it is we arrived in this position. Why were all those regulations enacted? Why do certified products cost so much more? Why does every nut and bolt on a factory plane have to be "certified"?

We are a nation ruled by lawyers and the legal system is ingrained in our collective consciousness. When an American feels he has been wronged, or slighted, the first thought is to seek out a lawyer and file a suit. In addition, when a tragedy occurs and it turns out that no one broke any laws, we demand our law makers to make a new law in an attempt to prevent future tragedies.

If in fact, certified light piston GA shrivels up and dies, leaving only E/AB and crashes continue, it is then naive to believe that the laws, lawsuits and regulations will not be forthcoming to the E/AB community IMO. Give it time. The reason why European and other foreign airplane factories are surviving and turning out new designs and products is because they exist in a different culture than ours.

Our fight is not with the government, or even the lawyers, but rather our culture. It is our lack of personal responsibility and the value we place on the individual over the collective combined and wrapped up with greed that is bringing our country down, starting with GA.
 
Dav8or said:
Kind of a smug response. I think you need to expand your thinking and try to understand how it is we arrived in this position. Why were all those regulations enacted? Why do certified products cost so much more? Why does every nut and bolt on a factory plane have to be "certified"?

We are a nation ruled by lawyers and the legal system is ingrained in our collective consciousness. When an American feels he has been wronged, or slighted, the first thought is to seek out a lawyer and file a suit. In addition, when a tragedy occurs and it turns out that no one broke any laws, we demand our law makers to make a new law in an attempt to prevent future tragedies.

If in fact, certified light piston GA shrivels up and dies, leaving only E/AB and crashes continue, it is then naive to believe that the laws, lawsuits and regulations will not be forthcoming to the E/AB community IMO. Give it time. The reason why European and other foreign airplane factories are surviving and turning out new designs and products is because they exist in a different culture than ours.

Our fight is not with the government, or even the lawyers, but rather our culture. It is our lack of personal responsibility and the value we place on the individual over the collective combined and wrapped up with greed that is bringing our country down, starting with GA.
Click to expand...

I wasn't being smug at all. Your response just further illustrates how laws, rules, and regs kill business. As a student of economics it is pretty clear how we have shot ourselves in the foot with our litigiousness.
 
The insurance guy's letter misses an important point. If your insurance doesn't cover your crash because you were in violation of an AD, and there's nothing else in your estate worth taking, the lawyer on the other side will probably decline to take the case on a contingency basis without the possibility of a big insurance payout.
 
Kinda like Vans SB concerning bags of soft rivits that were sent out with the kits.
Guy gets the SB after he's finished construction, and decides rather than replace rivits, he just sell th' little thing, and not worry about it. After all, gallons of slick paint will fill the dimples anyway, and no one will know the difference.
 
bluerooster said:
Kinda like Vans SB concerning bags of soft rivits that were sent out with the kits.
Guy gets the SB after he's finished construction, and decides rather than replace rivits, he just sell th' little thing, and not worry about it. After all, gallons of slick paint will fill the dimples anyway, and no one will know the difference.
Click to expand...

One more reason to buy a Glasair. :D
 
bluerooster said:
Kinda like Vans SB concerning bags of soft rivits that were sent out with the kits.
Guy gets the SB after he's finished construction, and decides rather than replace rivits, he just sell th' little thing, and not worry about it. After all, gallons of slick paint will fill the dimples anyway, and no one will know the difference.
Click to expand...
You heard of that actually happening? Or was that just an assumption that it could have?
 
Geico266 said:
...Your response just further illustrates how laws, rules, and regs kill business...
Click to expand...

Allow me to interject here - if only it were so simple.

The fact is that "laws, rules and regs" mostly come about for a reason. For instance it's nice to have a wood burning fireplace in your house, even if it's in an urban or suburban area but then there is inevitably going to be the jerk who likes to chop up old pressure treated fence posts and have a nice green fire on Christmas Eve.

If "business" were allowed to do whatever it is they felt they needed to do to be competitive this place would be a lot more like China, the air might look kinda brown and the water in the creek out back might not look or smell so good. I'm all for you having a successful enterprise pal but don't screw up my yard doing it.

I know that the regs do appear to be and often are over bearing and I know that politicians, who are after all basically "law makers" jump at every opportunity to make a new law in order to appear as if they are actually doing something. I know there are completely inane laws and regulations out there and honestly most of them are the result of some politician trying to squirt some oil on a squeaky wheel but there are also, and this is the more disturbing side, laws and regulations that exist because of money controlling politics.

So put that in your pipe and smoke it. :stirpot:
 
'Most AD's include in the applicability provision the phrase "certified in any category" to ensure that the AD covers the aircraft affected by the unsafe condition, regardless of the kind of type certificate issued.
 
bluerooster said:
Kinda like Vans SB concerning bags of soft rivits that were sent out with the kits.
Guy gets the SB after he's finished construction, and decides rather than replace rivits, he just sell th' little thing, and not worry about it. After all, gallons of slick paint will fill the dimples anyway, and no one will know the difference.
Click to expand...

Never heard of that before. :no:

All parts sent out with the kits are to AN Standards for aircraft hardware.
 
Silvaire said:
Allow me to interject here - if only it were so simple.

The fact is that "laws, rules and regs" mostly come about for a reason. For instance it's nice to have a wood burning fireplace in your house, even if it's in an urban or suburban area but then there is inevitably going to be the jerk who likes to chop up old pressure treated fence posts and have a nice green fire on Christmas Eve.

If "business" were allowed to do whatever it is they felt they needed to do to be competitive this place would be a lot more like China, the air might look kinda brown and the water in the creek out back might not look or smell so good. I'm all for you having a successful enterprise pal but don't screw up my yard doing it.

I know that the regs do appear to be and often are over bearing and I know that politicians, who are after all basically "law makers" jump at every opportunity to make a new law in order to appear as if they are actually doing something. I know there are completely inane laws and regulations out there and honestly most of them are the result of some politician trying to squirt some oil on a squeaky wheel but there are also, and this is the more disturbing side, laws and regulations that exist because of money controlling politics.

So put that in your pipe and smoke it. :stirpot:
Click to expand...

So you are okay with more regulations as long as it saves one child. Got it. :mad2:
 
I remember seeing that letter. Now, my question still stands... has anyone actually heard of a plane being completed or sold with the soft "rivits" [sic] installed?
 
It appears a few Experimental Aircraft owners don't care, have no idea of what they are doing. Since some did not build it but think they can maintain it, they believe since it's Experimental they can do what they want. Some Experimental planes have larger engines, props and whatever else that were not part of the original Airworthiness and still operate under the original Special Airworthiness Cert. and still pass the annual conformity requirement. It's time to require a new Special Airworthiness Cert every 5 years or so for Experimental Aircraft to weed out the rouge Aircraft.

And give the A&P/IA the authority to issue it, I need the money.:wink2:
 
Last edited:
brien23 said:
It appears a few Experimental Aircraft owners don't care, have no idea of what they are doing. Since some did not build it but think they can maintain it, they believe since it's Experimental they can do what they want.
Click to expand...

Go to any small airport out there that has an active GA community, peek behind those closed hangar doors, and you'll (gasp) see the exact same thing happening to a significant percentage of certificated aircraft.

I've rented hangars at two dozen airports (at least) and I've found this almost everywhere. And the older the pilot and his A&P I/A the more likely a wink and nod are involved in the annual inspections.

I don't see airplanes falling out of the sky, certificated or not, because of this.
 
Last edited:
brien23 said:
It appears a few Experimental Aircraft owners don't care, have no idea of what they are doing. Since some did not build it but think they can maintain it, they believe since it's Experimental they can do what they want. Some Experimental planes have larger engines, props and whatever else that were not part of the original Airworthiness and still operate under the original Special Airworthiness Cert. and still pass the annual conformity requirement. It's time to require a new Special Airworthiness Cert every 5 years or so for Experimental Aircraft to weed out the rouge Aircraft.

And give the A&P/IA the authority to issue it, I need the money.:wink2:
Click to expand...


You must have gone to the same A&P /IA school ol Tom did...

Alot of us built our experimentals and hold the "repairmens certificate" for that airframe.....

For those who didn't build and just bought an existing experimental. where in your FAA rules for A&P's /IA's does it say an owner CANNOT maintain their plane.......:dunno:...

Hint.......................NO WHERE..............
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top