LSA repairman certificate

A

Alexb2000

En-Route
Joined
Nov 28, 2010
Messages
3,530
Location
Dallas, TX
Display Name
Display name:
Alexb2000
I have been kicking around buying a pure fishing plane. This would be a real rough field aircraft, tundra tires, etc. I would really like a super cub type LSA aircraft. I want to keep the expenses as low as possible or it just wouldn't be worth messing with. Anyway, there are several LSA cub choices out there so that isn't a problem.

The question I have is about the LSA repairman certificate. I understand it's about a 3 week course and gives repair and inspection authority. I wouldn't be doing any structural repair, rigging work, engine rebuilding, or any other critical function (I would pay a specialist). However, it would be nice to be able to change an alternator, do an inspection, change a gasket, etc.

So is this a reasonable thing to do? Has anyone here done it? I imagine in addition to the course some engine specific training would be in order? Any other concerns, thoughts, recommendations?
 
I'm not sure how I feel about the LSA repairman cert, I understand that there is no need for the training I have in turbines, or pressurization, but at the same time it does seem grossly light.

By all means go for it, but don't be afraid to seek additional training beyond the legal requirements.
 
Skylane81E said:
I'm not sure how I feel about the LSA repairman cert, I understand that there is no need for the training I have in turbines, or pressurization, but at the same time it does seem grossly light.

By all means go for it, but don't be afraid to seek additional training beyond the legal requirements.
Click to expand...

Well on further reading it appears that the repair certificate course is two days to work on your own aircraft. The three week course is to work on other peoples aircraft for profit:hairraise::hairraise::hairraise:

Apparently, after so many repairs and inspections you can apply for an A&P as well.:dunno:

Anyway, seems super light, but that's how I read it. If I go forward with this thing and narrow down the aircraft, I might talk to the manufacturer about type specific training.
 
I don't see a problem with that. The only issue is if someone is overconfident, has bad judgement, and does sloppy work. Otherwise people are going to do what they know how or can learn. Nothing will stop mechanical monkeys from making stuff they own worse. Canada has owner maintenance on regular certified stuff, they don't seem to have a problem.
 
Alexb2000 said:
Well on further reading it appears that the repair certificate course is two days to work on your own aircraft. The three week course is to work on other peoples aircraft for profit:hairraise::hairraise::hairraise:

Apparently, after so many repairs and inspections you can apply for an A&P as well.:dunno:

Anyway, seems super light, but that's how I read it. If I go forward with this thing and narrow down the aircraft, I might talk to the manufacturer about type specific training.
Click to expand...

If you understand that it is limited training, then you are set. Even after three years of school and an A&P certificate there was (and still is) so much more for me to learn.

There is nothing quite like taking care of your own plane,
HAVE FUN!
 
Alexb2000 said:
Well on further reading it appears that the repair certificate course is two days to work on your own aircraft. The three week course is to work on other peoples aircraft for profit:hairraise::hairraise::hairraise:

Apparently, after so many repairs and inspections you can apply for an A&P as well.:dunno:
Click to expand...

The 16 hour course enable you to perform a condition inspection on your own ELSA. The certiricate is issued for you by tail number.
The 120 hour course lets you perform maintenance and sign off SLSA and ELSA.
Standard certificates and E-AB are the same as always.
 
I am looking to get mine to just be able to do preventative maintenance on my S-LSA. One difference between part 23 and ASTM aircraft is that S-LSA's require the factory to specify who can do what even for preventative maintenance. In my case owners can't do anything. I don't think I would sell my services as I don't like the liability issues but just being able to change oil, tires, batteries, etc would be nice.

Carl
 
SportPilotCO said:
I am looking to get mine to just be able to do preventative maintenance on my S-LSA. One difference between part 23 and ASTM aircraft is that S-LSA's require the factory to specify who can do what even for preventative maintenance. In my case owners can't do anything. I don't think I would sell my services as I don't like the liability issues but just being able to change oil, tires, batteries, etc would be nice.

Carl
Click to expand...

Exactly.

I didn't know the rules were different for owners of LSA's, interesting.
 
43.3
(g) Except for holders of a sport pilot certificate, the holder of a pilot certificate issued under part 61 may perform preventive maintenance on any aircraft owned or operated by that pilot which is not used under part 121, 129, or 135 of this chapter. The holder of a sport pilot certificate may perform preventive maintenance on an aircraft owned or operated by that pilot and issued a special airworthiness certificate in the light-sport category.
43.7
(g) The holder of a repairman certificate (light-sport aircraft) with a maintenance rating may approve an aircraft issued a special airworthiness certificate in light-sport category for return to service, as provided in part 65 of this chapter.
This above talks to SLSA
ELSA, being experimental, the trunk monkey can work on but who can sign off is as described above.
 
The folks out at Rainbow Aviation who teach the LSRM classes have some great info on their web site about the rules. One thing to note is that the operating limitations in S-LSA's define who can repair them as well. Here is a discussion that talks to that.
http://www.rainbowaviation.com/articles/operating limitations.pdf

There is also an EAA webinar in their archives by Carol Carpenter who owns Rainbow with her husband.

Carl
 
Alex, I think if you have the mechanical aptitude to change oil, change alternators, etc., then there's no reason why you couldn't comfortably do your own maintenance on the plane.

On the other hand, there's also no reason why you couldn't do that anyway - just find a willing A&P. With the current shop, I made it clear going into the relationship that there are certain things that I want to do, and certain things I want them to do. This is just fine for them. My last shop I made the mistake of setting the precedent of letting them do all the work, which meant it was an uphill battle when I wanted to get my hands more involved.
 
Ted DuPuis said:
Alex, I think if you have the mechanical aptitude to change oil, change alternators, etc., then there's no reason why you couldn't comfortably do your own maintenance on the plane.

On the other hand, there's also no reason why you couldn't do that anyway - just find a willing A&P. With the current shop, I made it clear going into the relationship that there are certain things that I want to do, and certain things I want them to do. This is just fine for them. My last shop I made the mistake of setting the precedent of letting them do all the work, which meant it was an uphill battle when I wanted to get my hands more involved.
Click to expand...

I'm comfortable with mechanical things and I sure spend a lot of time working on them, just not aircraft. So I'll need some training and supervision, but that's OK. My intention is to find a good A&P, perhaps retired, that still likes to mess around a little from time to time (and earn a little extra money) to mentor me and act as an inspector.

I don't mind learning on a VFR LSA type bird, but I'm not sure I want to go through the learning curve on the 206. The conditions I fly in are just too unforgiving.

So here's one I'm thinking about:

http://justaircraft.com/page.php?45

Reasons I like it: burns very little E10 with a Rotax 912iS (no fuel issues), easy to repair, simple, wings fold so I can put it in a trailer just like a glider. That would also be nice because I could have a portable hangar anywhere I went without the expense.

I'm still just kicking the can around.
 
Rotax has some strange MX requirements that can come into play. You might want to check them carefully as it applies to your situation. We bumped into it on a Rans.

Alexb2000 said:
I'm comfortable with mechanical things and I sure spend a lot of time working on them, just not aircraft. So I'll need some training and supervision, but that's OK. My intention is to find a good A&P, perhaps retired, that still likes to mess around a little from time to time (and earn a little extra money) to mentor me and act as an inspector.

I don't mind learning on a VFR LSA type bird, but I'm not sure I want to go through the learning curve on the 206. The conditions I fly in are just too unforgiving.

So here's one I'm thinking about:

http://justaircraft.com/page.php?45

Reasons I like it: burns very little E10 with a Rotax 912iS (no fuel issues), easy to repair, simple, wings fold so I can put it in a trailer just like a glider. That would also be nice because I could have a portable hangar anywhere I went without the expense.

I'm still just kicking the can around.
Click to expand...
 
wabower said:
Rotax has some strange MX requirements that can come into play. You might want to check them carefully as it applies to your situation. We bumped into it on a Rans.
Click to expand...

Wayne-

Give me a hint. I don't know squat about Rotax's, I see a lot of them and thought they had a good rep?
 
The requirements for approved inspectors are quite restrictive. Even our A&P IA couldn't sign off the annual without attending Rotax school or some such nonsense.

Alexb2000 said:
Wayne-

Give me a hint. I don't know squat about Rotax's, I see a lot of them and thought they had a good rep?
Click to expand...
 
Rotax wants you to replace all of the rubber components every 5 years. The lubrication system is, well, unique - and there are procedures to follow if you open up the oil lines. The gear box needs to be inspected every now and again. There are about 1/4 million service bulletins to sort through. But other than that, I haven't run into anything particularly unusual.
 
wabower said:
The requirements for approved inspectors are quite restrictive. Even our A&P IA couldn't sign off the annual without attending Rotax school or some such nonsense.
Click to expand...

Thanks, I'll have to check that out.

Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe said:
Rotax wants you to replace all of the rubber components every 5 years. The lubrication system is, well, unique - and there are procedures to follow if you open up the oil lines. The gear box needs to be inspected every now and again. There are about 1/4 million service bulletins to sort through. But other than that, I haven't run into anything particularly unusual.
Click to expand...

Doesn't sound real good. Know anything about the Jabiru?
 
wabower said:
The requirements for approved inspectors are quite restrictive. Even our A&P IA couldn't sign off the annual without attending Rotax school or some such nonsense.
Click to expand...

Rotax requires training and certification to do warranty work on their engines and can only highly recommend that any mechanic get the training before they work on an engine they aren't familiar with. The FAA says that any certified mechanic (A&P, IA, LSRM) can legally do work as long as they are familiar whether they have been trained and certified by Rotax or not.

Rotax does have some different mx requirements but are still among the most efficient engines around.
 
Alexb2000 said:
Doesn't sound real good. Know anything about the Jabiru?
Click to expand...

Not that big a deal. No, I've never maintained a Jabiru.

I'm happy enough with my Rotax.

Don't expect to save money on parts compared to a Lycoming / Continental.
 
Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe said:
Not that big a deal. No, I've never maintained a Jabiru.

I'm happy enough with my Rotax.

Don't expect to save money on parts compared to a Lycoming / Continental.
Click to expand...

OK, I mis-understood, I thought you were unhappy with Rotax. I've been happy with Lycoming and Continental so that isn't the issue and I don't expect to save any money on parts. I would like to be able to use 10E gas that is common around DFW and many other places. I also like that they have just come out with an injected, electronic ignition version.
 
Alexb2000 said:
I would like to be able to use 10E gas that is common around DFW and many other places.
Click to expand...

The Rotax tolerates E-10, but make sure any rubber fuel lines between the fuel tank and the engine are SAE spec. and not aircraft grade (which will not take E-10).
 
wabower said:
The requirements for approved inspectors are quite restrictive. Even our A&P IA couldn't sign off the annual without attending Rotax school or some such nonsense.
Click to expand...
Wayne,

That is incorrect. Rotax would like to make you believe so, and some light sport repairmen would like you to believe it, but the FAA says no, as another poster said. The FAA says no one can make law, which is what Rotax was trying to do.

The aircraft manufacturer (not Rotax) can define hose changes if you have an SLSA, but if you convert it to ELSA you can do it on any schedule you like - you could even (gasp) replace it on condition.

For a good intro to Rotax, see the Dean Vogel of Lockwood Aviation EAA webinar video. About 1.5 hours, the first almost hour on presentation, the rest questions. Lays some of these concerns to rest.

http://www.eaavideo.org/video.aspx?v=2242926960001
 
Alexb2000 said:
Thanks, I'll have to check that out.

Doesn't sound real good. Know anything about the Jabiru?
Click to expand...

I fly twice Jabirus regularly, one four-cyl and one six-cyl. I've been impressed by both. Seem very well made. Very simple systems. It's a 2000 hr engine but 1000 hr cylinders. On our four-cyl I've been told it's about a grand to replace cylinders...but that might be the cost to our shop.

They're really sweet running engines.
 
About 4 years ago I visited Jabiru USA when my boss was interested in buying one for the Rans S-7 he was (and still is) building. We were impressed. It looks like a mini-Lycoming, and they were smart about using off-the-shelf components where possible.
 
They converted the problem airplane to resolve the problem. The shop owner conferred with his MX guy at FSDO prior to recommending the change. It was all above my pay grade, so I didn't follow it, just noted Rotax' idiotic position, deleted them from my list and moved on.

jnmeade said:
Wayne,

That is incorrect. Rotax would like to make you believe so, and some light sport repairmen would like you to believe it, but the FAA says no, as another poster said. The FAA says no one can make law, which is what Rotax was trying to do.

The aircraft manufacturer (not Rotax) can define hose changes if you have an SLSA, but if you convert it to ELSA you can do it on any schedule you like - you could even (gasp) replace it on condition.

For a good intro to Rotax, see the Dean Vogel of Lockwood Aviation EAA webinar video. About 1.5 hours, the first almost hour on presentation, the rest questions. Lays some of these concerns to rest.

http://www.eaavideo.org/video.aspx?v=2242926960001
Click to expand...
 
Only rotax I ever worked on (912ULS) was for the aircraft manufacturer, so I could have been anyone off the street. It is a little goofy but if you read the manuals it is no problem to take care of.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top