New Currency Rule for Homebuilt?

[Gig Giacona]

Read this today on AVWEB. What is the deal?

http://avweb.com/newswire/11_19b/briefs/189753-1.html

The FAA is underscoring regulatory requirements for pilots who fly
passengers in homebuilt aircraft. A new notice would restrict them to flying
passengers only in planes in which they are qualified and experienced.
Currency and proficiency rules apply to those who take people for rides in
their experimental aircraft and EAA says current pilots have until Aug. 31,
2005, to prove they have the necessary category and class ratings for the
aircraft they fly. Those who always fly solo will not need to fly through
the bureaucratic hoops. Under the new notice, which was issued April 21,
affected pilots will have fill out a form and make sure their recreational
or higher certificate is in order. Flying passengers requires that the pilot
have at least five hours as PIC in the category, class, make and model of
the experimental aircraft in question between Sept. 1, 2004, and Aug. 31,
2005. An authorized flight instructor must make a logbook entry attesting to
the pilot's proficiency with the aircraft and then the pilot must show the
log to a designated pilot examiner or FAA Operations Inspector. A new pilot
certificate will then be issued restricting the pilot to flying that
particular experimental aircraft (or any others for which he or she has done
the paperwork).

[Dude]

"Gig Giacona" > wrote in message
news:aXRge.4964$Db6.2196@okepread05...
>
> Read this today on AVWEB. What is the deal?
>
> http://avweb.com/newswire/11_19b/briefs/189753-1.html
>
> The FAA is underscoring regulatory requirements for pilots who fly
> passengers in homebuilt aircraft. A new notice would restrict them to
> flying passengers only in planes in which they are qualified and
> experienced. Currency and proficiency rules apply to those who take people
> for rides in their experimental aircraft and EAA says current pilots have
> until Aug. 31, 2005, to prove they have the necessary category and class
> ratings for the aircraft they fly. Those who always fly solo will not need
> to fly through the bureaucratic hoops. Under the new notice, which was
> issued April 21, affected pilots will have fill out a form and make sure
> their recreational or higher certificate is in order. Flying passengers
> requires that the pilot have at least five hours as PIC in the category,
> class, make and model of the experimental aircraft in question between
> Sept. 1, 2004, and Aug. 31, 2005. An authorized flight instructor must
> make a logbook entry attesting to the pilot's proficiency with the
> aircraft and then the pilot must show the log to a designated pilot
> examiner or FAA Operations Inspector. A new pilot certificate will then be
> issued restricting the pilot to flying that particular experimental
> aircraft (or any others for which he or she has done the paperwork).


1. Bureaucracy detests what it cannot control
2. They hate you killing yourself, but harming others is really, really
irritating (and lots more career risk).

Seriously, it all sounds reasonable, but I know many instructors refuse to
fly in homebuilts. I suppose EAA will start having to have a contact sheet.

At the sametime, NavCanada will now let you get your experimental
professionally built AND let you get a repair certificate as well. Proof
that ideas should be judged on their own merits, and not that of their
source (seriously, Ottawa went for this!).

PS no disrespect to the Canadians, love those people. Don't like Washington
anymore than Ottawa.

[Roger]

On Fri, 13 May 2005 02:57:53 GMT, "Dude" > wrote:

>
>"Gig Giacona" > wrote in message
>news:aXRge.4964$Db6.2196@okepread05...
>>
>> Read this today on AVWEB. What is the deal?
>>
>> http://avweb.com/newswire/11_19b/briefs/189753-1.html
>>
>> The FAA is underscoring regulatory requirements for pilots who fly
>> passengers in homebuilt aircraft. A new notice would restrict them to
>> flying passengers only in planes in which they are qualified and
>> experienced. Currency and proficiency rules apply to those who take people
>> for rides in their experimental aircraft and EAA says current pilots have
>> until Aug. 31, 2005, to prove they have the necessary category and class
>> ratings for the aircraft they fly. Those who always fly solo will not need
>> to fly through the bureaucratic hoops. Under the new notice, which was
>> issued April 21, affected pilots will have fill out a form and make sure
>> their recreational or higher certificate is in order. Flying passengers
>> requires that the pilot have at least five hours as PIC in the category,
>> class, make and model of the experimental aircraft in question between
>> Sept. 1, 2004, and Aug. 31, 2005. An authorized flight instructor must
>> make a logbook entry attesting to the pilot's proficiency with the
>> aircraft and then the pilot must show the log to a designated pilot
>> examiner or FAA Operations Inspector. A new pilot certificate will then be
>> issued restricting the pilot to flying that particular experimental
>> aircraft (or any others for which he or she has done the paperwork).
>
>
>1. Bureaucracy detests what it cannot control
>2. They hate you killing yourself, but harming others is really, really
>irritating (and lots more career risk).
>
>Seriously, it all sounds reasonable, but I know many instructors refuse to
>fly in homebuilts. I suppose EAA will start having to have a contact sheet.
>
>At the sametime, NavCanada will now let you get your experimental
>professionally built AND let you get a repair certificate as well. Proof
>that ideas should be judged on their own merits, and not that of their
>source (seriously, Ottawa went for this!).
>
>PS no disrespect to the Canadians, love those people. Don't like Washington
>anymore than Ottawa.
>
>

Roger

[Jerry Springer]

>>Seriously, it all sounds reasonable, but I know many instructors refuse to
>>fly in homebuilts. I suppose EAA will start having to have a contact sheet.
>>


Being an instructor myself I know a lot of instructors and everyone of
them jump at a chance to fly in my RV-6. I also believe that EAA already
has a list of instructor contacts, you just have to submit your name
to them if you want to be on it.

Jerry

[Dude]

"Jerry Springer" > wrote in message
...
>
>>>Seriously, it all sounds reasonable, but I know many instructors refuse
>>>to fly in homebuilts. I suppose EAA will start having to have a contact
>>>sheet.
>>>
>
>
> Being an instructor myself I know a lot of instructors and everyone of
> them jump at a chance to fly in my RV-6. I also believe that EAA already
> has a list of instructor contacts, you just have to submit your name
> to them if you want to be on it.
>
> Jerry
>

That's good. This shouldn't end up being to big a deal then.

If you head to a big city CPC, you will likely find more of the guys I am
talking about.

[UltraJohn]

>>> Read this today on AVWEB. What is the deal?
>>>
>>> http://avweb.com/newswire/11_19b/briefs/189753-1.html
>>>
>>> The FAA is underscoring regulatory requirements for pilots who fly
>>> passengers in homebuilt aircraft. A new notice would restrict them to
>>> flying passengers only in planes in which they are qualified and


Does anyone have a link to the notice so we can read the whole thing not
something written by some author for an aviation web news site?

A couple questions I might have.
1. Is this for all classes of license or is this Sport Pilot.
(it sounds like sportpilot since they require check out in individual
planes (unless PPL operating as SP).
2. Is this a proposal or has in been implemented without any public
response?

I have never heard of PPL needing a new license for a particular airplane.
Maybe jets or aircraft over 12500 lbs.

John

[David O]

"Gig Giacona" > wrote:

>
>Read this today on AVWEB. What is the deal?
>http://avweb.com/newswire/11_19b/briefs/189753-1.html


Gig and all,

No action is required under this notice for the vast majority of
pilots who fly experimental aircraft. This notice affects only those
pilots who wish to carry passengers in an experimental aircraft for
which they do not hold the appropriate category and class rating. No
action is required under this notice, for example, for pilots who hold
a private pilot SEL airplane category and class rating certificate and
fly a SEL experimental aircraft. On the other hand, pilots who hold a
private pilot SEL airplane category and class rating certificate and
fly a multi-engine experimental aircraft (MEL) will need to comply
with the new requirements if they wish to carry passengers in their
multi-engine experimental aircraft.

Here is a link to the FAA notice (a MS Word document)
http://www.faa.gov/avr/afs/notices/8700/n8700-42.doc

Here is a link to the EAA's explanation of the notice
http://www.eaa.org/communications/eaanews/050509_rating.html


David O -- http://www.AirplaneZone.com

[Ron Wanttaja]

On Sat, 14 May 2005 20:23:20 GMT, UltraJohn > wrote:

>>>> Read this today on AVWEB. What is the deal?
>>>>
>>>> http://avweb.com/newswire/11_19b/briefs/189753-1.html
>>>>
>>>> The FAA is underscoring regulatory requirements for pilots who fly
>>>> passengers in homebuilt aircraft. A new notice would restrict them to
>>>> flying passengers only in planes in which they are qualified and
>
>
>Does anyone have a link to the notice so we can read the whole thing not
>something written by some author for an aviation web news site?

Check EAA's web page:

http://www.eaa.org/communications/eaanews/050509_rating.html

They have a link to the actual FAA notice.

Ron Wanttaja

[UltraJohn]

David O wrote:

> "Gig Giacona" > wrote:
>
>>
>>Read this today on AVWEB. What is the deal?
>>http://avweb.com/newswire/11_19b/briefs/189753-1.html
>
>
> Gig and all,
>
> No action is required under this notice for the vast majority of


David
Thanks for the info. It also answers my post elsewhere on this ng.
John

[Peter Dohm]

Thanks to "David O" for the link to the FAA Notice as a Word Document.

The way that I read it, this new procedure is really intended by the FAA to
be a convenient shortcut for those pilots holding a Recreational certificate
or higher, and who desire priveleges to fly only a particular make and model
of aircraft for which they would not otherwise be qualified.

The example is given of the Leza Air Cam, which a pilot with a multi-engine
land rating is qualified to fly. A pilot holding only a single engine land
rating
could qualify, in as few as five hours, to carry passengers in the Air Cam;
but would not be automatically qualified to fly any other multi-engine
aircraft.

Additional discussion, and additional example(s) make this a very good
thing to read--expecially since the EAA explanation, which I read first,
left me with an entirely different impression...

Peter

Disclaimer: I am not curently a pilot, nor have I ever been an attorney.


> Here is a link to the FAA notice (a MS Word document)
> http://www.faa.gov/avr/afs/notices/8700/n8700-42.doc
>
> Here is a link to the EAA's explanation of the notice
> http://www.eaa.org/communications/eaanews/050509_rating.html
>
>
> David O -- http://www.AirplaneZone.com
>
>

[Dave S]

> Does anyone have a link to the notice so we can read the whole thing not
> something written by some author for an aviation web news site?
>
> A couple questions I might have.
> 1. Is this for all classes of license or is this Sport Pilot.
> (it sounds like sportpilot since they require check out in individual
> planes (unless PPL operating as SP).
> 2. Is this a proposal or has in been implemented without any public
> response?
>
> I have never heard of PPL needing a new license for a particular airplane.
> Maybe jets or aircraft over 12500 lbs.
>
> John
>

You've seen the link.. think about it like this.. there are experimental
aircraft out there that are 1) amphibious 2) multiengined or 3)
something OTHER than a "Single Engine Land" type of plane. In the past,
enforcement of pilots who were "SEL" type guys flying multiengine
experimentals or amphibious experimentals was somewhat lax, especially
with passengers.

The rule is not new. The emphasis on enforcing the rule when passenger
carrying is what is new. So, now.. if you wanna take your buddy up for a
joyride in an experimental a/c you have to be just as qualified for it
(category and class) as if it was a standard airworthiness certificated
aircraft.

Dave

[Gig Giacona]

"David O" > wrote in message
...
> "Gig Giacona" > wrote:
>
>>
>>Read this today on AVWEB. What is the deal?
>>http://avweb.com/newswire/11_19b/briefs/189753-1.html
>
>
> Gig and all,
>
> No action is required under this notice for the vast majority of
> pilots who fly experimental aircraft. This notice affects only those
> pilots who wish to carry passengers in an experimental aircraft for
> which they do not hold the appropriate category and class rating. No
> action is required under this notice, for example, for pilots who hold
> a private pilot SEL airplane category and class rating certificate and
> fly a SEL experimental aircraft. On the other hand, pilots who hold a
> private pilot SEL airplane category and class rating certificate and
> fly a multi-engine experimental aircraft (MEL) will need to comply
> with the new requirements if they wish to carry passengers in their
> multi-engine experimental aircraft.
>
> Here is a link to the FAA notice (a MS Word document)
> http://www.faa.gov/avr/afs/notices/8700/n8700-42.doc
>
> Here is a link to the EAA's explanation of the notice
> http://www.eaa.org/communications/eaanews/050509_rating.html
>

Thanks David,

The you and the EAA did a much better job explaining it than AVWeb did.

[Highflyer]

"Dude" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Jerry Springer" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>>>>Seriously, it all sounds reasonable, but I know many instructors refuse
>>>>to fly in homebuilts. I suppose EAA will start having to have a contact
>>>>sheet.
>>>>
>>
>>
>> Being an instructor myself I know a lot of instructors and everyone of
>> them jump at a chance to fly in my RV-6. I also believe that EAA already
>> has a list of instructor contacts, you just have to submit your name
>> to them if you want to be on it.
>>
>> Jerry
>>
>
> That's good. This shouldn't end up being to big a deal then.
>
> If you head to a big city CPC, you will likely find more of the guys I am
> talking about.
>

It isn't really a big deal in any case. It doesn't apply to anyone who has
at least a Private Single Engine Land. That means that it doesn't really
apply to very many folks.

The ones they are out to get rated are the homebuilt helicopter guys who
never got a rotorcraft rating and are flying with just a logbook signoff for
solo.

Highflyer

[Sully]

On Sat, 14 May 2005 20:58:40 -0400, "Peter Dohm"
> wrote:

>Thanks to "David O" for the link to the FAA Notice as a Word Document.
>
>The way that I read it, this new procedure is really intended by the FAA to
>be a convenient shortcut for those pilots holding a Recreational certificate
>or higher, and who desire priveleges to fly only a particular make and model
>of aircraft for which they would not otherwise be qualified.
>
>The example is given of the Leza Air Cam, which a pilot with a multi-engine
>land rating is qualified to fly. A pilot holding only a single engine land
>rating
>could qualify, in as few as five hours, to carry passengers in the Air Cam;
>but would not be automatically qualified to fly any other multi-engine
>aircraft.
>
> Additional discussion, and additional example(s) make this a very good
>thing to read--expecially since the EAA explanation, which I read first,
>left me with an entirely different impression...
>
>Peter
>
>Disclaimer: I am not curently a pilot, nor have I ever been an attorney.
>
>
>> Here is a link to the FAA notice (a MS Word document)
>> http://www.faa.gov/avr/afs/notices/8700/n8700-42.doc
>>
>> Here is a link to the EAA's explanation of the notice
>> http://www.eaa.org/communications/eaanews/050509_rating.html
>>
>>
>> David O -- http://www.AirplaneZone.com
>>
>>
>

I just want to point out that this really isn't "New". My
airworthiness certificate issued in 2002 says the same thing. The
only thing that is new about it is that it sounds like they are going
to make it easier for you if you can show experience in the past year
(I believe it was since Aug) and don't want to jump through all the
hoops of say a multi-engine rating then you can get the experimental
multi-engine. It also sounds like they may be planning on enforcing
it now too.

Gary

[[email protected]]

Yeah, and I think AVWeb got really gigged on this. In their latest
newsletter they get it right, basically what's been said here on this
newsgroup.

Neal


Gig Giacona wrote:
> "David O" > wrote in message
> ...
> > "Gig Giacona" > wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>Read this today on AVWEB. What is the deal?
> >>http://avweb.com/newswire/11_19b/briefs/189753-1.html
> >
> >
> > Gig and all,
> >
> > No action is required under this notice for the vast majority of
> > pilots who fly experimental aircraft. This notice affects only
those
> > pilots who wish to carry passengers in an experimental aircraft for
> > which they do not hold the appropriate category and class rating.
No
> > action is required under this notice, for example, for pilots who
hold
> > a private pilot SEL airplane category and class rating certificate
and
> > fly a SEL experimental aircraft. On the other hand, pilots who
hold a
> > private pilot SEL airplane category and class rating certificate
and
> > fly a multi-engine experimental aircraft (MEL) will need to comply
> > with the new requirements if they wish to carry passengers in their
> > multi-engine experimental aircraft.
> >
> > Here is a link to the FAA notice (a MS Word document)
> > http://www.faa.gov/avr/afs/notices/8700/n8700-42.doc
> >
> > Here is a link to the EAA's explanation of the notice
> > http://www.eaa.org/communications/eaanews/050509_rating.html
> >
>
> Thanks David,
>
> The you and the EAA did a much better job explaining it than AVWeb
did.