Experimental Aiworthiness

[Gadget Guy]

I have just recently had my Airworthiness inspection on a DG-300 completed by the local DAR. He provided me with 5 pages of limitations. I noticed that the past owner had only 1 page, a total of 9 limitations. The airplane has only been in the country for 7 years. Does someone know where these limitations come from? What is the Guideline that the FAA DAR follows when issueing?
The plane has a exhibition/racing Special Airworthiness.

John

[Frank Whiteley]

FAA Order 8310F, including Chg 1 (347pages)
http://tinyurl.com/8fxtg (pdf)

See Section 10, pg 184 for Experimental Racing, Exhibition. All items
that pertain to Group I, Performance Competition Aircraft as
applicable.

Frank Whiteley

[JS]

Try re-applying for the Operating Limitations at your FSDO. My old
OLs had 16 paragraphs, one being the requirement to send an annual
Program Letter to a specific FSDO which no longer existed. It was also
2300 miles away.
I applied for a new EXP certificate and Operating Limitations at the
local FSDO, which came to 9 sensible paragraphs. The only Program
Letter required was submitted with the application. I thought that was
exceptional service, and cost nothing.
Yes, you did read - exceptional service - from the FAA!
When an Experimental aircraft moves from one FSDO's jurisdiction to
another, the new local FSDO would prefer to have the paperwork filed in
their office.
Jim

[Gadget Guy]

Thanks Jim
The other item that we started to discuss locally is can a owner of a experimental perform "ALL" maintenance on their ship? Part 43.1 (b) says "This part does not apply to any aircraft for which the FAA has issued an experimental certificate, unless the FAA has previously issued a different kind of airworthiness certificate for that aircraft. "

The local DAR had said that I can do all maintenance. I just log it to the plane log book and put my pilot certificate number down.

Now I know my own limits of what I can do and can't do mechanically. But does this mean that the only sign off I need from a AP or AI is for the condition inspection every year? This would lead me to believe that the only advantage to a homebuilt is a Repairmans liscense allows you to do your own annual.

Is this thinking correct?


Try re-applying for the Operating Limitations at your FSDO. My old
OLs had 16 paragraphs, one being the requirement to send an annual
Program Letter to a specific FSDO which no longer existed. It was also
2300 miles away.
I applied for a new EXP certificate and Operating Limitations at the
local FSDO, which came to 9 sensible paragraphs. The only Program
Letter required was submitted with the application. I thought that was
exceptional service, and cost nothing.
Yes, you did read - exceptional service - from the FAA!
When an Experimental aircraft moves from one FSDO's jurisdiction to
another, the new local FSDO would prefer to have the paperwork filed in
their office.
Jim

[Bob Kuykendall]

Earlier, Gadget Guy wrote:


> ...But does this mean that the only sign off I need from a AP or AI is for
> the condition inspection every year? This would lead me to believe that
> the only advantage to a homebuilt is a Repairmans liscense allows you to
> do your own annual.
>
> Is this thinking correct?

I believe that it is correct, unless there are specific directives
otherwise in your Operating Limitations. It's definitely how I approach
my experimental glider.

But, personally, I'm of a mind that the annual condition inspection is
best done by a party other than the builder or owner. They're more
liely to bring a fresh perspective to the job.

Bob K.

[Eric Greenwell]

Bob Kuykendall wrote:
> Earlier, Gadget Guy wrote:
>
>
>
>>...But does this mean that the only sign off I need from a AP or AI is for
>>the condition inspection every year? This would lead me to believe that
>>the only advantage to a homebuilt is a Repairmans liscense allows you to
>>do your own annual.
>>
>>Is this thinking correct?
>
>
> I believe that it is correct, unless there are specific directives
> otherwise in your Operating Limitations. It's definitely how I approach
> my experimental glider.
>
> But, personally, I'm of a mind that the annual condition inspection is
> best done by a party other than the builder or owner. They're more
> liely to bring a fresh perspective to the job.

This is certainly my experience over the last 20 years.

--
Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA

www.motorglider.org - Download "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane
Operation"

[Frank Whiteley]

There are differences regarding the assignment and transferability of
operating limitations depending on whether your glider was pre- (July
9, 1993) or post- (August 18, 1993) moratorium import.

Frank Whiteley

[JS]

Gadget Guy wrote:
>
> The other item that we started to discuss locally is can a owner of a
> experimental perform "ALL" maintenance on their ship?
>

We tend to be a bit liberal with the EXP rules. I hear you can
disassemble and reassemble the whole flying machine, but modification
is a bit of a gray area. There is a rating (?) you can get from your
FSDO which would permit you to perform maintenance on your own
experimental aircraft. This can be used to log hours toward other
mechanic ratings.
Agreed, Bob, a fresh perspective is good on the annual "condition
inspection".
Jim

[Frank Whiteley]

Liberal or not, alteration or major modification with likely void your
current airworthy and involve a new Special Airworthiness Certificate
which would require new operating limitations and program letter and
perhaps fly-off requirements.

I'm aware of a experimental glider that the two previous owners were
not flying legally. Neither came to the attention of the FAA, but
there exists a trail of documentation that would indicate that pilots
and perhaps those signing off the condition inspections were ignorant
of specific requirements.

Frank Whiteley

[Bob Kuykendall]

Earlier, JS wrote:


> We tend to be a bit liberal with the EXP rules. I hear you can
> disassemble and reassemble the whole flying machine, but modification
> is a bit of a gray area. There is a rating (?) you can get from your
> FSDO which would permit you to perform maintenance on your own
> experimental aircraft. This can be used to log hours toward other
> mechanic ratings...

So far as I know, there is no such rating. The closest thing I know of
is the reparman's certificate available to the builder of an
amateur-built experimental. As as others have mentioned, the only
unique priviledge it confers is that of conducting the annual condition
inspection.

Modifications depend on the aircraft's specific operating limitations.
Several years ago I developed a retrofit center stick control system
for my HP-18. At the time, my OLs specified that I had to inform the
FAA in writing of any major modifications. I did, and the FAA guys came
out and inspected it. They issued a new airworthiness certificate, and
also new operating limitations that said removed the provision for
informing the FAA, and instead just imposing a new test period.

Thanks, and best regards to all

Bob K.
http://www.hpaircraft.com/hp-24

[[email protected]]

Gadget Guy wrote:
> I have just recently had my Airworthiness inspection on a DG-300
> completed by the local DAR. He provided me with 5 pages of limitations.
> I noticed that the past owner had only 1 page, a total of 9 limitations.
> The airplane has only been in the country for 7 years. Does someone
> know where these limitations come from? What is the Guideline that the
> FAA DAR follows when issueing?
> The plane has a exhibition/racing Special Airworthiness.
>
> John
>
>
> --
> Gadget Guy

Since I moved from Florida to New Mexico I had to update my
registration, special airworthiness certificate, operating limitations,
and program letter. The local FSDO made it as painless as possible,
and to zero in on the question you pose, I did a very careful check to
ensure that my operating limitations did not change from the old
version to new. I found one paragraph missing from the new OLs and
asked the inspector about it, but he said the ommission was covered by
what was in my program letter. And besides, he also said that the OLs
change all the time. I have quite a few more paragraphs than the nine
you have, but they are not onerous. I can pretty much fly wherever and
whenever I want. And if you want to fly somewhere that you did not
indicate in your program letter, it is simply a matter of notifying the
FAA of your intentions, and you can do that by faxing an amendment of
your program letter to the local FSDO. Your duty is to notify only so
a response is not required (nor are you likely to get one).