Experimental Catagory: Pros and Cons?

[[email protected]]

What are the pros and cons of putting my Schweizer glider under the
Experimental Catagory? With recent trouble in getting parts etc., it
seems to me that is might make some things easier.

[bumper]

I don't think it's necessary to register an aircraft as experimental in
order to legally owner/manufacture parts for it. There's a section of the
FARs that allows for owner built parts. This section allows orphaned classic
and antique aircraft to keep flying.

bumper
> wrote in message
oups.com...
> What are the pros and cons of putting my Schweizer glider under the
> Experimental Catagory? With recent trouble in getting parts etc., it
> seems to me that is might make some things easier.
>

[BTIZ]

I did not think you could take a type certificated aircraft and change
category from standard to experimental. Any "thought" good DAR can certify
"home made" parts as suitable and place into service.

BT

> wrote in message
oups.com...
> What are the pros and cons of putting my Schweizer glider under the
> Experimental Catagory? With recent trouble in getting parts etc., it
> seems to me that is might make some things easier.
>

[Bob Kuykendall]

Earlier, wrote:
>
> What are the pros and cons of putting my Schweizer glider under the
> Experimental Catagory? With recent trouble in getting parts etc., it
> seems to me that is might make some things easier.

First off, realize that there's not one big happy "Experimental"
category. FAR 21.191divides Experimental into several sub-categories,
each with its own purpose and limitations. A few of the more common
ones are:

Racing and Exhibition - Like it sounds; operation of the aircraft is
limited to races, shows, transport to and from said events, and also
practice for those events. Fortunately, soaring being what it is,
almost every flight can be said to be "practice." Oh - and every year
you have to send the FAA a program letter that states what events and
practice flights you're going to do (it's easier than it sounds). All
ASW-20, Zunis, and Russias (for example) in the US are licensed as
either Experimental Racing or Experimental Exhibition.

Amateur built - You demonstrate that most of the aircraft was built for
the purposes of education and recreation. After that, you get assigned
a test period (usually 25 or 40 hours) during which you can only fly it
so it drops pieces over sparsely populated areas. If the test period
goes well, you receive operating limitations that are pretty much no
more restrictive than a certificated glider. You can also get a nifty
Repair(perspon)s certificate, unsuitable for framing, that allows you
the dubious priviledge of performing your own annual Condition
inspections.

Research and development - You are testing a prototype aircraft. The
FAA looks quite askance at what you're doing unless you're serious
about the testing.

For all of these Experimental certificate types, the basic ground rules
are that you can do any maintenance or repair work yourself, either the
repair(person) or an A&P does the annual condition inspection, and you
must carry a copy of the Operating Limitations document that says what
you can do with the aircraft, and where.

Anyhow, if your Schweizer is a two-seater, realize that if you really
want to certify it as (for example) Experimental Racing or Experimental
Exhibition, the FAA might hand you OpLims that say that only required
flight crew members can fly. The way I understand it, that's what has
happened to virtually every Antonov AN-2 biplane that has reached the
US - a pity; as otherwise they'd make great skydiving jump planes.

Furthermore (and this is probably the important paragraph for you),
note that buried in the FARs (I think it's 21.303) are rules that allow
the owner of a type certificated aircraft to make their own replacement
parts for the aircraft. Note that the owner can't install the parts,
just make them. That might not sound like much, but it is what keeps
many many little puddle-jumping Aeroncas in the air.

Here's a neat article by Don Dodge on the topic:

http://150cessna.tripod.com/parts.html

Also, most of that is from memory; if I've gotten something wrong I
hope somebody will chime in with corrections.

Thanks, and best regards to all

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

[Bob C]

I put my standard category Salto into experimental
exhibition category a few years ago to be able to fly
it at night. I still have to do a 337 for major alterations,
but I had some latitude in establishing new operating
limitations. In this case I am able to fly at night
under certain conditions, which was prohibited under
the original certification. I still must comply with
ADs, and I have to submit an annual program letter.

Certificate changes are done through a MIDO office,
not a FSDO. A DAR can do the inspection and paperwork.
But then a DAR can inspect and approve the manufactured
parts.

Bob

At 03:30 08 March 2006, Btiz wrote:
>I did not think you could take a type certificated
>aircraft and change
>category from standard to experimental. Any 'thought'
>good DAR can certify
>'home made' parts as suitable and place into service.
>
>BT
>
> wrote in message
oups.com...
>> What are the pros and cons of putting my Schweizer
>>glider under the
>> Experimental Catagory? With recent trouble in getting
>>parts

etc., it
>> seems to me that is might make some things easier.
>>
>
>
>

[COLIN LAMB]

>I don't think it's necessary to register an aircraft as experimental in
>order to legally owner/manufacture parts for it. There's a section of the
>FARs that allows for owner built parts. This section allows orphaned
>classic and antique aircraft to keep flying.

The rule is interesting. Owners can make their own replacement parts. But
there are guidelines. My friend owns a Funk airplane that had rusty struts.
After researching the rules, he learned that in order to manufacture the
replacement part, he had to have the blueprints for that part. He could not
simply remove the old part and make a copy of the part. He had to locate a
place that had the blueprints, then purchase a copy of that part of the
blueprint that had that part on it. Once he had that, he could legally make
a replacement part.

Colin

[[email protected]]

Bob, where in the FAR's (or whatever they are really called these days)
does it state the requirement for an annual program letter to be sent
to the FAA if your glider is EXPERIMENTAL - RACING AND EXHIBITION?

Kirk
66

[Andy]

Kirk,

The requirement for me to submit an annual program letter is specified
in para 35 of my Operating Limitations.

Andy

[Cliff Hilty]

I think it changed a few years ago as my 84 Ventus
is Racing and exihibition limited to the 48 continental
US states and no program letter, very liberal compared
to the later ones that I have seen.

At 14:00 08 March 2006, Andy wrote:
>Kirk,
>
>The requirement for me to submit an annual program
>letter is specified
>in para 35 of my Operating Limitations.
>
>Andy
>
>

[[email protected]]

Andy,

That's what I thought - my LS6's Operating Limitations does not have
any requirement for a program letter, and very liberal limits. So it
seems to be up to the local FAA dude to impose program requirements on
new gliders.

I was curious if any of the new requirements were codified in the
"FARs", or were imposed via internal FAA "guidelines".

Tom Knauff says he has picked up a contract to train FAA examiners -
let's hope he can explain to them that the program letters are pretty
much useless.

Good thing my Ops limit letter doesn't have an expiration date!

Kirk
66

[Frank Whiteley]

The difference is whether your glider import and/or initial
airworthiness in the experimental/racing category was pre-(July 9,
1993) or post-(August 18, 1993) moratorium. See FAA Order 8130F with
latest change. Gliders are in Group I. All relevant paragraphs of the
order for the group apply to post-moratorium gliders. Post moratorium
gliders, regardless of country of construction, will have operating
limitations under this order.

Regarding the annual program letter, from paragraph 37:
(37) The owner/operator of this aircraft must submit an annual program
letter update to the
local FSDO that lists airshows, fly-ins, etc., that will be attended
during the next year, commencing at
the time this aircraft is released into phase II operation. This list
of events may be amended, as
applicable, by letter or fax to the FSDO prior to the intended
operation amendments. A copy of the
highlighted aeronautical chart, when applicable, must be carried aboard
this aircraft and be available to
the pilot.
(Applicability: All)

If it's included in the operating limitations, it's required. You
won't find this statement in pre-moratorium operating limitations.
Keep them safe and dry.

The operating limitations are part of your special airworthiness
certificate, FAA Form 8130-7. Pre-moratorium gliders have a seemingly
permanent and portable set of operating limitations. Post-moratorium
gliders airworthiness certificate does not expire, however, there are
30 day reporting requirements regarding change of address of the
registrant or for change of owner or base of operations. Since there
may be a new program letter requirement (the program letter is just a
required extension to the OL's) due to any of the above. A change of
base of operations will require a change in the operating limitations.

Frank Whiteley

[jphoenix]

Pre-1993 Ops Limitations are under a moratorium and do not have the
same annual program updates and change of ownership, geographic
location requirements as do post 1993 ops limitations. People, like me,
with circa 1983 ops limitations are living free and easy comparatively.
Only thing I can't do with the Nimbus is fly it in Canada, or other
location outside the lower 48.

It's all in the FAA Order 8130.2F.

Those of you operating experimental certificated aircraft of any type
that was previously US type certificated with a "different kind of
airworthiness certificate" (for instance utility of glider or 21.29)
need to carefully read part 43 again to determine applicability,
specifically 14 CFR Part 43.1(b)) (amended 1 Sep 04)

Bob C has it right.

Bottom line: part 43 remains applicable to your newly experimental
glider, in addition to the limitations contained in your ops
limitations, etc. etc. blah blah blah.

While were in the rulebook, lets read my favorite: 14 CFR part
91.403(b):

"No person may perform maintenance, preventive maintenance, or
alterations on an aircraft other than as prescribed in the subpart and
other applicable regulations, including part 43 of this chapter."

That rule is what we call an enforceable rule, because it states "No
person may"; as opposed to what we call a permissive rule, such as
91.409(c) that, effectively, exempts the requirement for an annual
inspection on an experimental aircraft (NOT the annual condition
inspection - that's a different thang).

If you're hopelessly confused by all this, don't worry, I am too ;-)


Rules, rules, rules!

Jim

[JMR]

Off topic a bit, but check with your Life insurance company first. Some
don't payout if your death occurs in an "experimental" aircraft. Mine
won't!!!
Justin

[Robert Backer]

I recently purchased life insurance at a very good rate through the AOPA
group program. I requested clarification as my Ventus is experimental
in the US but certified in Germany. The following is the response that
I received.

> Mr. Backer,
>
> This is in follow-up to the phone conversation we had on December 6, 2005.
> The 50% reduction of the death benefit that is referenced in your AOPA
> certificate for an aircraft that is not certified by a governmental unit,
> is not strictly limited to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA).
> Since your glider is certified by the LBA, which is affiliated with the
> International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO), a full death benefit
> would be payable in the event your death occurred while operating this
> aircraft.
>
> If you have any more questions, please feel free to contact me in the
> method most convenient for you and thank you for your continued interest in
> our AOPA group life insurance program.
>
> Rebekah L. Twaddle
> Minnesota Life Insurance Company
> Group Farm Credit
> Customer Service Representative
> 651-665-3862



JMR wrote:
> Off topic a bit, but check with your Life insurance company first. Some
> don't payout if your death occurs in an "experimental" aircraft. Mine
> won't!!!
> Justin
>

[Michael McNulty]

"Andy" > wrote in message
ups.com...
>
> wrote:
>> What are the pros and cons of putting my Schweizer glider under the
>> Experimental Catagory? With recent trouble in getting parts etc., it
>> seems to me that is might make some things easier.
>
> Pro - Only need airframe mechanic for condition inspection instead of
> IA for annula inspection.
>
> Con - Your life insurance is probably not in effect while flying an
> experimental aircraft.
> Con - May have to submit program letter every year.
>
> There may be many others but these are the only things that I noticed
> different when I changed form a std airworthiness glider to a newer
> experimental (exhibition/ air racing) glider.
>
>
> Andy
>

The "Pro" above is not valid in your stated sitiuation. The U.S.
regulations state that "Experimental" registered aircraft that were
previously registered as "Standard" are still under the Part 43 requirements
and so must still have an annual inspection by an IA. (See the first
paragraph or two of Part 43.)

[jphoenix]

Jim said before:

....91.409(c) effectively exempts the requirement for an annual
inspection on an experimental aircraft (NOT the annual condition
inspection - that's a different thang).

Yes. as Michael states, Part 43 must still be complied with in this
case ("Experimental" registered aircraft that were
previously registered as "Standard"), however the annual inspection
requirement is not a 43 rule, it is a 91 rule. So, as Bob C states, one
must do the 337's, etc. comply with the performance rules in 43 and all
that other stuff, but no "annual" by an IA - just an annual condition
by an A&P.

Unless I'm wrong - that has happened upon occasion.

Please note the absence of the word "always in my posts" - I am
learning, albeit slowly.

Jim

[[email protected]]

Good info!

I better run out and make a bunch of copies of my ops limitations!

Kirk

[Andy]

Do you lurk RAS all year round in the hope of finding fault with
something I post?

[Henryk Birecki]

To celebrate the 10'th anniversary of the program and to answer
people's needs to support gliding software development (Andy, are you
there ?) and to answer questions as to value I put on the program
(Marta ?) I decided to sell 10th anniversary registration for the
program. For the price of $500 the buyer will get free download of the
program, free support on the GPS_LOG Yahoo discussion group, and
satisfaction of buying something.

For brief history of GPS_LOG and for the special please visit
http://www.soaringpilotsoftware.com/tenth_aniversary.htm

Happy flying, (it's pouring here :( )
Henryk Birecki