Peter Dohm wrote in
:

... why an owner would want them to do so.

In general, there are less restrictions on the operation af a
certificated aircraft than there are for an experimental,
For many of the descriptions in this thread, an STC would seem
(outwardly) to be the more efficient process.

If you were going to restore the certificated aircraft back to a
condition consistent with its type certificate, maybe with only VERY
MINOR changes, then you would probably be correct. But in this case
they are going to wind up hanging a foreign turboprop engine on the
thing, change the fuel system, etc. (in addition to turning it back into
an airplane again G).

I know the son of the guy who did the Jet Prop Malibu STC, and I also
worked with GAMI on the original GAMIjectors STC (my plane was the TSIO-
360 test aircraft). For the Malibu these guys are rebuilding, figure
that even a one-time STC would probably run them $2,000,000 and take
four or five years (after the plane is flying). Not to mention having
to go through a lot of it all over, every time they decide to change
something. And for all that time they won't be able to fly anything but
very limited flights, with no one else on board, in designated areas,
while paying five times the normal insurance costs.

Sure, they are going to wind up with a one-off plane that only they can
maintain, probably can't be sold at a reasonable price, and will never
recover all their sweat equity. But isn't that what homebuilding is all
about anyway? {:)

-----------------------------------------------
James M. Knox
TriSoft ph 512-385-0316
1109-A Shady Lane fax 512-366-4331
Austin, Tx 78721
-----------------------------------------------