changing operating limitations

I'm not sure of what to do with your post. I can't argue with anything in
it, but it is not very relevant to what the OP was asking about.

If I am remembering correctly, he asked about getting an RV-3 in under the
SP rule. It would not have any problem with flutter, or structure, I think
it is safe to say.

Sure, you could fly past the rule limits, but at some point in time,
(probably when the pilot screws up, and the FAA is investigating) it has to
make the muckety-mucks happy, that it is SP legal. That is the only
question at issue, I think.
--
Jim in NC

"Rich S." wrote in message
...
X-No-Archive

"Morgans" wrote in message
...

If you took a Lycoming, and said you were going to limit it for
continuous
operation at 2,000 RPM, that would not fly for the sport plane
restrictions.
They (the FAA) all know that this engine can run much faster than that,
with
no harm. So you are told to try again; no dice.

Jim...........

There are many factors besides engine operating parameters which limit
cruising speed. In some aircraft it may be control surface flutter, others
may be subject to overstress by outside aerodynamic forces (hence
maneuvering speed). While an engine may be capable of driving an airframe
at
speeds in excess of 120 knots, the airframe itself may be beyond it's
limits.

The fellow who is holding the stick has the legal responsibility for
setting
the limits of safe operation on every flight. Just because a designer says
it can do more, doesn't mean it will. That's what test periods are for.

Let's not become our own worst enemy here by espousing a rule that few
people think makes any sense at all -outside the group of new LSA
manufacturers who stand to make a buck selling their airplanes. I'm not
talking about the speed limit, BTW. I'm talking about the "You crossed the
line and can't go back" clause.

Rich S.