A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Instrument Flight Rules
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Garmin 300XL Data cards.



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old February 17th 05, 03:26 PM
Dave Butler
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

abripl wrote:
There is no problem with experimentals and IFR except maybe that some
CFI's or examiners may not feel like flying in one - but that is an
individual choice.


For the record, I never suggested that there was a problem with experimentals
and IFR.

.... but I'm still curious. Doesn't your receiver's *installation* have to be
approved for IFR, just like on a Cessna/Piper/Beech? When that installation is
approved, don't you get an AFMS? Doesn't the AFMS spell out what database must
be installed?

Dave
  #2  
Old February 17th 05, 04:44 PM
abripl
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Dave,

Just about everything on experimentals is "builder" approved. You
install it and make an aircraft log book entry that it was correctly
installed and tested. The exception is the required periodic IFR tests
of pitot, transponder, etc. which has to be done by approved trained
persons. Join rec.aviation.homebuilt news group and learn.

There are advantages to experimentals. And there are disadvantages:
takes several years to build one (many give up) and hull insurance is
hard to get.
--------------------------------------------------------
SQ2000 canard: http://www.abri.com/sq2000

  #3  
Old February 17th 05, 04:59 PM
Ron Natalie
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

abripl wrote:
Dave,

Just about everything on experimentals is "builder" approved. You
install it and make an aircraft log book entry that it was correctly
installed and tested. The exception is the required periodic IFR tests
of pitot, transponder, etc. which has to be done by approved trained
persons. Join rec.aviation.homebuilt news group and learn.


The annual condition inspection must be done by an approved person
as well (either the holder of the repairman's certificate or an A&P).
In addition, anything that would constitute a major modification to
the aircraft requires FAA notification (though I've never heard of
the FAA actually acting on any of these notifications).
  #4  
Old February 17th 05, 05:15 PM
abripl
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Ron,

I have the repairmans certificate. Never heard of FAA refusing a
repairmans certificate to the original builder (only). The newer FAA
approved operating limitations do not require FAA notifications after
major modifications, but compliance with 91.319(b) which in my aircraft
operating limitations requires 5 hours of phase one flight testing and
appropriate entry in the aircraft logbook.

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Amateur Review of the Garmin GPSMAP 296 GPS Rhett Piloting 10 March 23rd 05 01:16 AM
Pirep: Garmin GPSMAP 296 versus 295. (very long) Jon Woellhaf Piloting 12 September 4th 04 11:55 PM
Garmin GNS 530/430 spare data cards David R. Owning 1 March 11th 04 12:47 AM
Ice meteors, climate, sceptics Brian Sandle General Aviation 43 February 24th 04 12:27 AM
Garmin Emap Handheld GPS w/ Remote Antenna AND Data Transfer Cable Cecil E. Chapman Products 0 October 1st 03 02:06 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:16 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.