licensing for homebuilts

"Morgans" wrote in message
...

"Richard Lamb" wrote

While all of the above is true, there is one additional factor that
should
be
considered.

Do you have enough experience in a similar type if aircraft to be
competent in
the new one?

True.

It is my understanding that an experimental amateur built has no
subdivisions, such as seaplane, tailwheel, ect.

Certified aircraft do not have those subdivisions either. No difference.
Those subdivisions apply only to qualifications for the pilot.


So could I, a single engine land pilot, get into my flying boat homebuilt
and proceed to do water landings?

Yes. But you could not carry any passengers. The same with rotorcraft.

Technically, yes, if what I was told is correct. A FAA guy visiting at a
fly-in told us that he would not sign off a new plane, if the owner was
not
experienced in the "corresponding type" of certified plane.

Hmmm. They do it all the time around here. However, they DO require the
owner get the appropriate qualifications added to their pilot certificate
before they take anyone up in it and they prefer to see the qualifications
added before the owner attempts to fly it. I have known non-pilots who
have built airplanes and licensed them properly and legally as amateur
built. They just couldn't fly them themselves.


What do you all think of that? True or not? Within his powers, or not?


Most FAA guys are not too concerned with "limitations on their powers."
Remember, if they ever find anyone who understands an FAA regulation, it is
immediately rewritten to cure that problem. That allows FAA guys to pretty
much do their own interpretation of the regs unless and until a specific
interpretation is officially released by FAA Legal. Then it still only
applies in that specific situation or instance.

Highflyer
Highflight Aviation Services
Pinckneyville Airport ( PJY )