Experimental Instrument Rated?

CFLav8r wrote:

I recently showed my instructor an ad for a Glasair and he remarked that
you could never get it IFR certified with the FAA.

He's correct, but only because the FAA does not certify any aircraft for IFR. If
you installed adequate avionics and instruments and got a shop to sign off the
altimeter, you could fly instruments in the Wright Flyer as far as the FAA is
concerned.

George Patterson
Love, n.: A form of temporary insanity afflicting the young. It is curable
either by marriage or by removal of the afflicted from the circumstances
under which he incurred the condition. It is sometimes fatal, but more
often to the physician than to the patient.

In article ,
Ron Wanttaja wrote:



As several other folks have pointed out, there is no such thing as "IFR
Certified"...if any aircraft is equipped in accordance to CFR 91.205(d) and
receives the required regular equipment checks, it can legally be used to
fly IFR.

Not always the case.

The B-24 I was flying is licensed Experimental/Exhibition. It states in
the "Operating Limitations" (which appears to be a generic document)
that it will be operated VFR only. That being said we did fly it IFR
quite often. G I can't find it now, but there was other statements
which allowed us to operate IFR.

We also carried passengers for hire in the airplane, but that was
specifically restricted to Day/VMC.

--
Dale L. Falk

There is nothing - absolutely nothing - half so much worth doing
as simply messing around with airplanes.

http://home.gci.net/~sncdfalk/flying.html

"Stealth Pilot" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 07 Feb 2004 03:24:11 GMT, "CFLav8r"
wrote:

Is it true that an experimental aircraft can not be instrument certified
by
the FAA?

David (KORL)


since the australian rules are a transplant of the american an aussie
answer may be valid.

experimental amateur built aircraft are by default signed off for day
vfr.
IFR requirements are another set of regulations.
If the aircraft meets the requirements of those regulations then the
signoff can be amended to incorporate the necessary endorsements for
IFR.

havent seen ifr in person but I have mediated for an experimental
Thorp T18 being endorsed for night vfr in this country. was easy.

Stealth Pilot
Australia

The UK equivalent of experimental is the "permit to fly". They are limited
to VFR only.

In article ,
Ron Wanttaja wrote:
As several other folks have pointed out, there is no such thing as "IFR
Certified"...if any aircraft is equipped in accordance to CFR 91.205(d)

But a Diamond DA-20 can be equipped (probably even comes) with all the
necessary IFR equipment, but you can't actually fly it IFR because they
didn't embed the metal mesh in the composite skin like they did in the
DA-40.

--
Ben Jackson

http://www.ben.com/

"S Green" wrote in
:

The UK equivalent of experimental is the "permit to fly". They are
limited to VFR only.

It appears that you can do so much more in UK with an FAA PPL in an N-reg
aircraft than you can with a JAA PPL in a G-reg. Also (from this thread) N-
reg experimentals can legally fly over conurbations, at night, and in IMC
(which UK PFA types cannot). So, is it possible to build and maintain an N-
reg experimental in UK? If not, is it possible to import a US homebuilt and
keep it on the N register?

TIA,

--
Geoff Lane
Cornwall, UK

But a Diamond DA-20 can be equipped (probably even comes) with all the
necessary IFR equipment, but you can't actually fly it IFR because they
didn't embed the metal mesh in the composite skin like they did in the
DA-40.

I'll bite. Why does a metal mesh make a difference? Is it an issue of
primary radar returns, or something else?

In article k.net,
"Geoffrey Barnes" wrote:

But a Diamond DA-20 can be equipped (probably even comes) with all the
necessary IFR equipment, but you can't actually fly it IFR because they
didn't embed the metal mesh in the composite skin like they did in the
DA-40.

I'll bite. Why does a metal mesh make a difference? Is it an issue of
primary radar returns, or something else?



Nope -- lightning protection and dissipation. Lightning can literally
blow apart nonmetallic structures and home in on the occupants in
flight, without tha Faraday cage effect of the metal mesh.

Nope -- lightning protection and dissipation. Lightning can literally
blow apart nonmetallic structures and home in on the occupants in
flight, without tha Faraday cage effect of the metal mesh.

Thanks! I never would have thought of that, but it makes sense now that you
point it out.

On Sat, 07 Feb 2004 22:05:04 GMT, (Ben Jackson) wrote:

In article ,
Ron Wanttaja wrote:
As several other folks have pointed out, there is no such thing as "IFR
Certified"...if any aircraft is equipped in accordance to CFR 91.205(d)

But a Diamond DA-20 can be equipped (probably even comes) with all the
necessary IFR equipment, but you can't actually fly it IFR because they
didn't embed the metal mesh in the composite skin like they did in the
DA-40.

I'd seriously doubt the metal mesh would keep it from being certified
for IFR. The Beech Starship didn't have a metal mesh and it was
certified for IFR.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

"Roger Halstead" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 07 Feb 2004 22:05:04 GMT, (Ben Jackson) wrote:

In article ,
Ron Wanttaja wrote:
As several other folks have pointed out, there is no such thing as "IFR
Certified"...if any aircraft is equipped in accordance to CFR 91.205(d)

But a Diamond DA-20 can be equipped (probably even comes) with all the
necessary IFR equipment, but you can't actually fly it IFR because they
didn't embed the metal mesh in the composite skin like they did in the
DA-40.

I'd seriously doubt the metal mesh would keep it from being certified
for IFR. The Beech Starship didn't have a metal mesh and it was
certified for IFR.


Believe it. The mesh provides the lightning protection required to meet the
current Part 23 rules. Starship is one of the reasons the HIRF and
lightning standards have increased by several orders of magnitude over the
last 10 years. I know guys who worked the Starship's avionics. It was a
headache then to meet the old specs. No way it could be certificated today
without the extra shielding.

The key words in whether you can fly IFR are OPERATING LIMITATIONS. If your
operating limitations say "VFR only" you can't fly IFR even if you have the
equipment in 14 CFR 91.205(d). If it doesn't say you can't, or it says you
can; then you can fly IFR if you meet all the other requirements in Part
91.

All aircraft have operating limitations. An experimental gets them as part
of the airworthiness certificate. These are pretty loose since it doesn't
have to meet any of the 14 CFR Part 23 requirements. A certificated
aircraft gets its operating limitations as part of its type certificate. If
it can't meet 14 CFR 23.1309 (b), it will be limited to VFR. While it
doesn't say anything about lightning, section 23.1309 (b)(4)(i) refers to
"...including malfunctions and damage from external sources;" Lightning and
HIRF are external sources that must be addressed by the applicant.

Gerry