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. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
SO who DO I ask.
You might start with the person who issued the Airworthiness Certificate. I am not sure if a change in Gross weight would require a new certificate. Could be that it is just too soon to tell. Lyman |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Who do I ask? I do think your on the right track.Sence I have the repair
permit and I can change any thing as lone as it's loged,wy not the gross weight?The one's at the airport say,why not,but so far,no real answer.SO who DO I ask. LJ Rich S. wrote: "Cy Galley" wrote in message news:aJk4d.91311$D%.90322@attbi_s51... Here is my take that might work. Ask that the listed gross weight is reduced. Why? because during the testing phase, the plane didn't perform as expected. You felt unsafe at your tested gross weight. For safety, please lower the gross weight to 1329. Isn't the testing phase designed for checking out the plane's parameters so it can be safely flown? If it isn't, why have a testing phase at all. My Bellanca has a red line of 216 MPH. Why such a weird number? It is 90% of the demonstrated test speed of 240 MPH. (240-24). For safety the CAA dropped off 10%. You should be able to do the same from your testing program. Cy........... I feel somewhat the same about the "specified" gross weight of an Experimental - Amateur Built aircraft. I'm not even sure the gross weight is recorded with the FAA. I'm sure that the other parameters are not, such as stall spped, max speed (Vh), propeller type, cabin pressurization - even retractable gear. Then too, there is the proviso that one may make changes - even major changes - to an airplane of this class. I will agree that the new regs do say in order to be certified as a LSA, the aircraft must have, since it's original certification, continued to meet the limitations. But in this case, we are not alking about changing the certification of the aircraft. We are simply trying to meet the intent of this statement: "Aircraft with a standard airworthiness certificate that meet above specifications may be flown by sport pilots. However, that airworthiness certification category will not be changed to a light-sport aircraft. Holders of a sport pilot certificate may fly an aircraft with a standard airworthiness certificate if it meets the definition of a light-sport aircraft." It is a small point perhaps and one that may be better left unquestioned. It is my feeling that the particular wording was adopted at the behest of the existing and hopeful LSA aircraft manufacturers in order to sell more new airplanes. I have no basis for this opinion except an assumption of avarice. Letting the people who stand to make a buck set the rules of the game doesn't seem kosher. I suppose there is always the option of abandoning the certification of an airplane and then going through the process again with a lower gross on the data plate. Oh, BTW I would ask for 1319# - not 1329" ) Rich S. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
On Wed, 22 Sep 2004 17:10:12 -0700, "Rich S."
wrote: "LJ & Nancy Blodgett" wrote in message ... Who do I ask? I do think your on the right track.Sence I have the repair permit and I can change any thing as lone as it's loged,wy not the gross weight?The one's at the airport say,why not,but so far,no real answer.SO who DO I ask. LJ The person who inspected your airplane and signed off your airworthiness certificate. I personally think you'll have a tough row to hoe. You're asking for a *200-pound* reduction in the gross weight of the aircraft. That's going to take some fast talkin' to explain *why* such a choice is necessary...other than to dodge FARs. It's really going to depend upon the FAA person you talk to. Some are hard cases and you'll have no chance. Others might be willing to work with you. Unless the language of the rules is changed, there may currently be a conflict between the Sport Pilot regulations and the regs affecting Experimental/Amateur built. I don't know. It may be better to NOT ask. I think Todd posted the appropriate part of the regs that cover this case: "since its original certification...." *Original* certification. Yes, we can make changes, but an airplane is only originally certified once. If one is desperate, I suppose one could cancel the registration and airworthiness certificate, then re-apply. With a new N-number and new serial number, the plane would then undergo a "new" original certification. Ron Wanttaja |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
"Ron Wanttaja" wrote in message
... I personally think you'll have a tough row to hoe. You're asking for a *200-pound* reduction in the gross weight of the aircraft. That's going to take some fast talkin' to explain *why* such a choice is necessary...other than to dodge FARs. Hmmm..... You could say that you lust after a single-place airplane like that Wanttaja guy has, so you've ripped out the bench seat and installed a single bucket seat right in the middle. Rich "No, I didn't infer you have a butt shaped like a bucket!" S. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Just some notes from the accepted planes list on EAA site, don't know if it
follows the exact FAA guidelines yet but I think it may help with an answer. "Aeronca 7EC's are normally certificated at either 1450 or 1500 lbs gross weight, which disqualifies them for operation by sport pilots. However, there are some 7EC's certificated at 1300 lbs gross weight. These aircraft are eligible for operation by sport pilots." From this it looks like the original certificate will be the "weight" sticker. and it would probably take an act of Congress to change the original certificate. "Hatz Lyman C" wrote in message ... SO who DO I ask. You might start with the person who issued the Airworthiness Certificate. I am not sure if a change in Gross weight would require a new certificate. Could be that it is just too soon to tell. Lyman |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
On Wed, 22 Sep 2004 19:07:08 -0700, "Rich S."
wrote: "Ron Wanttaja" wrote in message .. . I personally think you'll have a tough row to hoe. You're asking for a *200-pound* reduction in the gross weight of the aircraft. That's going to take some fast talkin' to explain *why* such a choice is necessary...other than to dodge FARs. Hmmm..... You could say that you lust after a single-place airplane like that Wanttaja guy has, so you've ripped out the bench seat and installed a single bucket seat right in the middle. Actually, I think you'd have to take an approach like that. Anybody looking at the plane is going to assume you're going to fill it up, and a Kitfox 7 has ~300 pounds of useful load left once the seats and tanks are filled. Most pilots know enough not to stuff 300 pounds of baggage into a compartment designed for only 100. But if the compartment is merely *placarded* for 100, and the same plane (unchanged) can legally and safely fly with 200 additional pounds in there, I don't think I'd hesitate to pack in a few more brewskis. If you redesigned and rebuilt the plane as a single-seater, with no obvious/easy way to reconfigure it back to a two-seater, you'd have a chance... and a pretty roomy ride. Rich "No, I didn't infer you have a butt shaped like a bucket!" S. And I wouldn't be too offended, as long as you're referring to buckets made by Rubbermaid instead of Massey-Fergusson. :-) http://lynn-machine-tool.com/rebuilding.htm Ron Wanttaja |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
"W P Dixon" wrote in message
news Just some notes from the accepted planes list on EAA site, don't know if it follows the exact FAA guidelines yet but I think it may help with an answer. "Aeronca 7EC's are normally certificated at either 1450 or 1500 lbs gross weight, which disqualifies them for operation by sport pilots. However, there are some 7EC's certificated at 1300 lbs gross weight. These aircraft are eligible for operation by sport pilots." From this it looks like the original certificate will be the "weight" sticker. and it would probably take an act of Congress to change the original certificate. One difference is that is a Type Certificate, not a Special Airworthiness Certificate as is issued to LSA's and Experimentals, among others. Rich S. |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
I think I'm caught between a rock and a hard spot.Although you would
think it would be ok to lower the weight than raise it.I thank every one for the replies. LJ Rich S. wrote: "LJ & Nancy Blodgett" wrote in message ... Who do I ask? I do think your on the right track.Sence I have the repair permit and I can change any thing as lone as it's loged,wy not the gross weight?The one's at the airport say,why not,but so far,no real answer.SO who DO I ask. LJ Unless the language of the rules is changed, there may currently be a conflict between the Sport Pilot regulations and the regs affecting Experimental/Amateur built. I don't know. It may be better to NOT ask. Rich "Just my take on it" S. |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
"Ron Wanttaja" wrote ...
Actually, I think you'd have to take an approach like that. Anybody looking at the plane is going to assume you're going to fill it up, and a Kitfox 7 has ~300 pounds of useful load left once the seats and tanks are filled. Most pilots know enough not to stuff 300 pounds of baggage into a compartment designed for only 100. But if the compartment is merely *placarded* for 100, and the same plane (unchanged) can legally and safely fly with 200 additional pounds in there, I don't think I'd hesitate to pack in a few more brewskis. It's rather interesting, if you fly the airplane overloaded won't you be faced with a violation for flying without a licence? Rich |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
On Wed, 22 Sep 2004 22:21:54 -0700, "Richard Isakson"
wrote: "Ron Wanttaja" wrote ... Actually, I think you'd have to take an approach like that. Anybody looking at the plane is going to assume you're going to fill it up, and a Kitfox 7 has ~300 pounds of useful load left once the seats and tanks are filled. Most pilots know enough not to stuff 300 pounds of baggage into a compartment designed for only 100. But if the compartment is merely *placarded* for 100, and the same plane (unchanged) can legally and safely fly with 200 additional pounds in there, I don't think I'd hesitate to pack in a few more brewskis. It's rather interesting, if you fly the airplane overloaded won't you be faced with a violation for flying without a licence? I suspect it'll be more for exceeding the authorized operation of one's license, like flying a twin without the appropriate rating or carrying passengers on a student certificate. Like the FAA will have trouble finding something to nail you with... :-) Ron Wanttaja |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Weight and Balance | Dale Larsen | Home Built | 2 | June 23rd 04 05:11 PM |
Weight of a Harley Evo / Twin-cam 88 for aircraft? | Wright1902Glider | Home Built | 3 | June 4th 04 01:56 PM |
Pitts S-1 weight and balance | wallyairplanefan | Aerobatics | 2 | March 6th 04 04:09 AM |
Weight of snow on wings | Michael Horowitz | Home Built | 10 | January 4th 04 10:58 PM |
Weight of Lycoming O290 | Ray Toews | Home Built | 1 | December 21st 03 11:56 PM |