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 |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
All in all, I would suggest that having someone else make your first flight would be tatamount to having a stand in take the first shot at your new wife. Ed Sullivan Only if your wife is likely to KILL YOU if you make a mistake. Bob Reed www.kisbuild.r-a-reed-assoc.com (KIS Builders Site) KIS Cruiser in progress...Slow but steady progress.... "Ladies and Gentlemen, take my advice, pull down your pants and Slide on the Ice!" (M.A.S.H. Sidney Freedman) |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Cecil Chapman wrote...
...but how do you get yourself to do that first flight? In my case it was a matter of whether or not I felt I was qualified and safe to do it. I got as much time as I could scrounge in similar airplanes, I sought out airplanes with worse handling qualities than mine and practiced emergency procedures, and plannedplannedplanned for every contingency I could think of, and racticed those that I could. I wouldn't consider myself the BEST qualified pilot to make the first flight of my airplane (an RV-4), but I felt I was qualified, and I trusted myself as much or more than anyone else I could think of. I've certainly seen surrogates who took it _less_ seriously than I did. After all that, the first flight (video buried somewhere on John Ousterhout's website) was a non-event. Other flights since have certainly been more, uh, 'worrisome'. I would think a thousand questions would fill one's mind... Self doubt is probably a normal reaction (I certainly suffered from it), but if my workmanship were to cause a problem that resulted in an injury I'd rather it be to me than someone else. If you doubt your ability to handle an emergency, by all means have someone better qualified fly it, but if you're qualified, are you going to feel better if someone else gets hurt while you watch? How does one safely test an 'unknown'... In small steps with time to review results in between flights. Dave 'endpoint' Hyde RV-4 down for engine work at 27 hours EAA tech counselor |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Ed Sullivan wrote...
All in all, I would suggest that having someone else make your first flight would be tatamount to having a stand in take the first shot at your new wife. If your new wife has the potential to crush you, stab you, and burn you to death due to your inability to handle her, you might consider getting a stand-in until you've polished your skills a bit. So to speak. Pride has no place in flight test. Dave 'long fall' Hyde |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Del Rawlins wrote:
.....but if you will read the whole thing you will see that I was using that to question James' assertion that the airplane has to look safe and conform to safety standards, when neither is required for an experimental amateur built C of A. Here's an excerpt from a post (by someone else, not me) on this exact subject on a canard forum: I have a personal saying, "You can't change peoples' opinions, only the facts on which they're based." So I'll leave you with the following I received from Darren Brown, Aviation Safety Inspector with the Richmond FSDO. I'll leave it up to you to determine fact from fiction. 1. The congressional laws for authority a 49 USC 44701 and 44702. 2. The regulations to look at a 14 CFR 21.191(g), 21.193, 39, 45, 47, 91.7(b), 91.319, and 183.33. For more information go to: http://av-info.faa.gov/ click on "Amateur Built Aircraft". 3. The certification process that the inspector or DAR would follow, go to: http://av-info.faa.gov/ click on "Regulatory Guidance Library" then click on "Orders/Notices" then click "Current Orders" scroll down to 8130.2E change 2 incorporated. Go to chapter 4, sections 6 and 7 for general experimental airworthiness certifications and experimental amateur-built airworthiness certifications. 4. The extent of the application, records review and aircraft inspection is to determine that the eligibility requirements referred to above have been met and the physical inspection of the aircraft does not reveal item(s) that would make the aircraft unsafe for flight. If an FAA Inspector or DAR finds an item that is unsafe for flight, then the Special Airworthiness Certificate would not be issued until the item(s) are corrected. This may be an opinion on part of the designee or inspector but would be based on industry standards like the aircraft plans/build instructions, AC 43.13-1B or the scope of Appendix D of 14 CFR Part 43 and justifiable. 5. If an application or certificate is denied and the applicant does not agree with the findings of the inspector or designee, they may request to contact the next level of supervision at the FSDO as part of the FAA's Customer Service Initiative. The individual may take the issue as high up the managerial chain as necessary to attain resolution. 6. When the applicable requirements have been met, the FAA Inspector or DAR concurs with the owner's certification statement made in the application and records that "the aircraft is safe for flight," and makes a similar statement in the aircraft records and issues the certificate with its' associated operating limitations. So, while people may like to THINK that the DAR or FAA inspector HAS to issue the certificate, that's not so. They may respond to pressure from above, but that's not the same as being REQUIRED to issue the certificate just because the paper is in order. -- Marc J. Zeitlin http://marc.zeitlin.home.comcast.net/ http://www.cozybuilders.org/ Copyright (c) 2004 |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
On Sat, 18 Sep 2004 04:27:41 GMT, "Marc J. Zeitlin"
wrote: Here's an excerpt from a post (by someone else, not me) on this exact subject on a canard forum: I have a personal saying, "You can't change peoples' opinions, only the facts on which they're based." So I'll leave you with the following I received from Darren Brown, Aviation Safety Inspector with the Richmond FSDO. I'll leave it up to you to determine fact from fiction. I looked at each and every one of the documents cited and did not find one instance of the regulations allowing them to inspect for compliance with safety standards. What I did find, is that they have assumed that authority for themselves without bothering to go through the NPRM process for modifying the regulations. Nothing surprising in that, but the regs specifically mention that the aircraft has to meet criteria like having been constructed for education of recreation, and carry certain markings, and they spell out what those requirements are. If homebuilt aircraft were required to meet some airworthiness or safety standard the regs would say so and it would spell out what those are. 1. The congressional laws for authority a 49 USC 44701 and 44702. 2. The regulations to look at a 14 CFR 21.191(g), 21.193, Nothing in there about safety standards. It just says that amateur built is a type of experimental C of A you can get. 21.193 just talks about paperwork that must be submitted to apply. 39, Part 39 is all of the airworthiness directives issued against type certified products. 45, Identification and Registration Marking. Includes stuff that the DAR/Inspector can actually deny a certificate for, but not safety standards. 47, Aircraft Registration. Paperwork and such. 91.7(b), This just says that the PIC is responsible for determining an aircraft's airworthiness. 91.319, Operating Limitations. Nothing about process of obtaining the certificate. and 183.33. This is a general list of the things a DAR may do, but contains no procedures. For more information go to: http://av-info.faa.gov/ click on "Amateur Built Aircraft". The relevant document on this site is AC20-27F, which says that the FAA or DAR will inspect it for "general airworthiness", whatever that means. Ignoring for a second that the regs don't give them any authority for doing so, this is impossibly vague. You can't build something to meet a standard if they don't say what that standard is. 3. The certification process that the inspector or DAR would follow, go to: http://av-info.faa.gov/ click on "Regulatory Guidance Library" then click on "Orders/Notices" then click "Current Orders" scroll down to 8130.2E change 2 incorporated. Go to chapter 4, sections 6 and 7 for general experimental airworthiness certifications and experimental amateur-built airworthiness certifications. Looks like they are up to change 3 now, but there isn't anything relevant there that isn't in AC20-27F. 4. The extent of the application, records review and aircraft inspection is to determine that the eligibility requirements referred to above have been met and the physical inspection of the aircraft does not reveal item(s) that would make the aircraft unsafe for flight. If an FAA Inspector or DAR finds an item that is unsafe for flight, then the Special Airworthiness Certificate would not be issued until the item(s) are corrected. This may be an opinion on part of the designee or inspector but would be based on industry standards like the aircraft plans/build instructions, AC 43.13-1B or the scope of Appendix D of 14 CFR Part 43 and justifiable. This is more along the lines of what I expected. Basically the position the author takes is that they can make up the inspection criteria at the time of inspection if that is what they want to do. 43.1(b) specifically states that part 43 doesn't apply to experimental aircraft. Either way the regulations do not give them the authority to do that. [snipped a couple paragraphs about appealing an adverse decision up through the chain of command] So, while people may like to THINK that the DAR or FAA inspector HAS to issue the certificate, that's not so. They may respond to pressure from above, but that's not the same as being REQUIRED to issue the certificate just because the paper is in order. I'm still trying to find a regulation (which AC20-27F and the last document are not) that says they will inspect for safety standards, and more importantly, what those standards are. ================================================== == Del Rawlins-- Unofficial Bearhawk FAQ website: http://www.rawlinsbrothers.org/bhfaq/ Remove _kills_spammers_ to reply |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
"Del Rawlins" wrote in message
... snip I'm still trying to find a regulation (which AC20-27F and the last document are not) that says they will inspect for safety standards, and more importantly, what those standards are. I remember talking to one of the inspectors from the Seattle office many years ago. Memory fails but I believe his last name was Clark. At the time, the Feds had a lighter workload and a bigger budget. He told me that while he couldn't refuse a certificate, he could set test parameters. First off, if he found an airplane which needed some fixin' up, he'd try to explain to the builder just what were the deficiencies and how to correct them. Failing his compliance, he would contact other reputable builders in the area and the EAA chapter to see if they couldn't 'splain things to the Darwin candidate. If all the above failed, he would set up the test area at someplace like the Mojave desert, all flights to take place between Sunrise and Six am on alternate Thursdays. And *that* man knew airplanes. Rich S. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
AOPA Stall/Spin Study -- Stowell's Review (8,000 words) | Rich Stowell | Aerobatics | 28 | January 2nd 09 02:26 PM |
Newbie question on Rate of Climb | Wright1902Glider | Home Built | 0 | August 17th 04 03:48 PM |
Newbie Question - Vacuum vs Electric | Bill Denton | Aerobatics | 1 | April 15th 04 11:30 PM |
Flight test report and intake leak question | nauga | Home Built | 11 | April 12th 04 04:12 PM |
Horsepower required for level flight question... | BllFs6 | Home Built | 17 | March 30th 04 12:18 AM |