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 » Soaring
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

TRIG TN72 X ADS-B GPS Receiver



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old January 9th 20, 01:51 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 774
Default TRIG TN72 X ADS-B GPS Receiver

Perhaps someone out there has gone thru the hoops of switching from certificated to experimental. I would think that you would have to have some significant reason for doing this.

Lots of people have gone from Standard to Experimental, and the hoops aren't complex at all. You just request to change your Certificate of Airworthiness, get an inspection and new Operating Limitations and file an annual Program Letter with your local FSDO. I am probably going to do that this year, primarily so I can do more of my own work on the glider and also to take advantage of the simpler and cheaper "meets 14 CFR 91.227 requirements" GPS source.

Now, the big caveat is that it is hugely complex and difficult to go BACK to Standard Type from Experimental.
  #12  
Old January 9th 20, 06:11 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Charles Longley
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 290
Default TRIG TN72 X ADS-B GPS Receiver

You can’t do your “own work on” an experimental glider anymore than you can do on a type certified one. Either one requires an A&P or a Repairman to sign it off. Except for preventative maintenance which a rated pilot can do in either case.
  #13  
Old January 9th 20, 03:04 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 774
Default TRIG TN72 X ADS-B GPS Receiver

Yes, but I can get my own work signed off much easier than having to have an A&P do the work at a much higher labor rate, field approvals and 337's are not as much of an issue, and considering the amount of grief the FAA put me through over the 3,000 hour Pegase life limit, I don't want to have any more contact with their bureaucracy than is absolutely necessary.

ps. I already do some stuff for the local A&P for other aircraft he is working on. I.E., machining, welding, electrical, O2 system installations, etc.
  #14  
Old January 9th 20, 07:05 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
jfitch
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,134
Default TRIG TN72 X ADS-B GPS Receiver

On Thursday, January 9, 2020 at 6:04:11 AM UTC-8, wrote:
Yes, but I can get my own work signed off much easier than having to have an A&P do the work at a much higher labor rate, field approvals and 337's are not as much of an issue, and considering the amount of grief the FAA put me through over the 3,000 hour Pegase life limit, I don't want to have any more contact with their bureaucracy than is absolutely necessary.

ps. I already do some stuff for the local A&P for other aircraft he is working on. I.E., machining, welding, electrical, O2 system installations, etc.


My understanding is there is little difference between Exp and Standard catagories as far as maintenance and repair work. Both must be done under the supervision of, and signed off by certified persons. That means you can do the work provided those rules are met. I believe this is often confused with a homebuilt aircraft, which operate as experimental but under a different set of rules: the manufacturer can always work on their aircraft, and the builder is considered to be the manufacturer. Not true of a German built glider operating with an experimental certificate. That is my understanding, and I'd like to be corrected if it is wrong.
  #15  
Old January 9th 20, 08:32 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Charles Longley
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 290
Default TRIG TN72 X ADS-B GPS Receiver

On Thursday, January 9, 2020 at 10:05:59 AM UTC-8, jfitch wrote:
On Thursday, January 9, 2020 at 6:04:11 AM UTC-8, wrote:
Yes, but I can get my own work signed off much easier than having to have an A&P do the work at a much higher labor rate, field approvals and 337's are not as much of an issue, and considering the amount of grief the FAA put me through over the 3,000 hour Pegase life limit, I don't want to have any more contact with their bureaucracy than is absolutely necessary.

ps. I already do some stuff for the local A&P for other aircraft he is working on. I.E., machining, welding, electrical, O2 system installations, etc.


My understanding is there is little difference between Exp and Standard catagories as far as maintenance and repair work. Both must be done under the supervision of, and signed off by certified persons. That means you can do the work provided those rules are met. I believe this is often confused with a homebuilt aircraft, which operate as experimental but under a different set of rules: the manufacturer can always work on their aircraft, and the builder is considered to be the manufacturer. Not true of a German built glider operating with an experimental certificate. That is my understanding, and I'd like to be corrected if it is wrong.


That is exactly correct. The builder of a homebuilt experimental aircraft (could be a glider) is usually issued a Repairman license for that particular aircraft by serial number.
The only other real difference is who can sign of a major alteration or repair. Generally a FAA from 337 isn't required for experimental aircraft. (There are some exceptions.)
  #16  
Old January 9th 20, 09:20 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Darryl Ramm
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,403
Default TRIG TN72 X ADS-B GPS Receiver

On Thursday, January 9, 2020 at 10:05:59 AM UTC-8, jfitch wrote:
On Thursday, January 9, 2020 at 6:04:11 AM UTC-8, wrote:
Yes, but I can get my own work signed off much easier than having to have an A&P do the work at a much higher labor rate, field approvals and 337's are not as much of an issue, and considering the amount of grief the FAA put me through over the 3,000 hour Pegase life limit, I don't want to have any more contact with their bureaucracy than is absolutely necessary.

ps. I already do some stuff for the local A&P for other aircraft he is working on. I.E., machining, welding, electrical, O2 system installations, etc.


My understanding is there is little difference between Exp and Standard catagories as far as maintenance and repair work. Both must be done under the supervision of, and signed off by certified persons. That means you can do the work provided those rules are met. I believe this is often confused with a homebuilt aircraft, which operate as experimental but under a different set of rules: the manufacturer can always work on their aircraft, and the builder is considered to be the manufacturer. Not true of a German built glider operating with an experimental certificate. That is my understanding, and I'd like to be corrected if it is wrong.


My understanding as well.

But more importantly I think folks need to be careful with an aircraft that was moved from standard/type certified to experimental racing/exhibition. You don't escape from lots of stuff as for that aircraft "the FAA has previously issued a different kind of airworthiness certificate for that aircraft;" and therefore 14 CFR 41 (b)(1) applies and captures that aircraft back into Part 41 requirements.

"(b) This part does not apply to -

(1) Any aircraft for which the FAA has issued an experimental certificate, unless the FAA has previously issued a different kind of airworthiness certificate for that aircraft;"

----

Transferring a standard type certificated aircraft to experimental exhibition/racing does not seem to me to remove say approval requirements for major alterations. Now wether a FSDO took a different level of interest in things and wanted more or less justification in an approval, who knows. After the NTSB investigation about he Galloping Ghost crash at Reno I wonder if FSDOs are paying more attention to all major alterations to racing and exhibition aircraft.

And on the other hand I hear about things, sometimes just crazy stuff, where I suspect folks are taking way too hard an interpretation of what is a major alteration in type certified gliders. This especially can happen if gliders are taken to say airframe or avionics shops that have no experience working with gliders.

As for ADS-B out installations, the regulations and policies are fairly complex when you dig into the lowest levels (much easy if you understand the policies apply and just follow them :-)) and I don't understand all the details, and not sure anybody really does, including even avionics manufacturers. I have questions into the FAA office of Chief Counsel asking about specific details with ADS-B Out installation regulations and policies.

My quick re-read of the AFS-360 March 2, 2016 Memo and AFS-360-2017-1 technical paper that describe the FAA ADS-B out installation policy (for type certified aircraft) is those policies do not seem to capture experimental aircraft that were previously type certified--since the preamble to each is similar stating the policies apply to "civil aircraft certificated under Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) Parts 23, 25, 27, 29". However it may be a bit more complex that that, and do not rely on me for legal interpretation here.



  #17  
Old January 10th 20, 01:53 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Bob Kuykendall
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,345
Default TRIG TN72 X ADS-B GPS Receiver

On Wednesday, January 8, 2020 at 9:11:31 PM UTC-8, Charles Longley wrote:
You can’t do your “own work on” an experimental glider anymore than you can do on a type certified one. Either one requires an A&P or a Repairman to sign it off. Except for preventative maintenance which a rated pilot can do in either case.


As an EAA technical counselor, I can say that that's almost always wrong. The operating limitations attached to the airworthiness certificate have the final say, but in all cases I've ever checked, there are no limitations about who can work on an amateur-built or racing experimental aircraft; 14CFR43 does not apply to them. The only thing you need certification for is signing off the annual condition inspection, and that's what requires the Repairman Certificate or A&P rating.

--Bob K.
  #18  
Old January 10th 20, 01:57 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Bob Kuykendall
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,345
Default TRIG TN72 X ADS-B GPS Receiver

On Thursday, January 9, 2020 at 11:32:07 AM UTC-8, Charles Longley wrote:

That is exactly correct. The builder of a homebuilt experimental aircraft (could be a glider) is usually issued a Repairman license for that particular aircraft by serial number...


Here's the official EAA position on that:

https://www.eaa.org/eaa/aircraft-bui...er-maintenance

--Bob K.
  #19  
Old January 10th 20, 05:10 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Charles Longley
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 290
Default TRIG TN72 X ADS-B GPS Receiver

Right Bob but the guy was talking about going from a standard airworthiness certificate to experimental in which case part 43 would still apply.
 




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
TT21/TN72 power consumption jfitch Soaring 10 May 30th 18 09:19 PM
Trig TT21 + TN72 TABS ADS-B Out Install working great.... Darryl Ramm Soaring 38 April 1st 18 11:17 PM
Trig TN72 Antenna Andrew Ainslie Soaring 17 April 6th 17 04:21 AM
Trig TX-Too much sun? K m Soaring 1 June 7th 16 06:01 AM
Trig 1090ES ADS-B Receiver jcarlyle Soaring 1 July 21st 10 10:00 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:41 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2024 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.