Qualifying a Experimental built from Parts ?

Homebuilt Aircraft & Kit Plane Forum

Help Support Homebuilt Aircraft & Kit Plane Forum:

Turd Ferguson

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 13, 2008
Messages
5,828
Location
Upper midwest in a house
Ever read the Repairmans Certificates app and FAR 61.104
61.104? No, never read it. You might mean 65.104

Yet the RP certificate is a paper you simply mail to the FSDO. We assume that the FSDO would call the DAR and ask.. but I doubt that actually happens.
Yeah, that's how I got my airman certificates. I just mailed an app to the FSDO and received the requested certificates in the mail; ATP, CFI, A&P.
You may not have complete understanding of how that process works.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: BJC

Pilot-34

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 7, 2020
Messages
1,455
Location
Most of me is in IL but my hearts in Alaska
There's an advisory circular that covers all this stuff. Pretty sure that if you read it, it will tell you that if you start with a 'major assembly' (wing, fuselage, etc) that is from a certified a/c, you get zero credit for that assembly, even if you totally tear it apart and rebuild it. That is a 'repair', not fabrication/assembly. Good example would be the 'Badlands Traveler'; a homebuilt Super Cub with Cessna 172 wings. Builder had built another homebuilt Super Cub with C152 wings prior to the Traveler. My understanding is that he worked with his FSDO, and was able to get Homebuilt Experimental certs for both, by building *everything* except the wings.
So if I fabricated and assembled ONE rib and skin in wing made by Elmo’s kit plane company I get full credit just like I had done them all but if I do the same with a wing made by Cessna plane company I get nothing ?
 

speedracer

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 4, 2020
Messages
209
About 30 years ago a friend built a 4 place Cub, called it The Superbear. The DAR walked into his hanger, glanced at it and said "Convince me that's not a Super cub". My friend said "Count the seats".
 

rv7charlie

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 17, 2014
Messages
2,157
Location
Pocahontas MS
So if I fabricated and assembled ONE rib and skin in wing made by Elmo’s kit plane company I get full credit just like I had done them all but if I do the same with a wing made by Cessna plane company I get nothing ?
correct.
Edit: Not precisely correct, but close. The way the FAA looks at a kitbuilt (uncertified) major assembly is different from the way it looks at certified parts/assemblies. Once the Cessna assembly is 'certified', any action you take on it is a repair or modification. For uncertified assemblies, in particular the quickbuild kits, the FAA seems to have realized that the more pre-fab that's happening, the safer the end result is likely to be. So they seem to be 'gaming' their own rules (to our advantage) by considering the making of a rib the completion of the rib building 'task', "for education and recreation".
 
Last edited:

TFF

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2010
Messages
15,839
Location
Memphis, TN
What the FAA does know is a professional shop tend to do professional work, and that is a safety feature that sometimes buys one out of trouble. How many pressurized Lancairs were actually built by the owners? You can see where the level of play has to be though.

There is plenty of grey if you understand the game as well as the inspector. If you waltz in and say, “You better pass me”,you are walking home alone. There is a difference in trying to build something and pass something off. That is what they are assessing with the checklist. If one really is trying to cut the line too close, they usually end up loosing. FAA gets salary if you pass or not, and most DARs will ask for money up front. If it looks like a trap when they walk in, nope. If you really want to do this thing, you will need a DAR that will talk you through bolting each piece on and let him decide if it can or needs to be remade by you. A buddy had his plane saved by the FAA instead of being scrapped, but they reached deep and saw grey. They would have been more technically right to have him scrap it. No free lunch, they gave him 40 hour fly off just like a new build. It was that of throw it away. The FAA are not bad. My friend tried not to bend the rules and that is why the FAA was easy. If they had seen the issues were of his doing, all paperwork, no way. Your attitude tends to be what prevails.
 

pfarber

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 21, 2019
Messages
877
Location
Dollywood
61.104? No, never read it. You might mean 65.104



Yeah, that's how I got my airman certificates. I just mailed an app to the FSDO and received the requested certificates in the mail; ATP, CFI, A&P.
You may not have complete understanding of how that process works.
Simply do what everyone else does: Fill out a paper and mail it in. There is nothing more to it than that. If you were unlucky enough to have to actually go to the FSDO, then that's just bad luck. Many FSDO's just sign off the RP from the submitted paperwork.

Maybe way back there was a formal interview... these days? Pencil whip that cert and mail it back.

You can search different E/AB web sites and get answers all over the place... some just get it in the mail, others got it done at an airshow. In your world you may be right. But the world is a big place and you are not the only one in it.
 
Last edited:

skydawg

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 26, 2016
Messages
107
Location
Denver, Colorado
There is always some tier of subjectiveness with DARs and FSDO, but my experience is that the related FAA policies (not regulations) consider a previously certified part far different than a like part amateur built (weather made professionally from a kit builder or a hired shop). The FAA official policy (ref orders like 8130.2) states certified parts are some how magical regardless of vintage and mods must be in the form of certified alterations or STCs. Basically, if its not worth the $ to get an old certified plane airworthy, than it must be scrapped or parted out to other certified models.

they reference that a amateur builder can’t make an altimeter or complex device as a tachometer so you can use a c172 tach, but they do make a point when it comes to structural products, especially large components as a wing or stabilizer, so simply mixing parts from a Cessna and a piper and a home builder part wont get you an AB cert.

because kits were never certified, you can buy a half finished, or completely finished plane by professionals and have an AB cert… but not likely the repairman cert.

FAA is committed to continue killing GA and preventing legacy certified aircraft from being economically to continue flying, is part of the plan. There is no direct or clear regulation stating you can’t put a certified aircraft into EXP that I know of, just FAA policies.
 

bifft

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 17, 2011
Messages
333
Location
Utah
because kits were never certified, you can buy a half finished, or completely finished plane by professionals and have an AB cert… but not likely the repairman cert.
Actually, I think you can get the repairman in this case. At least I've heard of somebody buying a nearly complete plane from another builder and still getting the repairmen when finishing it. As long as the majority of the work was done by amateurs it is legally Ok. Just one repairman's per plane.
 

D Hillberg

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 23, 2010
Messages
1,455
Location
very low low low earth orbit
R-22 main gearbox - drive sheave - t/r gearbox - power from an APU from an Apache - cyclic grip from an F-86
main blades from a QH-60, battery from an OH 58 - Aluminum airframe with scrap parts from Gulfstream

If I an do it -You can do it
 

rv7charlie

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 17, 2014
Messages
2,157
Location
Pocahontas MS
My understanding is that bifft has it about right. Even if you're the builder/assembler of the last 0.1% of an airframe that meets the 51%-by-amateurs rule, as long as you are the builder of record (your name is on the application and the dataplate), you are *eligible to apply* for the repairman's cert. But even if you built 101%, the FAA is not obligated to issue you one. The repairman's cert (which is actually an authorization to do and sign off the annual *condition inspection*; not 'repairs') is supposed to be issued if the FAA finds that you are competent to inspect the a/c and determine that it is safe for flight. While that might seem to be defined by the ability to build the a/c in the first place, it really isn't. With today's 'aluminum IKEA' kits, the ability to put tab A into slot A is no indicator that you can understand the danger of a crack on that tab or slot. Or do a compression check on the engine. Or check wheel bearings for wear. Etc.

D Hillberg,
The only things in your list that *might* violate the FAA's major component rule would be the 'scrap parts from Gulfstream', if those parts consisted of a fuselage, or a wing, or a major part of the tail. I'm guessing, but I strongly suspect that the FAA would view the rotor blades the same way they view a fixed wing a/c propeller; it's not part of the airframe any more than an engine or gearbox for that engine is part of the airframe.

Remember, the 'no credit' thing is about 'major assemblies'; a fuselage, wing(s), vertical or horizontal tail. There's not much else as a major assembly. Using individual components like, say, the control stick/walking beam assy from a certified Cub in a homebuilt version might lose you a few checkboxes on the checklist, but it doesn't remove the fuselage itself from the equation.
 

TFF

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2010
Messages
15,839
Location
Memphis, TN
I think scratch built experimental helicopters are inspected like, if you’re willing to get in that, have at it. Let me sign the paperwork and get out before you start it up. Same with balloons.
 

D Hillberg

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 23, 2010
Messages
1,455
Location
very low low low earth orbit
My understanding is that bifft has it about right. Even if you're the builder/assembler of the last 0.1% of an airframe that meets the 51%-by-amateurs rule, as long as you are the builder of record (your name is on the application and the dataplate), you are *eligible to apply* for the repairman's cert. But even if you built 101%, the FAA is not obligated to issue you one. The repairman's cert (which is actually an authorization to do and sign off the annual *condition inspection*; not 'repairs') is supposed to be issued if the FAA finds that you are competent to inspect the a/c and determine that it is safe for flight. While that might seem to be defined by the ability to build the a/c in the first place, it really isn't. With today's 'aluminum IKEA' kits, the ability to put tab A into slot A is no indicator that you can understand the danger of a crack on that tab or slot. Or do a compression check on the engine. Or check wheel bearings for wear. Etc.

D Hillberg,
The only things in your list that *might* violate the FAA's major component rule would be the 'scrap parts from Gulfstream', if those parts consisted of a fuselage, or a wing, or a major part of the tail. I'm guessing, but I strongly suspect that the FAA would view the rotor blades the same way they view a fixed wing a/c propeller; it's not part of the airframe any more than an engine or gearbox for that engine is part of the airframe.

Remember, the 'no credit' thing is about 'major assemblies'; a fuselage, wing(s), vertical or horizontal tail. There's not much else as a major assembly. Using individual components like, say, the control stick/walking beam assy from a certified Cub in a homebuilt version might lose you a few checkboxes on the checklist, but it doesn't remove the fuselage itself from the equation.
The FAA is only interested in who's getting that Repairmans Certificate... Not if you fudge on the parts count.
You'll get more issues with "hired guns" who "help" for pay.
 
Top