When to cut off and make new dataplate?

Homebuilt Aircraft & Kit Plane Forum

Help Support Homebuilt Aircraft & Kit Plane Forum:

Aviacs

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 21, 2019
Messages
218
With all that you really need to do, you will have to cut it up a bunch. The wing carry through, you stretching the cockpit or laying it back, is the tail length/volume going to be ok, landing gear, engine mount? You might be starting with a Sonerai fuselage, but it’s not going to be one in the end. You really are going to build another plane.
Thanks for sticking with this - you got it.

Selling or trading to either get an RV fuselage or Sonerai wings would make more sense.
The most "sensible" approach in many people's eyes might be to buy one of the complete older RV3's with few avionics & less-desirable-to-modern-eyes engines like maybe a high time O290 that come up cheapish from time to time because original wings have the same spar issues that early Sonerai 2's did. Original spar RV3 wings are de-rated/ aerobatics not permitted anymore. So swap in the B wings. If i had been to the machine shop auction and acquired "Lot #123, contents of this corner: pile of scrap aluminum and possible airplane parts" before buying the complete Sonerai 2, that could have been my approach. Having happened a year+ afterward, i can't afford to manage the transition on SS. Nor especially can i afford the fuselage kit, engine, and completion items for an RV3 build. I spent time with the Van's online catalog and on the phone with them last year.

Sonerai is complete with S mod wings.
Ideally it needs fuselage mods as you described. (My preference)
It is faintly possible that blowing a new, taller canopy to extend back over the turtle deck could fit it to my longish torso with the seat back reclined a little. I'd still like to add some area to the tail/rudder.
Not fond of the paint job. So, if fabric comes off, it might be easier (and perhaps more interesting) to complete & use the -3 wings than to strip the S2 wings and repaint. If original wings go back on, i'd still add the Hoerner tips. Aerodynamicist friend with former Sonerai interest has indicated willingness to advise either way.

However, this is straying pretty far from the interest of the original post.
Which is, there are a number of ways to go, to satisfy different intents including my personal curiosity "what if" bent.
Ideally, I'd like the most efficient way to an EAB, and that will probably require a few conversations with one of our local FSDO guys, as has been suggested by others. If that is not "somewhat efficiently" possible, then putting the original AC back together for Exhibition will take precedent.
Biggest concern is ability to continue to mod it, and to maintain it between annuals.

smt
 
Last edited:

rv7charlie

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 17, 2014
Messages
1,889
Location
Pocahontas MS
I still don't have a clear idea of chronology/conditions.
If it was deregistered for export to Canada, registered in Canada, and deregistered for export from Canada to the US, I'd think it could be re-registered as the same a/c in the US. Would likely end up with a different N number, but still the same a/c. If, on the other hand, the *a/w cert was surrendered* at any point saying the a/c was scrapped, things get a lot muddier.

A separate question is what mods can be done to a homebuilt. Answer is, anyone can do any mod, then inform the FAA that you need a test area to fly off the test hours (typically 5) in the new configuration, if it's a 'major modification'. Think RV-1; Van's metal wings on the Stits Playboy.
 

Aviacs

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 21, 2019
Messages
218
I still don't have a clear idea of chronology/conditions.
To recap with some additional info: plans built in CA 35 yrs ago, registered and flown by original builder. Continued through several succeeding owners, many of whom modified it extensively with documentation. Most spoke/wrote in French, apparently none were tall*, at least one who did many of the mods over some 16 yrs was a Canadian A & P & CFI. I can sort of read (though not speak) French, but it is slow slogging with handwriting, idioms, and Aviation specific terms and abbreviations. (Even though English got many of its terms from the French :) ) So have not gone through every page of every binder. Last owner did not fly it at all over his 2 yr ownership. He occasionally "did some high speed taxi tests". He is an accomplished TW pilot with multiple hotter TW airplanes over his past, but apparently something about this one failed to give full confidence while he had other planes to fly. Perhaps simply the unfamilair VW engine. He cautioned me several times about the carburator & the "gaskets". One of my friends was retiring that year as an aviation inspector for Transport Canada. He spent a morning on it, noted some relatively minor items that would be required if it were an actual Canadian annual, noted some tiredness in areas, but essentially gave it a good bill of health.

After verifying that hangar space would be available, i bought it and trailered home in 2 trips. Unfortunately there was a misunderstanding about whether wings folding would be a factor, (they don't on this example) so even though wings are on a cart, it was relegated to my neighbors barn until my number for a full size hangar space eventually rose to the top last month. Time to get to work.
This is far more info than necessary for the original Q, but did i miss anything? :)

A separate question is what mods can be done to a homebuilt. Answer is, anyone can do any mod, then inform the FAA that you need a test area to fly off the test hours (typically 5) in the new configuration, if it's a 'major modification'. Think RV-1; Van's metal wings on the Stits Playboy.
This is encouraging. Thanks!

*PS* I'm not particularly tall either, honest 6' even. But seem to have a long torso.
 

PTAirco

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 20, 2003
Messages
3,648
Location
Corona CA
I know someone who rebuilt a Waco from a pile of parts that still had a data plate attached. The plate was badly corroded. He had a NOS blank data plate from the Waco factory and stamped it with the identical information and put it on the airplane. When it came to registering it, the FAA somehow got a look at the new data plate and told him. it's not legal and what he has there is a homebuilt, not a Waco. Lawyers got involved. FAA won. Once more the world has been saved by our Friendly Aviation Agency.
 

Aviacs

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 21, 2019
Messages
218
I know someone who rebuilt a Waco from a pile of parts that still had a data plate attached. The plate was badly corroded. He had a NOS blank data plate from the Waco factory and stamped it with the identical information and put it on the airplane. When it came to registering it, the FAA somehow got a look at the new data plate and told him. it's not legal and what he has there is a homebuilt, not a Waco. Lawyers got involved. FAA won. Once more the world has been saved by our Friendly Aviation Agency.
Did the original data plate come with the full set of logs from year 1, & then continue to include the work to rebuild?

Many AC that are built up under a dataplate are ex-military versions that never had a civil AW. They will end up in Exp. Exhibition no matter. So original logs are less of or not a factor.
 

PTAirco

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 20, 2003
Messages
3,648
Location
Corona CA
Did the original data plate come with the full set of logs from year 1, & then continue to include the work to rebuild?
You know any basket case Wacos that have logs back to day 1? Since when has that been a requirement to rebuild an aircraft?
 

TFF

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2010
Messages
15,433
Location
Memphis, TN
One thing with rebuilding an aircraft or part is something has to be original. You only need one. A data tag would be the perfect piece to be original. Sure it’s way easier to start with pretty and new. If you have any of the old Smithsonian books on restoration of their airplanes, the level that they kept as much original is overwhelming in the amount of work.

Your buddy’s Waco is famous, but without splices and repairs; some proof it was the old plane, how can it be the old plane? I have a friend who restored a Curtiss Robin. He actually had two, but one was just a log book and the amount of tubing to hold the engine as an engine stand until it could go on the other. No way that was going to be an airplane as there was nothing useable. I get rebuilt exhausts all the time, they are brand new except that one flange that came off the old one.

Watching Kermit Weeks’ Vega go together is fascinating but I imagine without the build documentation showing each rotted part, it would fall into that hole.
 

Aviacs

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 21, 2019
Messages
218
You know any basket case Wacos that have logs back to day 1? Since when has that been a requirement to rebuild an aircraft?
It's not.
But to the point of your post on my Q, it may affect how the FAA registers it. As you yourself noted.
Also, to modify my question, the logs probably don't need to go back to day one, but it is advantageous if they include "the last one" which more or less references earlier (disappeared) docs.

You may have read earlier sections of this posting: a group of us did the same thing with a different certified airplane, no problems with FAA, continue to fly it. We have the logs.

PS: if your point was "lose the logs, use a new dataplate and the FAA will call it a homebbuilt" That is exactly what i am hoping for the subject/Sonerai 2 airplane. :) Seems to be more complex than that, though.
 
Top