What's new
Van's Air Force

Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.

Production, flying RV-12, for 85-90K?

Noel Simmons

Noel Simmons

Well Known Member
Before everyone gets out their favorite flame throwers (I known you have them at the ready). I find this interesting.


Van's quote
"Although the E-LSA category does not permit
builders to vary from the kit or plans (no
unapproved engines, propellers, etc. are allowed)
it does have some very attractive features.
In the E-LSA category, there is no
“51%” rule, and no restriction on who may
assist in building the airplane."

This would be really nice for us here at Blue Sky Aviation. I would love to get into "production". We have been running some numbers and we think we can produce RV-12s with an enclosed trailer for $85-90K.

I am also thinking we will still need to "certify" the shop according to ASTM standards. Two years ago we were going to produce our own LSA and we implemented the facility standards so this will not be an issue for us.

I would sure like to see us, Americans, building RV-12s rather than China or Philippines.
 
Last edited:
Noel Simmons said:
Before everyone gets out their favorite flame throwers (I known you have them at the ready). I find this interesting.


Van's quote
"Although the E-LSA category does not permit
builders to vary from the kit or plans (no
unapproved engines, propellers, etc. are allowed)
it does have some very attractive features.
In the E-LSA category, there is no
?51%? rule, and no restriction on who may
assist in building the airplane."

This would be really nice for us here at Blue Sky Aviation. I would love to get into "production". We have been running some numbers and we think we can produce RV-12s with an enclosed trailer for $85-90K.

I am also thinking we will still need to "certify" the shop according to ASTM standards. Two years ago we were going to produce our own LSA and we implemented the facility standards so this will not be an issue for us.

I would sure like to see us, Americans, building RV-12s rather than China or Philippines.
Click to expand...

Er, doesn't sound legal to me. Experimental aircraft can only be kit or plans built by an individual or group for recreation or education (LSA or EAB). Reselling them turn-key, ready-to-fly to a customer base is considered a commercial aircraft sales operation by the FAA and thus, I think, requires the planes be SLSA..

I'd sure love to be wrong tho... ;)

LS
 
lucien said:
Er, doesn't sound legal to me. Experimental aircraft can only be kit or plans built by an individual or group for recreation or education (LSA or EAB). Reselling them turn-key, ready-to-fly to a customer base is considered a commercial aircraft sales operation by the FAA and thus, I think, requires the planes be SLSA..

I'd sure love to be wrong tho... ;)

LS
Click to expand...
I think Lucien is correct. I think the only one who could produce the ELSA's would be Van's. Of course, there is nothing to stop Van's from outsourcing the production just as Cessna has done. So perhaps you should discuss your plans with Van. Maybe you could persuade him to outsource the production to you.
 
RVbySDI said:
I think Lucien is correct. I think the only one who could produce the ELSA's would be Van's. Of course, there is nothing to stop Van's from outsourcing the production just as Cessna has done. So perhaps you should discuss your plans with Van. Maybe you could persuade him to outsource the production to you.
Click to expand...

I should also think a builder-assist program or something along those lines would be legal as well. Though if they produce the 12 virtually completely built, then there wouldn't be too much point in something like that.....

But for sure, FAA really gets bent out of shape with anything that looks like building an Experimental to turn-key status for a customer (unless the customer is a significant/full participant in the building of the plane). They're very strict about commercially produced airplanes having some kind of standard airworthiness certificate, such as the typical standard category AW cert. for your average GA planes, and SLSA for LSA aircraft.

I'd be very very careful here.......

LS
 
RVbySDI said:
I think Lucien is correct. I think the only one who could produce the ELSA's would be Van's. Of course, there is nothing to stop Van's from outsourcing the production just as Cessna has done. So perhaps you should discuss your plans with Van. Maybe you could persuade him to outsource the production to you.
Click to expand...

Sections 21.190, 21.191, and 21.193 appear to be the applicable FARs[1]. Note that 21.191 lists what is commonly called experimental, amateur built (E-AB) under 21.191(g) while experimental, LSA (E-LSA) is under 21.191(i). They are distinct purposes (neither is subordinate to the other) and different rules generally apply. I can't see anything in them that prohibits some entity from assembling E-LSA kits on a commercial basis and then selling the assembled aircraft, provided the regulations are adhered to. But I am not a lawyer and don't play one on TV, so if you do the above and get in trouble - it ain't my fault! ;)

[1] http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/tex...5&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title14/14cfr21_main_02.tpl
 
Just checking to see if you have read this

:confused:
Er, doesn't sound legal to me. Experimental aircraft can only be kit or plans built by an individual or group for recreation or education (LSA or EAB). Reselling them turn-key, ready-to-fly to a customer base is considered a commercial aircraft sales operation by the FAA and thus, I think, requires the planes be SLSA..



Although the E-LSA category does not permit
builders to vary from the kit or plans (no
unapproved engines, propellers, etc. are allowed)
it does have some very attractive features.
In the E-LSA category, there is no
?51%? rule, and no restriction on who may
assist in building the airplane. This allows
any amount of help, professional assistance
or even a fully professional-built airplane.

you can find this in Van's flyer.
 
Noel Simmons said:
:confused:
Er, doesn't sound legal to me. Experimental aircraft can only be kit or plans built by an individual or group for recreation or education (LSA or EAB). Reselling them turn-key, ready-to-fly to a customer base is considered a commercial aircraft sales operation by the FAA and thus, I think, requires the planes be SLSA..



Although the E-LSA category does not permit
builders to vary from the kit or plans (no
unapproved engines, propellers, etc. are allowed)
it does have some very attractive features.
In the E-LSA category, there is no
?51%? rule, and no restriction on who may
assist in building the airplane. This allows
any amount of help, professional assistance
or even a fully professional-built airplane.

you can find this in Van's flyer.
Click to expand...

Yes _Vans_ can sell an ELSA version of the 12 turn-key complete in this way, because (presumably) they have, or will have, gone through the SLSA process with at least one prototype as required by the rule.

But I don't think anyone other than the manufacturer (Vans in this case) of the original SLSA can do this - you can resell the ELSA kits as-is, but in order to build them into turn-key airplanes for sale to a customer with an ELSA certificate, you MUST go through the SLSA process as the manufacturer......

This is directly in the rules, which hopefully I've interpreted correctly......

LS
 
Whether or not it's currently legal, I can pretty much guarantee that it'll be legislated right out of existence once the certificated manufacturers feel an effect.
 
Noel is correct. E-LSA don't have conform to 51% standard. they fall under the ASTM standards.
Part of the reason E-LSA's are allowed is the are exact copies of a plane that has already jumped through the hoops. The experimental stuff is already complete.

Perfectly legal in the eyes of the FAA

Go for it BlueSky
 
JimLogajan said:
Sections 21.190, 21.191, and 21.193 appear to be the applicable FARs[1]. Note that 21.191 lists what is commonly called experimental, amateur built (E-AB) under 21.191(g) while experimental, LSA (E-LSA) is under 21.191(i). They are distinct purposes (neither is subordinate to the other) and different rules generally apply. I can't see anything in them that prohibits some entity from assembling E-LSA kits on a commercial basis and then selling the assembled aircraft, provided the regulations are adhered to. But I am not a lawyer and don't play one on TV, so if you do the above and get in trouble - it ain't my fault! ;)

[1] http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/tex...5&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title14/14cfr21_main_02.tpl
Click to expand...

Well the SLSA process would be what would prevent it.......

If you want to sell a 21.191(i)(2) ELSA "kit" as the manufacturer, you have to have gone through the SLSA process with a prototype. This is required in 21.193(e)(1).

And then there's the long list of intended applications of Experimental certificates in 21.191, none of which are production in ready-to-fly form for sale to the public.

There's just no way I can find, where this could be construed as a legal use of an Experimental (LSA) certificate.....

But again, I would be very glad, and it would be extremely cool, if I were wrong on this ;)

LS
 
hydroguy2 said:
Noel is correct. E-LSA don't have conform to 51% standard. they fall under the ASTM standards.
Part of the reason E-LSA's are allowed is the are exact copies of a plane that has already jumped through the hoops. The experimental stuff is already complete.

Perfectly legal in the eyes of the FAA

Go for it BlueSky
Click to expand...

Again no, I don't think what he's proposing is legal - he's talking about taking ELSA kits from Vans, building them into ready-to-fly form for sale to the public _certificated as ELSA_.

If he's doing that, _he's_ the manufacturer - he'll be listed as the manufacturer on the AW cert, just like with EAB.

So to sell them commercially period, much less in RTF form, _as 21.191(i)(2) ELSA_, he has to have gone through the _SLSA_ process with at least one of the planes.......

It's concievable that he could do that with a 12 built from a kit, but a) that would probably be considered extremely irregular by FAA and b) Vans would probably not be too keen on that being done either.....

LS
 
lucien said:
But for sure, FAA really gets bent out of shape with anything that looks like building an Experimental to turn-key status for a customer (unless the customer is a significant/full participant in the building of the plane). They're very strict about commercially produced airplanes having some kind of standard airworthiness certificate, such as the typical standard category AW cert. for your average GA planes, and SLSA for LSA aircraft.
Click to expand...

Actually, the only thing the FAA gets up tight about is commercial construction of an aircraft the owner intends to license as Experimental / Amateur Built.

Experimental aircraft are built for hire all the time...Restored warbirds are in the Experimental / exhibition category. Hundreds of thousands of dollars change hands building them and the FAA knows it.
Many other aircraft built for hire fly in the experimental category, just not amateur built.

An E-LSA aircraft can be built for profit by anyone as long as it is built exactly like a previously certificated S-LSA example, and the builder can substantiate that it is.
 
rvbuilder2002 said:
Actually, the only thing the FAA gets up tight about is commercial construction of an aircraft the owner intends to license as Experimental / Amateur Built.

Experimental aircraft are built for hire all the time...Restored warbirds are in the Experimental / exhibition category. Hundreds of thousands of dollars change hands building them and the FAA knows it.
Many other aircraft built for hire fly in the experimental category, just not amateur built.

An E-LSA aircraft can be built for profit by anyone as long as it is built exactly like a previously certificated S-LSA example, and the builder can substantiate that it is.
Click to expand...

Remember - the _builder of an ELSA from a kit is the manufacturer_; it'll be on the data plate that way just like with an EAB aircraft.

The burden will therefore be on the _builder of the kit_ (not Vans) to show that _he_ has gone through the SLSA process on a prototype of any copy of the plane he intends to sell RTF to the public certificated as a 21.191(i)(2) ELSA.

This is how Vans can sell the 12 RTF certificated as an ELSA - the same burden will be on the original poster if he decides to do this with the 12.

The rules seem clear to me on this - the original proposal does NOT sound legal according to the rules.....

Again, I would advise extreme caution in this matter; make sure all ducks are in a row before beginning this, otherwise it could be exceedingly expensive.....

LS
 
I seem to recall Mel (and I'll have to find the thread) saying that once the plane is certified SLSA by Van's, then the ELSA kit and plane that is produced is technically manufactured by Van's. The assembler of the kit is NOT the manufacturer under SLSA/ELSA.

Mel, you want to jump in here?

N_D

EDIT - Found the references I was looking for in the "Rolled out" thread:

Mel said:
If you build as an E-LSA kit, you will be given assembly instructions. You must be able to show that you followed them explicitly.
BTW, the kit manufacturer will be listed as the builder.
Click to expand...

Mel said:
Van's is the manufacturer. He can do whatever he wants so long as it meets ASTM standards for LSA. The manufacturer must approve any changes that you want to make.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
lucien said:
Remember - the _builder of an ELSA from a kit is the manufacturer_; it'll be on the data plate that way just like with an EAB aircraft.
....
Click to expand...

And now I understand your confusion. IF an RV-12 is assembled as a E-LSA based on Vans exact model, then Vans is the manufacturer. The Assembler is not the builder.
 
Its the Liability Thing...

As the kit manufacturer, I would set high standards before selling kits in volume to any Joe who wanted to resell aircraft assembled from my kits. The potential for liability to flow upstream is too great a risk.

Besides what is Van going to do with that building they just broke ground on? Perhaps they freeing up space for an assembly area...
 
ergie63 said:
Besides what is Van going to do with that building they just broke ground on? Perhaps they freeing up space for an assembly area...
Click to expand...

Sorry to kill a juicy rumor, but it will be for crating. Currently, the crating is going on in a building not attached to the "plant", so it's been a pain for them to move stuff back and forth.

--Bill
 
hydroguy2 said:
Noel is correct. E-LSA don't have conform to 51% standard. they fall under the ASTM standards.
Part of the reason E-LSA's are allowed is the are exact copies of a plane that has already jumped through the hoops. The experimental stuff is already complete.

Perfectly legal in the eyes of the FAA

Go for it BlueSky
Click to expand...

If the aircraft is built not conforming to the 51% standard is it possible to get a repairman certificate to perform the annual condition inspections?
 
hydroguy2 said:
And now I understand your confusion. IF an RV-12 is assembled as a E-LSA based on Vans exact model, then Vans is the manufacturer. The Assembler is not the builder.
Click to expand...

Could you show me the reg that stipulates this (i.e. that the 21.191(i)(2) ELSA is different from EAB in regards to who is the manufacturer of eventual aircraft)?

I'm still trying to find this in the regs somewhere, so far to no avail...

That would be totally cool if I"m wrong about all this....

LS
 
lucien said:
Remember - the _builder of an ELSA from a kit is the manufacturer_; it'll be on the data plate that way just like with an EAB aircraft.

LS
Click to expand...

That is not correct. The builder of an ELSA kit is not the manufacturer, it is the manufacturer of the kit. ELSA is different in that regard.
 
David-aviator said:
If the aircraft is built not conforming to the 51% standard is it possible to get a repairman certificate to perform the annual condition inspections?
Click to expand...

Yes, EAA sponsors several classes do to that very thing. You spend 2.5 days and at the end of the course, you get a nice repairman's cert, that allows you to do all the annuals on your own airplane. The cost is 299 for any EAAer.

EAA:

http://www.sportair.com/workshops/3Repairman (LSA) Inspection-Airplane.html#TopOfPage

Rainbow Aviation:

www.rainbowaviation.com
 
lucien said:
Well the SLSA process would be what would prevent it.......

If you want to sell a 21.191(i)(2) ELSA "kit" as the manufacturer, you have to have gone through the SLSA process with a prototype. This is required in 21.193(e)(1).

And then there's the long list of intended applications of Experimental certificates in 21.191, none of which are production in ready-to-fly form for sale to the public.

There's just no way I can find, where this could be construed as a legal use of an Experimental (LSA) certificate.....

But again, I would be very glad, and it would be extremely cool, if I were wrong on this ;)

LS
Click to expand...

I am quite certain you are wrong (with one conditional issue).
For a manufacturer to sell a completed and flying E-LSA airplane it would have to be built from an E-LSA kit purchased from Van's and built exactly like the S-LSA certificated aircraft (meaning, follow Van's construction manual exactly).

The main issue is that there is no FAR disallowing it (you seem to be looking for one that says it is OK).
Just like there is no FAR disallowing a shop to build a million dollar mustang restoration and certificate it in Exp. / Exhibition catagory. There is no FAR saying you can charge money for it building it (but there is none that says you can't either)
 
rvbuilder2002 said:
I am quite certain you are wrong (with one conditional issue).
Click to expand...

I sure hope so.... that would be a really cool thing to be able to do....

For a manufacturer to sell a completed and flying E-LSA airplane it would have to be built from an E-LSA kit purchased from Van's and built exactly like the S-LSA certificated aircraft (meaning, follow Van's construction manual exactly).

The main issue is that there is no FAR disallowing it (you seem to be looking for one that says it is OK).
Just like there is no FAR disallowing a shop to build a million dollar mustang restoration and certificate it in Exp. / Exhibition catagory. There is no FAR saying you can charge money for it building it (but there is none that says you can't either)
Click to expand...

It would probably be either a reg or an interpretation as to whose name is supposed to go on the "Manufacturer" line in the application and on the data plate on the completed plane. For EAB, that's the original builder, but I don't know offhand where that's specified.

I should think there'd be something similar at least semi-vague or better for the ELSA AW cert. somewhere......

Fingers crossed (that I'm wrong).....

LS
 
Here's a link from the EAA sport pilot freq. questions.

E-LSA FAQ

Question :
What is an Experimental Light-Sport Aircraft (E-LSA)?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Answer :
The E-LSA airworthiness certificate was created to allow certification of three distinct types of aircraft:

a) Ultralights and unregistered aircraft that fit the definition of a LSA and do not fit the definition of an ultralight. This certification opetion is available until January 31, 2008.

b) Kit built aircraft that do not meet the experimental amateur-built rules (e.g. a 90% complete kit). These aircraft are based on an Special LSA prototype and are built under the industry consensus standards.

c) Aircraft that were originally built as a Special LSA.

Aircraft certificated as ELSA must meet the definition of a light-sport aircraft as called out in 14 CFR 1.1, and must meet additional requirements called out in 14 CFR 21.191(i) in order to fall within one of the three criteria called out above.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Looks like Vans needs to have 1 certified as an S-LSA(not sure that is complete..yet)


b
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top