VAF Forums

VAF Forums (https://vansairforce.net/community/index.php)
-   RV-12/RV-12iS (https://vansairforce.net/community/forumdisplay.php?f=73)
-   -   EAB vs. ELSA ? (https://vansairforce.net/community/showthread.php?t=103843)

Bill_H 09-02-2013 01:17 PM

Do your research and do a lot of searching here. Unless you are doing something DRASTICALLY DIFFERENT like an engine or prop or have foreign-country regs to deal with, you will find that ELSA has huge advantages. AOA is no big deal. Neither would be wig-wag. Read the modifications sticky thread and the AOA IN THE RV12 thread. Send me an email... Billhollifield AT Iname DOT COM

Mel 09-02-2013 01:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kram (Post 803652)
@Dave : I too agree the market for a ELSA compliant RV-12's are much better and hold their value better. So, can one build a ELSA initially make enhancements or changes and later bring it back under ELSA compliance when they decide to sell?

When you make changes to an ELSA, that doesn't remove it from ELSA unless the changes take the aircraft out of LSA parameters. If the change does take it out of LSA parameters, the airworthiness certificate is void and cannot be reinstated.
By definition, LSA parameters require that the aircraft meet LSA continuously from original certification.

Bill_H 09-02-2013 01:40 PM

(KRAM - post-certification changes like extra lights, split rear bulkhead, AOA, etc do not change an RV12 from ELSA to EAB! Don't confuse that. The issue is getting the initial ELSA registration indicating "I built it like the plans said.")

But that raises an intesting question. What kind of changes could you make to an RV12 to take it out of ELSA if it was originally built per plans as an ELSA? They would be pretty darn big mods. Any ideas other than these?
1. Recertifying it at a higher gross weight in the paperwork. No going back after that to LSA, ever!
2. Note that an engine type change by itself would NOT change from ELSA, correct? As long it was in the paperwork that max cruise was still 120 kt and no gross weight increase. You could change to Viking, ULPower, Jabiru, whatever.
3. Constant speed prop. No going back after that either!
4. Ground adjustable different prop would NOT change from ELSA. But what about an adjustable pitch (not constant speed) that was electrical? A good question has to do with whether the adjustment switch would have to be inaccessible from the cockpit or simply placarded. That gets into the "spirit" vs. "letter" of the regs, like those folks with 180hp planes placarded to 120 kt and 1320 lbs and currently getting away with it... (Discussed in other threads).
5. Extra lights, even wing tanks, no problem.
6. Extended range tank in the cockpit, no problem as long as no gross weight increase.

What else?
Bill H.

Sam Buchanan 09-02-2013 01:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kram (Post 803652)
@Dave : I too agree the market for a ELSA compliant RV-12's are much better and hold their value better.

Do we have evidence to support this assertion?

Kram 09-02-2013 02:38 PM

This is from what i have noticed the past couple of months trying to buy a E-LSA compliant RV-12.

Mel 09-02-2013 02:55 PM

Once an ELSA always an ELSA!
 
OK! It's time to get serious here.

People!!!!! Do your research. An ELSA can never be "re-certificated" as anything else. Period! You could not re-certificate it with a higher gross weight because that is not allowable in ELSA. You cannot install an inflight controllable prop. That is not allowed in ELSA. If the airplane was originally certificated as ELSA, it can never be anything else. If a modification takes it out of LSA parameters, the airworthiness is no longer valid.

If the aircraft is certificated as EAB, any modification that takes it out of LSA parameters makes the aircraft ineligible for operation by a sport pilot, but it can still be flown by a recreation pilot or higher with a current medical.

BTW, the Cub that is flying with the 180 hp engine is not restricted by speed. It is restricted by HP. The engine manufacturer states that the engine is rated at 180 hp for a maximum of 5 minutes. Continuous hp is 80. This type of limit can be done only by the engine manufacturer. I don't agree with this "loop hole" but they got it approved by the fAA, so it is valid. If you build your own engine, you can establish this type of limit, but be certain that you can prove that you did indeed "build" your engine and didn't simply overhaul some one else's engine.

Sam Buchanan 09-02-2013 03:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mel (Post 803677)
BTW, the Cub that is flying with the 180 hp engine is not restricted by speed. It is restricted by HP. The engine manufacturer states that the engine is rated at 180 hp for a maximum of 5 minutes. Continuous hp is 80. This type of limit can be done only by the engine manufacturer. I don't agree with this "loop hole" but they got it approved by the fAA, so it is valid.

The "80hp 360" is the most outrageous stretch of the LSA regs I have ever seen. I still don't understand how the FAA let that one pass.....

BobTurner 09-02-2013 03:59 PM

Thread drift warning
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Sam Buchanan (Post 803689)
The "80hp 360" is the most outrageous stretch of the LSA regs I have ever seen. I still don't understand how the FAA let that one pass.....

Is it worse than the "two weeks to taxi" program?

Mel 09-02-2013 04:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BobTurner (Post 803691)
Is it worse than the "two weeks to taxi" program?

But that would relate to amateur-built regs.

DanH 09-02-2013 04:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kram (Post 803672)
This is from what i have noticed the past couple of months trying to buy a E-LSA compliant RV-12.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anecdotal_evidence

Personally, I would be far more interested in an RV-12 licensed EAB. I could do anything I want to it and fly it as a Sport Pilot so long as it remains within Light Sport parameters. I would not need a special school certificate to maintain it, which would be gratifying given some of us were happily following Rotax service instructions well before the bad regulatory bargain. The ability (or inability) to sign a condition inspection doesn't hamper a lively trade in all other RV models (100% EAB) so why should I believe it will reduce the value of a good -12?


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:58 PM.