VAF Forums

VAF Forums (https://vansairforce.net/community/index.php)
-   RV General Discussion/News (https://vansairforce.net/community/forumdisplay.php?f=2)
-   -   Phase 1 testing according to AC 90-116 (two pilot testing) (https://vansairforce.net/community/showthread.php?t=147676)

Mel 03-17-2017 02:04 PM

No quite the first.
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Captain_John (Post 1158681)
I was the first known participant in the program.
https://www.eaa.org/en/eaa/eaa-news-...-up-for-safety
I didn't bring anyone along until after the first 8 hours.
After that, I leaned on the knowledge of my peers for coming up to speed on the advanced functions of the G3X system like the GTN 650 and autopilot.
Your needs might be different. It is a GREAT program! As I recall, it is standard language in the OPLIMS (can someone confirm?) now. Your DAR might not have an option to include or exclude it. It is just a matter of your compliance with it... ie. aircraft equipment and pilot qualifications.
Have fun testing!
:) CJ

Actually, I issued an airworthiness certificate to an RV-9, N369RV, on October 4, 2014 with the inclusion of AC 91-116.

Triumph1974 03-17-2017 07:18 PM

Good info
 
Thanks guys for the feedback on your experience with the program, and the glass cockpit comments (which is what i have...skyview). Looking forward to updating you all in a few months when we are ready to start testing.

I wonder if the Faa has published test stats on two pilot testing vs. the traditional approach.....or if there is enough data at this point to do a sampling.

So it does sound like the Dar needs to signs you off with the ac 90-116 then.....so need to find a DAR that is open to this appoach to
Flight testing phase 1.

Paul

Ironflight 03-17-2017 07:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Triumph1974 (Post 1158755)
So it does sound like the Dar needs to signs you off with the ac 90-116 then.....so need to find a DAR that is open to this appoach to
Flight testing phase 1.

Paul

Mel or Vic can confirm, but I think it is automatically included in the Ops Lims these days. It was when we did our Tundra about a year ago with the FSDO inspector - he was surprised when I pointed it out, because he didn't know about the APP.....

Paul

Mel 03-17-2017 08:11 PM

Yes!
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Ironflight (Post 1158763)
Mel or Vic can confirm, but I think it is automatically included in the Ops Lims these days. It was when we did our Tundra about a year ago with the FSDO inspector - he was surprised when I pointed it out, because he didn't know about the APP.....
Paul

That paragraph is standard in all experimental amateur-built operating limitations issued since it became effective in October of 2014.

"Unless operating in accordance with AC 90-116, Additional Pilot Program for Phase I Flight Test, only the minimum crew necessary to fly the aircraft during normal operations may be on board. (36)"

rightrudder 03-17-2017 08:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ed_Wischmeyer (Post 1158267)
Along those lines, a statistic I've seen is that about a third of homebuilts involved in accidents these days have glass cockpits. And as an old user interface designer, and having worked my way up a hefty learning curve with little assistance, I can understand why.

One concept that needs to come to fruition is to have experimental avionics training available in the same way that experimental airframe training is available with an LODA. Hey, I can teach people to use a Garmin G3X touch system in my RV-9A and that will be valuable to them in whatever they fly, RV or not, even if they never touch the flight controls of the -9A. But as often happens, the rules haven't yet caught up with the new reality.

Meantime, I can give ground instruction on the G3X and not worry about insurance... hook up the ground power and roll the plane out of the hangar.

Ed

Yes, play with the EFIS incessantly and familiarize yourself with it on the ground. Also, declutter it as much as possible for the first flights...you can add more info later.

vic syracuse 03-18-2017 06:53 AM

Watch for my column in the upcoming June issue of KP by yours truly on how to prepare yourself for distractions on first flights. Hopefully , you will find it of value, and certainly pertinent to this discussion. :)

Vic

Ironflight 03-18-2017 01:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vic syracuse (Post 1158845)
Watch for my column in the upcoming June issue of KP by yours truly on how to prepare yourself for distractions on first flights. Hopefully , you will find it of value, and certainly pertinent to this discussion. :)

Vic

The picture alone is worth the price of the magazine!;)

Captain_John 03-20-2017 04:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mel (Post 1158701)
Actually, I issued an airworthiness certificate to an RV-9, N369RV, on October 4, 2014 with the inclusion of AC 91-116.

Mel, I guess that you were the first UNKNOWN issuance then!

Lol

Seriously, I was wondering if I were really the first.

:) CJ

jwilbur 03-21-2017 08:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ed_Wischmeyer (Post 1158267)
... statistic I've seen is that about a third of homebuilts involved in accidents these days have glass cockpits. ..... Ed

Put another way, 2/3 have round gauges. This statistic alone suggests glass cockpits are better. .... But of course it's also true that 100% of people who ate pickles in 1865 (at the end of the American civil war) have died, so avoid eating pickles at all cost.

rmartingt 03-21-2017 10:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ed_Wischmeyer (Post 1158267)
Along those lines, a statistic I've seen is that about a third of homebuilts involved in accidents these days have glass cockpits. And as an old user interface designer, and having worked my way up a hefty learning curve with little assistance, I can understand why.

That statistic alone is meaningless, just like the one that came out a while ago that said certified aircraft with glass have a higher accident rate. It's like saying "the majority of airplanes involved in crashes have propellers" and thereby concluding that propellers are a causative factor in those accidents. There are a bunch of other things that could be at play--type of aircraft and use of aircraft (VFR vs IFR) for instance--and what matters is if the accident cause has anything to do with the glass at all. Comparing the accident rates of high-performance airplanes flying actual IFR to steam-equipped day VFR trainers and fun flyers would be a red herring.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:06 AM.