Operating Limitations for IFR

[oaklandaviator]

Probably because their plans are predicted on your filed speed. If you randomly slow down, they might or might not notice until a problem occurs or one is set to happen in the future. Better just to tell them you're slowing down to prevent them from having to guess what you're doing.

[ColoCardinal]

The DAR emailed me a Program Letter (Denver FSDO) to complete that states:

I request airworthiness certification and operating limitations be issued permitting me to operate the aircraft within the following geographical area for flight testing. Initial flights will determine engine reliability and flight control characteristics. A flight test plan has been developed using the guidance in AC 90-89 and is available for review. After phase I flight test completion, I plan to operate the aircraft under VFR conditions only.

I spent a lot of time, effort and $ to not be limited to VFR. What do you suggest?

[lr172]

Originally Posted by ColoCardinal

The DAR emailed me a Program Letter (Denver FSDO) to complete that states:

I request airworthiness certification and operating limitations be issued permitting me to operate the aircraft within the following geographical area for flight testing. Initial flights will determine engine reliability and flight control characteristics. A flight test plan has been developed using the guidance in AC 90-89 and is available for review. After phase I flight test completion, I plan to operate the aircraft under VFR conditions only.

I spent a lot of time, effort and $ to not be limited to VFR. What do you suggest?

Change the wording to IFR. When I did my work with the FSDO, they asked if I intended to fly IFR as well as perform aerobatics. I presumed they asked this to put specific wording in the Op Lim's. It seems that some of their language is flexible and they align it with the builders goals/plans

Larry

[ColoCardinal]

I'll definitely give it a shot. Thought that it was presumptive of them to provide the wording without options. Thanks

[C. Brenden]

When flying IFR it is very important to report this speed change asap. Ground speed is displayed but any unexpected changes can lead to separation problems with other aircraft - simply because it was unexpected. Controllers may have already determined that no conflict exists between you and another aircraft operating nearby. Other tasks then take priority. When their attention is then brought back to your flight - an unexpected speed difference exists.

[parabuzzle]

This thread got me thinking and caused way too much FAR/AIM reading that I'd care to admit.

Anyway, I stumbled upon this really nice little writeup by the EAA on the subject of IFR equipped homebuilts: https://www.eaa.org/en/eaa/aviation-...ifr-operations

[lr172]

Originally Posted by C. Brenden

When flying IFR it is very important to report this speed change asap. Ground speed is displayed but any unexpected changes can lead to separation problems with other aircraft - simply because it was unexpected. Controllers may have already determined that no conflict exists between you and another aircraft operating nearby. Other tasks then take priority. When their attention is then brought back to your flight - an unexpected speed difference exists.

This makes sense. To be clear, I do report my speed changes as required. I was just curious for the rationale. It makes sense that they want a "heads up" so that they can assume a constant speed without having to look. That said, I sure hope their looking, as they are responsible for ground speed computation in the radar environment and am pretty sure they have tools that alert controllers to converging aircraft and other conflicts. I have heard controllers give a "distance to expected convergence" and I am pretty sure that wasn't computed by hand.

Larry

[no7rosman]

Originally Posted by sibriggs

Sometimes at first glance, the day VFR is followed by a statement saying something like ?unless equipped for ifr flight?.

Not sure of the exact wording as my doc is not handy, but I remember having to reread it a couple of times to determine I was ifr certified.

Steve

Steve - This was valuable. Thanks! I went out today and read <b>ALL<b> the documentation and it was further down on the page. Pretty sure I read phase 1 and stopped there.

My instructor was out today and went through everything and gave the ok. Hopefully will start next weekend.

Thanks again everyone. Also for all the IFR advise.

[gmcjetpilot]

I am curious what is in the panel Flight Instruments and Nav your RV9A has?

Of course to fly IFR you must have FAR required specific Flt Instruments (and have pitot
static currently certified for IFR). Experimental EFIS (not TSO'ed) seems to be allowed (or
at least used) a lot for IFR. A question of redundancy would be my concern. In GA planes
"partial panel" is when Vac pump failed and you only had TB or TC to keep wing level, plus
Alt, AS, VS and Power instruments (RPM/MAP) to scan for pitch. Single EFIS, no electrical
redundancy? If IMC with NO attitude instrument reference is a bad thing.

Nav instruments required are only those required for that intended flight. I flew a Piper
Tomahawk actual IFR with just a VOR between two fields all the time, years ago. Both
fields had VOR non precision approach. IFR GPS must be TSO'ed. However I bet many
pilots are driving around IFR w/ their fancy non TSO'ed EFIS and GPS. You must have
GPS NAV source TSO approved for IFR and an up-to-date database or VOR/LOC/GS.

IMHO single pilot hard IFR in a kit plane is sporty. Not required but well advised, an auto-
pilot. There are so many new autopilot options with advance track and altitude capture hold
from different companies. Autopilot is great for reducing work load. You let go of the stick
too long and let an RV roll and pitch down, speed builds quickly. Also now real time weather
via XM or ADSB is available and a blessing. Two things I will have in my RV-7.

PS someone mentioned turbulence? RV on the gauges in turbulence is a challenge to hand
fly, it yaws. Not saying RV's are unstable, they just are not a super stable platform, say like
a C-182. I suspect some of the new autopilots with yaw dampers might be awesome to tame
the tail wag, but to me that is overkill for a little sport plane. If you get into turbulence one
trick is to rest your feet lightly on rudder peddles.

[Deweyclawson]

GMCjetpilot;
Your opinion here is at odds with that of the EAA. I suggest you read their words here: https://www.eaa.org/en/eaa/aviation-...ifr-operations