|
-
POSTING RULES

-
Donate yearly (please).
-
Advertise in here!
-
Today's Posts
|
Insert Pics
|

09-02-2013, 05:04 PM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Paris, TX
Posts: 264
|
|
Right on!
I'm with Dan!
__________________
Steve Garrett - 903-272-5639, scg3037@icloud.com
N905RV - 520 hrs to date 
Home field XS30
|

09-02-2013, 05:09 PM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Dallas area
Posts: 10,768
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by DanH
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?
|
ELSAs are still in the Experimental category. Any one can perform all maintenance. The repairman certificate only allow one to sign off the condition inspection.
__________________
Mel Asberry, DAR since the last century.
EAA Flight Advisor/Tech Counselor, Friend of the RV-1
Recipient of Tony Bingelis Award and Wright Brothers Master Pilot Award
USAF Vet, High School E-LSA Project Mentor.
RV-6 Flying since 1993 (sold)
<rvmel(at)icloud.com>
|

09-02-2013, 05:16 PM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Marshall TX (KASL)
Posts: 1,783
|
|
Mel - I am sorry for the imprecision of my comment.
Clarify - I can make many mods to an ELSA but depending on their nature, the original airworthiness certificate would become invalid. That would necessitate a NEW airworthiness certificate be obtained, which would then be an EAB. Correct?
Please list a few modifications that would, and would not, invalidate an already obtained ELSA airworthiness certificate.
1. Installation of a CS prop would be one, apparently, that would.
2. Installation of an in-flight-adjustable-pitch prop (a different animal than a CS prop) would be another, apparently, that would.
3. Installation of a non-in-flight-but-still-"easily"-adjustable-pitch prop (think electric) would not be, nor would installation of any non-original ground-adjustable prop. (Like the Sensenich 3-blade for ROTAX)
More examples please!
Then, more complexly, if I were to change out the ROTAX on a proper, licensed, registered, ELSA aircraft to a Jabiru, (I do not intend this), something (what?) would trigger the Phase 1 process again(?), but would it still be a "Van's RV12" on the registration - even though Vans never built such an animal? Does it become an EAB "somehow?"
Curious things, these regs...
Last edited by Bill_H : 09-02-2013 at 05:20 PM.
|

09-02-2013, 05:24 PM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Dallas area
Posts: 10,768
|
|
See below:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill_H
Mel - I am sorry for the imprecision of my comment.
Clarify - I can make many mods to an ELSA but depending on their nature, the original airworthiness certificate would become invalid. That would necessitate a NEW airworthiness certificate be obtained, which would then be an EAB. Correct? NO! An ELSA cannot be re-certificated as anything else.
Please list a few modifications that would, and would not, invalidate an already obtained ELSA airworthiness certificate.
1. Installation of a CS prop would be one, apparently. YES!
2. Installation of an in-flight-adjustable-pitch prop (a different animal than a CS prop) would be another, apparently. YES!
3. Installation of a non-in-flight-but-still-"easily"-adjustable-pitch prop (think electric) would not be, nor would installation of any non-original ground-adjustable prop. (Like the Sensenich 3-blade for ROTAX) Correct!
More examples please!
Then, more complexly, if I were to change out the ROTAX on a proper, licensed, registered, ELSA aircraft to a Jabiru, (I do not intend this), something (what?) would trigger the Phase 1 process again(?), but would it still be a "Van's RV12" on the registration - even though Vans never built such an animal? Does it become an EAB "somehow?" NO! It would still be an ELSA RV-12 built by Vans. It would be modified, but that is allowable after certification.
An ELSA can never be anything but an ELSA.
Curious things, these regs...
|
__________________
Mel Asberry, DAR since the last century.
EAA Flight Advisor/Tech Counselor, Friend of the RV-1
Recipient of Tony Bingelis Award and Wright Brothers Master Pilot Award
USAF Vet, High School E-LSA Project Mentor.
RV-6 Flying since 1993 (sold)
<rvmel(at)icloud.com>
|

09-02-2013, 05:56 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: St. Louis
Posts: 28
|
|
So let me confirm this. An ELSA can be changed to a EAB, but because how the changes are made a EAB can never be re-certified back as a ELSA.
Didn't mean to hijack the thread from the op. But, I had these questions in my mind for a long time. Thanks!
|

09-02-2013, 06:04 PM
|
 |
been here awhile
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: North Alabama
Posts: 4,301
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kram
So let me confirm this. An ELSA can be changed to a EAB, but because how the changes are made a EAB can never be re-certified back as a ELSA.
Didn't mean to hijack the thread from the op. But, I had these questions in my mind for a long time. Thanks!
|
As Mel stated at least twice in this thread, the last time just above your last post, An ELSA can never be re-certified with any other type of certificate.
Once an ELSA.... always an ELSA.
And if an ELSA is ever modified to where it doesn't comply with LSA regs, it becomes a very expensive lawn ornament.
Last edited by Sam Buchanan : 09-02-2013 at 06:08 PM.
|

09-02-2013, 06:43 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Pensacola, FL & 2R4, Loveland, CO
Posts: 222
|
|
An E-LSA is inspected for and certified that the builder followed the designer's astm approved plans, acceptance procedures, and used the specified materials.
An E-AB is inspected for? The builder can do what they like within wide margins. Maybe the builder does know better than the designer, maybe not?
If you do not know the builder which would you prefer to buy?
In any event, the market place will ultimately decide regardless of what we may think.
I wonder what other builders have decided.
Thanks Van's for doing the extra work and taking on the added responsibility to offer the RV-12 as an E-LSA.
Just sayin, Dave
__________________
120500
Last edited by DaveLS : 09-02-2013 at 06:46 PM.
|

09-02-2013, 06:56 PM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Marshall TX (KASL)
Posts: 1,783
|
|
Now this just gets into theory..
Take parts from a wrecked Cessna, Piper, and Mooney. Cobble them together as a Frankenbird. If you can get an FAA or DAR airworthiness sign off, that can be an EAB, right?
Cannot an airplane's airworthiness certificate be abandoned, thus turning it into parts? Then you take the parts ex-RV-12 (nameplate removed), add an IO-540, and you have a Rocket12, which you can (try to!) get an EAB certification. Emphasis on the "E!" right?
But seriously though, is there anything else that is "practical" other than an inflightadjustable prop, that would void the ELSA AW cert. on an RV12? (And thus reg-wise turn it into parts.) I can't come up with anything except a substantially more powerful engine.
Just an intellectual exercise.
Kram, I think you are confusing ELSA. You cant easily CONVERT an ELSA to an EAB (except maybe via the "parts route!") You can initially BUILD an ELSA as an EAB instead, and some do. Very different thing! And most of those folks (maybe all???) are building it as an EAB LSA.
None of the common mods discussed take the RV12 out of the 1320GW 120kt 2-passenger etc. parameters of the LSA category. The main reasons people build EAB RV12s (in the USA) seem to be to initially use different engines (either non-Rotax or a used Rotax they happen to have) or avionics than the Vans plans call for. In one case, maybe to have wing fuel tanks. No one (Yet) has tried to do a taildragging slider canopy version (I WISH!) of the 12 as an EAB LSA.
Last edited by Bill_H : 09-02-2013 at 07:04 PM.
|

09-02-2013, 06:58 PM
|
 |
been here awhile
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: North Alabama
Posts: 4,301
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveLS
An E-LSA is inspected for and certified that the builder followed the designer's astm approved plans, acceptance procedures, and used the specified materials.
An E-AB is inspected for? The builder can do what they like within wide margins. Maybe the builder does know better than the designer, maybe not?
If you do not know the builder which would you prefer to buy?
|
It doesn't matter whether I know the builder or not or how the aircraft was registered. Any aircraft purchased should receive a thorough pre-purchase inspection regardless of how the aircraft was certified or who built it.
Quote:
|
In any event, the market place will ultimately decide regardless of what we may think.
|
This is true, we are still in somewhat uncharted territory with the used RV-12 market. But I suspect there are a lot of potential purchasers like myself that much prefer the options and freedoms afforded by having an E-AB registered aircraft vs ELSA.
A registered ELSA could be constructed in such a manner as to be considered junk by the informed builder....just as can be the case with an E-AB aircraft. An ELSA registration doesn't guarantee an aircraft will be one I would want to own.
I still think the market will value good craftsmanship much more than whether or not the RV-12 is ELSA or E-AB.
|

09-02-2013, 07:17 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Pensacola, FL & 2R4, Loveland, CO
Posts: 222
|
|
In general a BUILDER does not like being told what they can do, and E-AB has appeal.
Also in general, a BUYER may in fact like the idea that the builder was forced to follow the plans and use specified materials, and was inspected for same. Here E-LSA has appeal.
After purchase freedoms, as previously noted, are about the same for E-AB & E-LSA, if the aircraft is to remain LSA eligible. In fact a individual that buys a E-LSA has more authority (with a two day course) than a purchaser of an E-AB (condition inspection authority). Again here E-LSA has appeal.
Builder or buyer makes all the difference. But, most of use will eventually be sellers.
-Dave
__________________
120500
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:58 PM.
|