VansAirForceForums  
Home > VansAirForceForums

- POSTING RULES
- Donate yearly (please).
- Advertise in here!

- Today's Posts | Insert Pics


Go Back   VAF Forums > Main > RV General Discussion/News
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #81  
Old 03-24-2015, 09:26 PM
enielsen enielsen is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 146
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RV7A Flyer View Post
So this little tempest in a teapot seems to have run its course here in about a day, which is good. I do think the admonition to *make sure you're right* before posting something like this is good advice (even if it is free, and from a lawyer ).
As a fellow engineer, I know where you are coming from but you are falling into the same trap. This site is for entertainment purposes as is well stated. ALL and ANY information here OR on the internet, in general, should be individually researched. You would be insulting a lot of people's intelligence if you think otherwise. I encourage you to re-read the thread. As has been stated, the thought of restricting passengers in EABs is so absurd, there were call outs of an April fools joke. I think that speaks volumes! If it's true that the Order has been delayed to correct verbiage justifies the OP even more. We'll see... nuff said.
__________________
RV-x Planning stage
Reply With Quote
  #82  
Old 03-24-2015, 09:33 PM
RV7A Flyer's Avatar
RV7A Flyer RV7A Flyer is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: US
Posts: 2,251
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by enielsen View Post
If it's true that the Order has been delayed to correct verbiage justifies the OP even more. We'll see... nuff said.
We don't know that...the post which referenced the memorandum talked about *training*...
Reply With Quote
  #83  
Old 03-24-2015, 09:36 PM
RV6_flyer's Avatar
RV6_flyer RV6_flyer is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: NC25
Posts: 3,507
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RV6_flyer View Post
The FAA just posted the 8130.2H_Operating_Limitations_Job_Aid.pdf to the Regulatory and Guidance Library. It is with the 8130.2H order.

Download the PDF from the FAA created to create Operating Limitations and enter data for your aircraft then print form. It creates the OpLims for your Amateur Built aircraft.

I just did the above and there was NO restriction on carrying passengers. I did find a few parts of the order that was left out in the PDF OpLim Job Aid Form.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mel View Post
Have you ever had one of those days where everything you did was wrong? I certainly had one on Monday.

--- SNIP ---

I'm getting pretty fed up with the way FAA is treating DARs, and as much as I love this job, I may just hang it up this September.
I have also talked with a few other long-time DARs who are thinking about getting out.
Sometimes one just needs a break from the routine. If able, take a break before you make a decision. When it stops being fun, it is time for a change.

I hung it up a year ago after moving to an area that does not need a DAR. If it does, I will go back through the process and start all over again.


Good News. I just ran 2 different test of the OpLim Job Aid PDF and it worked great. If it is not perfect, it is close. It helps if one reads the instructions before just doing it. It will also be helpful to the DARs using it if they have Adobe Acrobat Pro so that they can convert from the PDF straight to a Word file that they can then make some minor edits (like the Phase I test area verbiage). My 1st test of the OpLim Job Aid PDF only gave fair results. IF I had RTFD, I would have had very good results. Reading and following the instruction, I got EXCELLENT results.

If the DARs and FAA Inspectors have some computer skills, this will make things better as it will Standardize the OpLims Format across the country.

Things that I notice new in the OpLims should not cause alarm to us flying RVs built the way Van recommends.

New things for us AB RV aircraft are:
Verbiage for replacement of life-limited articles. Think "Ballistic Chute" like used on Cirrus and batteries in our ELTs.
Verbiage is added that externally mounted equipment must be flight tested and documented. Those of us that put cameras and smoke canisters outside our aircraft are already doing this.
__________________
Gary A. Sobek
NC25 RV-6
Flying
3,400+ hours
Where is N157GS
Building RV-8 S/N: 80012

To most people, the sky is the limit.
To those who love aviation, the sky is home.
Reply With Quote
  #84  
Old 03-25-2015, 08:39 AM
Bill_H's Avatar
Bill_H Bill_H is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Marshall TX (KASL)
Posts: 1,783
Default

If you think that being concerned about unreasonable rulings, coming out of the blue, is to overreact, I have four words for you.
Bob Hoover.
Sleep apnea.
Reply With Quote
  #85  
Old 03-25-2015, 10:15 AM
RV7A Flyer's Avatar
RV7A Flyer RV7A Flyer is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: US
Posts: 2,251
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill_H View Post
If you think that being concerned about unreasonable rulings, coming out of the blue, is to overreact, I have four words for you.
Bob Hoover.
Sleep apnea.
Because those are exactly the same.

And in this case, in fact it was *not* an "unreasonable ruling", was it?
Reply With Quote
  #86  
Old 03-25-2015, 01:20 PM
jclark jclark is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Columbia, SC
Posts: 804
Default UPDATE. <<From EAA Government Team>>

I sent several emails to Sean Elliott (VP at EAA that handles Government matters). He and his team looked into this and followed up with me.

Below is a "cut and paste" of the direct response to me on this matter.

Summary: All is well. (please note the "do not apply")

James
===================

James,

I?ve spent a good amount of time looking into this issue, and Sean asked me to respond.

The FAA has reaffirmed to us that those specific limitations restricting the carriage of passengers and limiting flight to a geographic area (43 and 44) do not apply to the vast majority of homebuilts, save a handful of highly unusual cases. The FAA has also published a ?job aid? (http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgOrders.nsf/0/d10ce3d63a30600d86257e0d0074cdec/$FILE/8130.2H_Operations_Limitations_Job_Aid.pdf) that automatically generates ops limits per the new 8130.2H based on an aircraft?s registration data and a few factors the DAR inputs. You can try it for yourself with your aircraft to see exactly what your ops limits would be under this policy.

Per Appendix C, Limitations 43 and 44 ONLY apply if Paragraphs 3 or 5(c) of the same appendix apply to the aircraft.

Paragraph 3 says that in unusual cases additional limitations may be in order but must be coordinated with AIR-113. It specifically calls out former military aircraft of 9,000 pounds MTOW or greater with powerful jet engines or ejection seats.

Paragraph 5(c) gives the following 5 cases (paraphrased below):

1. S-LSAs that have outstanding service directives being converted to E-LSA

2. Aircraft requiring bailout or ejection in case of engine failure

3. Control systems where a single system failure results in total loss of control (i.e. non-redundant hydraulics or fly-by-wire, NOT traditional cable/pushrod controls)

4. Aircraft that bust 91.117(a) (250 kts below 10,000) in a normal cruise configuration

5. Rocket-powered aircraft


So again, for your typical E-AB this DOES NOT apply. We believe that Paragraph 5(c)(3) about single point of failure is a little too vague and could cause an overzealous inspector to think it applies to systems found on most aircraft, but this was most definitely not the drafting intent and if necessary the FAA will correct the language or publish clearer guidance.
__________________
James E. Clark
Columbia, SC
RV6 Flying, RV6A Cowling
APRS
Reply With Quote
  #87  
Old 03-25-2015, 05:28 PM
sahrens's Avatar
sahrens sahrens is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Battle Ground
Posts: 480
Default

Mel, when I stop making mistakes I will start to think about criticizing someone else. Thanks for posting this and getting me to read about a process I should have known about anyway.
__________________
Scott
RV-7 N818BG (flying)
Bearhawk Patrol (building)
Reply With Quote
  #88  
Old 03-25-2015, 05:38 PM
jclark jclark is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Columbia, SC
Posts: 804
Default "No Harm, No Foul!"

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mel View Post
Have you ever had one of those days where everything you did was wrong? I certainly had one on Monday.

BUT, you guys learned something by researching on your own and not just taking someone else's word.

My point was that the new form of "building" operating limitations is very convoluted and can lead to inconsistent operating limitations.
Think about it. How many inspectors are going to look at that and determine that almost ALL aircraft have a single fail point that would make the aircraft uncontrollable. What about you elevator pushrod. How many single point failures can occur between the stick and the elevator making the aircraft uncontrollable?

I apologize if I upset people. Maybe I didn't go about it the way I should have.

I'm getting pretty fed up with the way FAA is treating DARs, and as much as I love this job, I may just hang it up this September.
I have also talked with a few other long-time DARs who are thinking about getting out.
Mel,

I don't think that you did anything WRONG!

I, for one, am glad that you raised the flag.

What it did was cause us to seek greater clarity and that is a GOOD THING.
What it also did, I think, is remind people at FAA to make sure that there is greater clarity in the documents that try to convey what they mean.

My assumption was that there was some sort of error that simpky needed fixing quickly.

"No harm, no foul!"

James
__________________
James E. Clark
Columbia, SC
RV6 Flying, RV6A Cowling
APRS
Reply With Quote
  #89  
Old 03-25-2015, 05:46 PM
rvbuilder2002's Avatar
rvbuilder2002 rvbuilder2002 is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Hubbard Oregon
Posts: 9,035
Default

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

I agree with James 100%
__________________
Opinions, information and comments are my own unless stated otherwise. They do not necessarily represent the direction/opinions of my employer.

Scott McDaniels
Van's Aircraft Engineering Prototype Shop Manager
Hubbard, Oregon
RV-6A (aka "Junkyard Special ")
Reply With Quote
  #90  
Old 03-25-2015, 06:00 PM
tadsargent's Avatar
tadsargent tadsargent is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 307
Default

It does appear that boxes are being built. Ultimately our hobbie may be placed in these boxes, a lid placed on the box and then we become restricted to movement within the box. Good call Mel, I hope they put away the saws, hammers and nails. I enjoy my freedom.
__________________
Tad Stripes Sargent
GRT HXr Glass
TITAN POWERED IO-370
Hartzell's advanced composite propeller

Last edited by tadsargent : 03-25-2015 at 06:02 PM.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:41 AM.


The VAFForums come to you courtesy Delta Romeo, LLC. By viewing and participating in them you agree to build your plane using standardized methods and practices and to fly it safely and in accordance with the laws governing the country you are located in.