What's new
Van's Air Force

Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.

Looking for a builder

TeamBlackStar

I'm New Here
We have an RV 7 that we bought as a kit with a partner, who was building it up in his spare time. Unfortunately he passed away in a crash and the kit has sat partially assembled since. For sentimental purposes we are wanting to get the plane finished and brought to life, but are looking to outsource the help to build it. We are located in Picayune, MS and are looking for someone in the general vicinity who would be willing to take on the task of finishing this project. We can deliver the aircraft to the location it will be completed.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_3627.jpg
    IMG_3627.jpg
    309.4 KB · Views: 409
  • IMG_3628.jpg
    IMG_3628.jpg
    256.2 KB · Views: 358
  • IMG_2904.jpg
    IMG_2904.jpg
    433.1 KB · Views: 327
Project

I'm not in MS, but would take on a project. Being retired, and having already built three RV's, and helped with several others, and having extra hanger space, I know how to finish it. I'm located in Florida. If your interested send me a PM or email me at the address below.
 
Very sorry to see that you lost your building partner...that is tough.

Be sure you are well-versed in the regulatory limits and documentation needed when hiring help finishing the RV. It would be very frustrating to get to the point of registration and inspection to find that you no longer have an aircraft eligible for an experimental airworthiness certificate.

Best wishes for a successful completion. Welcome to VAF and let us know how we can help!
 
Last edited:
Very sorry to see that you lost your building partner...that is tough.

Be sure you are well-versed in the regulatory limits and documentation needed when hiring help finishing the RV. It would be very frustrating to get to the point of registration and inspection to find that you no longer have an aircraft eligible for an experimental airworthiness certificate.

Best wishes for a successful completion. Welcome to VAF and let us know how we can help!

Why would that be? I was under the assumption that as long as the plane is built 51% by amateurs, it doesn’t need to be done by the SAME person...
 
Why would that be? I was under the assumption that as long as the plane is built 51% by amateurs, it doesn’t need to be done by the SAME person...

As long as no one receives money or other compensation you can have as many builders as you wish. The faa will only issue one of the builders a repairman certificate, though.
Edit: when you said ‘outsource the help’ it sounded like money might be involved, so I understand the poster’s confusion.
 
As long as no one receives money or other compensation you can have as many builders as you wish. The faa will only issue one of the builders a repairman certificate, though.
Edit: when you said ‘outsource the help’ it sounded like money might be involved, so I understand the poster’s confusion.

I was only commenting that if one or 10 other people helped build it, or if someone built just about everything on the kit, it’s still eligible for an experimental certificate because it’s amateur built..
 
Project

My understanding of the rules is that if no one builds 51% of the aircraft, no one gets the repairman's certificate. It doesn't matter who finishes the aircraft when it comes to registration..... It's still an amateur built experimental aircraft.... And, so far, nothing has been said about money.......
 
My understanding is that who ever that applies for the repairman certificate needs to have built 51% of the plane. If 10 people work on it and each about 10%, no one can get the repairman cert. This is at least my understanding of the rule.
 
It is definitely an RV-6. That said I wouldn’t take on that large of a project for free. Possibly trade work for partnership in it might be legal. But I would sell it, if you aren’t willing or able to complete it yourself.

RD
 
My understanding is that who ever that applies for the repairman certificate needs to have built 51% of the plane. If 10 people work on it and each about 10%, no one can get the repairman cert. This is at least my understanding of the rule.

My understanding is that is not the case. Only ONE person of the 10 can get the repairman's certificate....
 
My understanding of the rules is that if no one builds 51% of the aircraft, no one gets the repairman's certificate....

My understanding is that who ever that applies for the repairman certificate needs to have built 51% of the plane. If 10 people work on it and each about 10%, no one can get the repairman cert. This is at least my understanding of the rule.

Neither of these statements is true - there is no requirement that the person getting the Repairman’s certificate has to have done 51% of the work - they simply have to be listed as one of the builders on the affidavit, and prove to the FAA Inspector that they have sufficient knowledge of the airplane to safely do the condition inspections. There are a number of ways to prove this, but if there have been a number of builders, expect a thorough quiz...

Paul
 
Last edited:
Correction

I was under the impression (I am just the guy who finds stuff, not one who was involved in purchasing it) that it was an RV 7. You all are correct- it is an RV 6.
 
Rudder Size

What is this RV-6 kit’s “serial number?” If the kit number is low it might have the smaller rudder? Whoever helps finish it ?should? finish it with the newer, larger rudder if the serial number is early. See Van’s website for a service bulletin. From Kitplanes magazine: A larger vertical stabilizer and rudder became standard in late 1999*, ‬with all RV-6* ‬kits being sold this way until the* ‬RV-7* ‬came out in 2001. Feb, 2020
 
Last edited:
What is this RV-6 kit’s “serial number?” If the kit number is low it might have the smaller rudder? Whoever helps finish it ?should? finish it with the newer, larger rudder if the serial number is early. See Van’s website for a service bulletin. From Kitplanes magazine: A larger vertical stabilizer and rudder became standard in late 1999*, ‬with all RV-6* ‬kits being sold this way until the* ‬RV-7* ‬came out in 2001. Feb, 2020

Not true (seems to be the theme of this thread).
It is of course true that a design change was made but not because the earlier design was deficient. So there is no more reason to not complete it with the original design rudder than there is to say that any RV-6 still flying with one should be grounded until retrofitted.
 
RV-6 Small Rudder

What is this RV-6 kit’s “serial number?” If the kit number is low it might have the smaller rudder? Whoever helps finish it ?should? finish it with the newer, larger rudder if the serial number is early. See Van’s website for a service bulletin. From Kitplanes magazine: A larger vertical stabilizer and rudder became standard in late 1999*, ‬with all RV-6* ‬kits being sold this way until the* ‬RV-7* ‬came out in 2001. Feb, 2020

Two of the RV's I've built are still flying with the small rudder. Both owners are happy with the plane's performance.
 
Just to add my 2 cents which are becoming less valuable by the day.

As soon as money is exchanged whoever is doing the work is no longer an armature. With that said you technically could pay someone to build an RV for you, but it would then be registered as experimental exhibition category which is a lot more restrictive operating limitations.
 
Just to add my 2 cents which are becoming less valuable by the day.

As soon as money is exchanged whoever is doing the work is no longer an armature. With that said you technically could pay someone to build an RV for you, but it would then be registered as experimental exhibition category which is a lot more restrictive operating limitations.

also not correct. First, 49% of the work can and often is done by commercial entities (QB kit is an example) For the 51%, You can pay for as much professional assistance as you like, including building the whole plane for you, as long as you (the amateur) are present for 100% of that work (there are exceptions, like the engine and panel, where you can simply outsource the work completely). You may not get the R/C if the knowledge isn't there, but is fine for A/B certification. The 2 weeks to taxi programs are like this. The amateur is present at the factory while their team does the bulk of the work.

If this was a slow build kit, it is likely the OP can outsource the balance of work here and still be under the 49%, making it fully legal.

Larry
 
Last edited:
also not correct. First, 49% of the work can and often is done by commercial entities (QB kit is an example) For the 51%, You can pay for as much professional assistance as you like, including building the whole plane for you, as long as you (the amateur) are present for 100% of that work (there are exceptions, like the engine and panel, where you can simply outsource the work completely). You may not get the R/C if the knowledge isn't there, but is fine for A/B certification. The 2 weeks to taxi programs are like this. The amateur is present at the factory while their team does the bulk of the work.

If this was a slow build kit, it is likely the OP can outsource the balance of work here and still be under the 49%, making it fully legal.

Larry

IMHO this is a bizarre interpretation of the rules. Basically, “I’m building this for my personal education, and I’m getting that education by watching others do the work.” I wouldn’t try that with the DAR or faa inspector. I think most would agree that the two weeks to taxi program was authorized by a local fsdo by mistake, and now the faa doesn’t know how to back-track.
 
Soooo...... What if I build an entire kit (on my own dime) up to but not including the airworthiness inspection then decide to sell said project?

It's my understanding that it can still be registered as experimental amature built since I built it for recreational and educational purposes.

Continuing this line of reasoning: If I had kept the project 1 day longer and obtained the AW certificate I'm allowed to sell it as a "used" airplane like any other. There are LOTS of second hand experimentals out there owned and flown by folks who didnt build them.
 
Soooo...... What if I build an entire kit (on my own dime) up to but not including the airworthiness inspection then decide to sell said project?

It's my understanding that it can still be registered as experimental amature built since I built it for recreational and educational purposes.

Continuing this line of reasoning: If I had kept the project 1 day longer and obtained the AW certificate I'm allowed to sell it as a "used" airplane like any other. There are LOTS of second hand experimentals out there owned and flown by folks who didnt build them.

That is correct as long as you can give the buyer adequate builder docs to prove compliance with E-AB when you sell the project. However, the buyer won't qualify for the Repairman's Certificate in either case of buying the completed project or flying aircraft.
 
IMHO this is a bizarre interpretation of the rules. Basically, “I’m building this for my personal education, and I’m getting that education by watching others do the work.” I wouldn’t try that with the DAR or faa inspector. I think most would agree that the two weeks to taxi program was authorized by a local fsdo by mistake, and now the faa doesn’t know how to back-track.

Pretty sure this the same interpretation used by all of the build support shops around the country. I have seen this several times and thought I even saw it in an FAA doc at one point. Also pretty sure the definition of personal education is having a professional explain it or show it to you. Clearly the goal of the rule is to allow experts to assist and teach with builders participation, but the rule only requires your attendance, not specifically participation, as that would be impossible to enforce. IMHO, this rule helps more than it hurts. I am sure lots of inexperienced people can create real disasters without assistance. This rule pre-dates sites like VAF and just look at some of the questions we see. Some folks need help and the FAA gave them a way to get it.
 
Last edited:
I am so sorry for your loss Sir...

I think there are a few assumptions going on here that led to an interesting thread.
The most apparent is that this kit owner "wants" a repair certificate.
His partner was doing the building as I read it and he was, it appears, a witness to the process but still a part-owner.

My take on it is that the owner wants the plane completed and was hiring it out to get the work completed. Full stop
 
Clearly the goal of the rule is to allow experts to assist and teach with builders participation, but the rule only requires your attendance, not specifically participation, as that would be impossible to enforce.

You’re reading way to modern of an interpretation into this rule Larry. The rules for EAB were written way back in the 1950’s to allow people to build their own airplanes. No one ever dreamed back then that there would be build assist centers or “pro builders” involved - that is a much more modern phenomenon. So no - the rules were not written to “only allow your attendance” as a builder. You sign an affidavit that says “I built this aircraft for the purpose of my own education and recreation...” - there is nothing in there about “I watched it being built”.

Those are the rules as they stand. There are movements to change the rules, and I agree that having a “custom built” category would allow pro builders to build solid airplanes for people - you wouldn’t get the wild quality variations we see in the EAB world. But....those types of rules are not yet in existence.

Paul
 
Last edited:
You’re reading way to modern of an interpretation into this rule Larry. The rules for EAB were written way back in the 1950’s to allow people to build their own airplanes. No one ever dreamed back then that there would be build assist centers or “pro builders” involved - that is a much more modern phenomenon. So no - the rules were not written to “only allow your attendance” as a builder. You sign an affidavit that says “I built this aircraft for the purpose of my own education and recreation...” - there is nothing in there about “I watched it being built”.

Those are the rules as they stand. There are movements to change the rules, and I agree that having a “custom built” category would allow pro builders to build solid airplanes for people - you wouldn’t get the wild quality variations we see in the EAB world. But....those types of rules are not yet in existence.

Paul

So, if that is the case, how are all of these builder assist centers getting away with it. You can't say you built the plane if part of the work was done by staff at the build assist center, assuming a 51% partially assembled kit. Isn't that what they are doing there. Or am I misunderstanding that. How are they pulling off the 2 week to taxi programs, where way more than 49% is being done by factory personnel, presumably not for free nor amateur? Seems the primary requirement is for the builder to be present at the factory.

Also, pretty sure the rules say that you are attesting to the fact that it was built by amateurs and that does not have to be the person applying for the cert. Only that all who built it were amateurs. I was pretty sure that I saw FAA docs that allow the hiring of professionals for assistance and the requirement was for an amateur to be present. I will see if I can find the reference.

EDIT:

I stand corrected. I suppose my research was from the original rule and not the modified ones. Found the following from the 08 rule changes. Apparently only true assistance can be counted toward the 51% now. Apparently they closed the loop hole. My questions above still apply.

Subparagraph f. Proposed Revision/Change: Revise providing commercial and/or
educational assistance as follows: “... The FAA will not credit toward the major portion
determination any tasks completed by the commercial assistance provider for educational
purposes.”

Disposition: The FAA agreed to add text that makes clear that educational instruction
provided on how to perform a task as opposed to accomplishing the task is allowable and
credited to the builder. However, this does not mean that the policy will allow all
educational assistance to be credited to the amateur builder at the discretion of the
evaluator. Instructors who actually demonstrate on actual parts (of the amateur-built
aircraft) will be restricted to only the instruction that is needed to learn a technique will
be credited to the builder.


Subparagraph e(1). Proposed Revision/Change: Revise as follows: “An aircraft that is
fabricated and assembled from a kit may be eligible for amateur-built certification,
provided the major portion of the aircraft has been fabricated and assembled by the
applicant [strike] amateur builder(s) [add] for education or recreation purposes….”
Disposition: The FAA concurs in principle. Text will be reviewed and revise as
necessary
 
Last edited:
Trying to digest this very interesting topic. Could this scenario work? Someone wants a custom built rv who has no interest in doing any of work. They partner with a quality amauture builder. They design and purchase all parts. Builder, builds, test flights and gets certified then sells his half (basically labor,shop rent and other overhead. Thoughts?
 
Trying to digest this very interesting topic. Could this scenario work? Someone wants a custom built rv who has no interest in doing any of work. They partner with a quality amauture builder. They design and purchase all parts. Builder, builds, test flights and gets certified then sells his half (basically labor,shop rent and other overhead. Thoughts?

seems no different than the guys who build RVs and then sell them right after Phase I is done.
 
Trying to digest this very interesting topic. Could this scenario work? Someone wants a custom built rv who has no interest in doing any of work. They partner with a quality amauture builder. They design and purchase all parts. Builder, builds, test flights and gets certified then sells his half (basically labor,shop rent and other overhead. Thoughts?

It is exactly as Paul said above. The builder signs a statement thar he built the airplane for his own recreation or education. If that is true, no problem. If it is not true, then the faa has the option of trying to prove the builder’s true intent was something else - legally, not an easy task.
 
No repairman's certificate

I think there's no real issue here unless the OP wants to earn the Repairman's Certificate.

If not, then there's no real issue as it really is like buying a flying RV. I bought a flying RV-7 and need an A&P to at least observe my work and sign off the condition of the aircraft as airworthy once a year.

Not a bad idea to have a second set of eyes checking on things, even if I'm working under the A&P's supervision.

Best of luck, it will get done and is probably already in the hands of a capable builder who will do a nice job finishing the aircraft.
 
It is exactly as Paul said above. The builder signs a statement thar he built the airplane for his own recreation or education. If that is true, no problem. If it is not true, then the faa has the option of trying to prove the builder’s true intent was something else - legally, not an easy task.

I think Bob nailed it. This is in the same category of the phase 1 sign off on acrobatic maneuvers which were never tested (as everybody knows RV can do them..), the annual conditional inspection performed 100 miles from the airplane, the .... .

There are lots of cases were the intent of the rule is clear:

"built the airplane for his own recreation or education"

but it is up to your personal integrity if you follow the rule as intended as odds of getting caught are low to none existent.

Oliver
 
Back
Top