|
-
POSTING RULES

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

07-11-2008, 11:55 AM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Jackson, MS
Posts: 1,262
|
|
After the repair
After what recently happened to Black Magic, I was wondering.......
Does the owner/builder declare the repair complete and sign off and away they go or is there some type of additional inspection by a DAR (or equivalent)?
BTW - Anybody heard the status of BM lately?
__________________
Webb Willmott
Jackson, MS
N32WW
|

07-11-2008, 12:10 PM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: getting ready to move
Posts: 287
|
|
posted on the 7th of july
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlackRV7
I'm posting this knowing others have much more than I have in my panel
BUT..........I just added it up.........I now officially have MORE in my panel than what I bought my first house for in 1981...$25,000 at 18%, back in the Jimmy Carter days
That's just not right!!
|
__________________
Ian
RV-8 economically on hold... short term hold. 
AME2, USN
|

07-11-2008, 12:23 PM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Jackson, MS
Posts: 1,262
|
|
Sticker shock.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lightning
posted on the 7th of july
|
I saw the panel sticker shock going on!!!!!
Just was thinking about all the rebuilding going on. I still am curious what happens after you declare the repair complete.
__________________
Webb Willmott
Jackson, MS
N32WW
|

07-11-2008, 05:14 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Elmendorf,TX
Posts: 358
|
|
No additional inspection is needed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Webb
After what recently happened to Black Magic, I was wondering.......
Does the owner/builder declare the repair complete and sign off and away they go or is there some type of additional inspection by a DAR (or equivalent)?
BTW - Anybody heard the status of BM lately?
|
Unless of course, you made a "major modification" to the aircraft while it was being repaired.
__________________
---------------------------------------------------------
Hangared since 11/23/2011, working on getting airborne again!
Joe Portman
N131RV - RV-7A, IO360A1B6, CS
Rebuilt as TD
Added dual MGL EFIS.
Airborne again at last! 2/21/2009
Elmendorf, TX (28TE)
baron (AT) baron (dot) com
|

07-11-2008, 07:54 PM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 704
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Webb
After what recently happened to Black Magic, I was wondering.......
Does the owner/builder declare the repair complete and sign off and away they go or is there some type of additional inspection by a DAR (or equivalent)?
|
In my case, my operating limitations detailed the following: "After incorporating a major change as described in 21.93, the aircraft owner is required to reestablish compliance with 91.319b and notify the geographically responsible FSDO of the location of the proposed test area. The aircraft owner must obtain concurrence from the FSDO as to the suitability of the proposed test area." Pretty cut and dry. Since I have installed a new engine I must fill out a revised 8130-6 to update Black Magic's file in the FAA registry. I will have a five hour fly off back in Phase 1.......which I am looking forward to with that new Barrett Precision engine
As for the progress there is one key word in the above.............
|

07-11-2008, 08:08 PM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: 57AZ - NW Tucson area
Posts: 10,011
|
|
Major changes
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlackRV7
In my case, my operating limitations detailed the following: "After incorporating a major change as described in 21.93, the aircraft owner is required to reestablish compliance with 91.319b and notify the geographically responsible FSDO of the location of the proposed test area. The aircraft owner must obtain concurrence from the FSDO as to the suitability of the proposed test area." Pretty cut and dry. Since I have installed a new engine I must fill out a revised 8130-6 to update Black Magic's file in the FAA registry. I will have a five hour fly off back in Phase 1.......which I am looking forward to with that new Barrett Precision engine
As for the progress there is one key word in the above.............
|
Dana...is that correct if you installed the same model engine?
I believe that for a certified plane, an engine change (same model number) is not a major change and only needs a log book entry.
Why should an experimental be different? - given the same engine model....
gil A - in sunny NE
__________________
Gil Alexander
EAA Technical Counselor, Airframe Mechanic
Half completed RV-10 QB purchased
RV-6A N61GX - finally flying
Grumman Tiger N12GA - flying
La Cholla Airpark (57AZ) Tucson AZ
|

07-11-2008, 08:46 PM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 704
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by az_gila
Dana...is that correct if you installed the same model engine?
I believe that for a certified plane, an engine change (same model number) is not a major change and only needs a log book entry.
Why should an experimental be different? - given the same engine model....
gil A - in sunny NE
|
My bad on the engine comment it says different make and model of engine but I think my prop gets me.
Gil, while my new engine is assembled per service data as applicable to Type 0-360A1A as my previous engine was, my new prop is a HC-C2YR-1BFP/F7497. My previous prop was a HC-C2YR-1BF/F7666. As per my op limits, it says "If the major change includes installing a different make and model of engine or propeller.....file a revised...8130-6. I went from a standard blade 1BF/7666 to the new blended 1BFP/F7497. Still looks to me like a major change that requires FSDO notification, revised 8130-6 and 5 hour flyoff.
Thoughts??
Last edited by BlackRV7 : 07-12-2008 at 04:27 AM.
|

07-11-2008, 09:13 PM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Pasadena CA
Posts: 2,484
|
|
You are absolutely right Dana, the prop does require new Phase 1 testing, although I don't think it'll need 40 hours worth. If you just do a repair with the same parts, or an engine overhaul with the same dash number engine, you don't need a new flyoff, that is just normal maintenance.
__________________
Stephen Samuelian, CFII, A&P IA, CTO
RV4 wing in Jig @ KPOC
RV7 emp built
|

07-11-2008, 10:20 PM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Flagstaff, AZ
Posts: 2,647
|
|
I thought structural repairs constituted a major change?
__________________
Patrick Kelley - Flagstaff, AZ
RV-6A N156PK - Flying too much to paint
RV-10 14MX(reserved) - Fuselage on gear
http://www.mykitlog.com/flion/
EAA Technical Counselor #5357
|

07-12-2008, 04:55 AM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 704
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by flion
I thought structural repairs constituted a major change?
|
I encourage you to just do a google search on 21.93. It is actually very small and does leave some room for consideration but it also leaves room for retribution. Here is the first paragraph, paragraph b refers to noise changes, as there is really not much later in the section other than the reference to using a replacement engine:
? 21.93 Classification of changes in type design
(a) In addition to changes in type design specified in paragraph (b) of this section, changes in type design are classified as minor and major. A "minor change" is one that has no appreciable effect on the weight, balance, structural strength, reliability, operational characteristics, or other characteristics affecting the airworthiness of the product. All other changes are "major changes" (except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section).
You could actually read this to mean a lot of "changes" are major and necessitate 5 hours back in Phase 1............
Remember here all I am doing is revising my 8130-6 to change the engine manufacturers name and prop model in the FAA registry and contacting my local FSDO to get their concurrence in using my original Phase 1 test area and throwing her back into Phase 1 for 5 hours as per my original op limits.
|
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 12:36 AM.
|