CHANGES TO THE FAA KIT CHECKLIST AND THE "51%" RULE

[briand]

I think some guys at the FAA have ARM's that are due to reset and they are just looking to "fabricate" some OT.

[robertahegy]

Most of the parts in the Van's kits are partially completed and still need a certain amount of fabrication such as finished hole size, dimpling, cleaning and bending. The FAA needs to recognize this and include it in it's interpretation of fabrication along with the assembly of sub parts to complete the sub assemblies.

I believe the FAA needs to address the infractions of the rules violated by hired guns building planes for profit. This is not in the spirit of amature building and does not help further our "HOBBY". Blowing off the rules in the name of building safer airplanes just doesn't cut it with me. If you don't think you can build a safe plane, either get the proper training or find another hobby.

JMHO

Roberta

[roadrunner20]

Originally Posted by N395V

Call me naieve but in my opinion we do not want a strict definition of the term fabricate.

When all is said and done the system will still require our existing Army of DARs to inspect the plane and paperwork and make a determination as they always have. Seems to me the more nebulous the word fabrication the more leeway the DAR has. It is not in the interest of DARs in general to start en masse refusing to certify aircraft that meet the spirit and intent of the regulations as opposed to strict detailed criteria.

The FSDOs currently do not have the manpower, interest, budget, desire, nor political pressure to get deeply involved in regulating and directly inspecting homebuilts. It is in our best interest to keep it that way.

At the end of the day I predict nothing will have changed other than the government form number on the paperwork we will fill out.

I agree. The FAA had no interest in doing my AW inspection and had no interest in interviewing me for my Repairman certificate or looking at my builder's log. They did make me change some of my date formats on the paperwork.

[rwtalbot]

I personally support what the FAA is doing as I believe Experimental "Amateur Built" is being abused by far too many people to ignore and it is these people that are ruining it for everyone.

Some people here compare to building a car or a chopper. The fact is they are totally dissimilar. You can buy a kit from Vans to build a well proven, aerobatic, IFR aircraft for less than half the price of a certified plane and you can maintain it yourself.

Perhaps success of experimental designs is the biggest issue but we are at the point where there is significant motivation to do this appart from "recreation".
In contrast very few people build cars or choppers. However, a very large percentage of people in the market for new aircraft are building or paying someone else to build for them. I fully support the notion that builders be transparent with who built their aircraft and how much they paid for, as well as how much they did themselves.

The fact is that existing legislation allows for building as a hobby – not flying as a hobby. There is no sense to abusing the FAA for upholding the rules and making it more difficult for people to abuse the system.

One so called “kit” manufacturer has a “two week to taxi” program… In my view that is not homebuilding and the fact that they promote such a thing shows disregard for the spirit of the legislation at the very least. Even using the FAA form and taking pictures as said builder tightens bolts on ailerons “rigging them” would not convince many people the aircraft has been built for recreation. I would be convinced the builder had cash, little time and wanted to fly a nice new shiny aircraft and avoid paying a licensed engineer to maintain it.

Please if you are a person that does not have the time, skills or desire to build an aircraft, but still want to fly one, go and find a friendly builder who has one for sale. Hopefully he has flown for a few years and enjoyed his plane/worked out the bugs in it for you. Enjoy flying it, take it to a LAME to get it fixed but don’t pay someone else to build for you or buy from someone who makes a habit of building planes for others. The law simply does not allow it.

Richard

RV-7A finishing.