FAA Requirements

[N661DJ]

Quick question:
I have a friend with a recently purchased RV7A, 180HP. CS prop. he is low time 200hrs. A good Pilot.
Does the FAA require a "Complex, high performance" "check out", "sign off" by a "Cert. Flight Instructor" ?

[Sid Lambert]

No, the airplane doesn't even meet any of those categories but even if it did it's experimental so it's not required. The insurance company on the other hand may require something more or entirely different.

[jnorris]

Originally Posted by Sid Lambert

....but even if it did it's experimental so it's not required.

Sid,

That's not universally true. Most (but not all) operating limitations for experimental aircraft include the following language;

"The pilot in command of this aircraft must hold a pilot certificate or an authorized instructor's logbook endorsement. The pilot in command must meet the requirements of ? 61.31(e), (f), (g), (h), (i), and (j) as appropriate."

Note that the endorsements called out in 61.31 are specifically required. This means that, if the aircraft meets the definition of a complex, high performance, or a tailwheel airplane the pilot will need the endorsements.

Some older operating limitations may not include this language, but your second comment about the insurance underwriters will come in to play at that point so it won't matter.

[JDRhodes]

A 180 HP anything is not high performance per the FAA definition. This one is complex due to CS prop and flaps.

If he's never flown anything with a CS prop, he probably needs to ride with a CFI in something that has one and get the endorsement. Shouldn't take more than an hour.

[JDRhodes]

... and insurance underwriters quoting RVs don't care or ask about the HP, the prop, or whether the pilot has any of the required endorsements. So that won't matter, so long as he's legal per Part 61.

[airguy]

Originally Posted by JDRhodes

... and insurance underwriters quoting RVs don't care or ask about the HP, the prop, or whether the pilot has any of the required endorsements. So that won't matter, so long as he's legal per Part 61.

It doesn't matter - until there is a claim. Just because they didn't ask when you initiated the coverage does not mean they won't deny the claim later if you don't meet the requirements. Ask - do not assume.

[scard]

Originally Posted by JDRhodes

This one is complex due to CS prop and flaps.

It is NOT complex without retractable gear.

[Auburntsts]

Originally Posted by JDRhodes

...he probably needs to ride with a CFI in something that has one and get the endorsement.

No such thing. Like Scott pointed out, you only need a complex endorsement if the aircraft has retractable gear, flaps, and a controllable pitch prop (or in the case of a seaplane, flaps and a controllable pitch propeller). Take away one of the 3 and no complex endorsement required.

The high performance endorsement for engines over 200HP is a seperate requirement altogether and is in no way tied to the complex endorsement.

[N941WR]

Originally Posted by Auburntsts

No such thing. Like Scott pointed out, you only need a complex endorsement if the aircraft has retractable gear, flaps, and a controllable pitch prop (or in the case of a seaplane, flaps and a controllable pitch propeller). Take away one of the 3 and no endorsement required.

And "High Performance" is anything OVER 200 HP. So if you have a 95 MPH Steaman with the stock 220 HP engine you need a High Performance (and Tailwheel) Endorsement to fly it.

BTW, most endorsements have a Grandfather clause.

[JDRhodes]

Originally Posted by Jamie

For an airplane to be complex it must have ALL THREE...an in-flight controllable pitch prop, flaps and retractable gear.

I was thinking for some reason that it had to have just 2 of the three. You may be right.