[RV Wannabe]

I have a couple of questions for those more read/educated on the subject than I.

I was recently told by an IA that since he is an IA he cannot work on, or sign off doing some work on my -4. He says an A&P or the builder could, but he can't since he is an IA. This sounds quite fishy to me. I thought in order to be an IA one must have an A&P, and then inspection authorization could be acquired after a set amount of experience, and the additional proper training and testing to be an IA. Aren't all IA's A&P's with inspection authorization? Is there a way to be an IA without having an A&P? He seems to make a distinction that he could if it was a certified plane, and can't since it is experimental.

This same person told me an owner could not work on the pitot system. It would need to be an A&P, or the builder (I am not) because it is a critical system. We are currently wanting to change out a pitot tube for a heated tube. We have also done a complete glass panel upgrade ourselves which he seems to be fine with, just not the pitot. He also says the pitot would require a test flight.

I will certainly treat the first flight with the respect and consideration it requires like a test flight, just don't know if it requires a phase type flight test? Although I would like to know if the changes made require the wording of the certification of the plane to include IFR, and to be legal to file IFR. If so, maybe it does require a phase?

The airplane will become IFR capable once we are done, and have a legal pitot static/ transponder check from a certified shop. It was not IFR to start with.

Any insight and information appreciated.
Mark

 

[Tbone]

He can sign off any work under his A&P. Not sure he knows what he is talking about. Are you sure he is an IA? Or anything for that matter....

 

[pazmanyflyer]

I have a couple of questions for those more read/educated on the subject than I.

I was recently told by an IA that since he is an IA he cannot work on, or sign off doing some work on my -4. He says an A&P or the builder could, but he can't since he is an IA. This sounds quite fishy to me. I thought in order to be an IA one must have an A&P, and then inspection authorization could be acquired after a set amount of experience, and the additional proper training and testing to be an IA. Aren't all IA's A&P's with inspection authorization? Is there a way to be an IA without having an A&P? He seems to make a distinction that he could if it was a certified plane, and can't since it is experimental.

This same person told me an owner could not work on the pitot system. It would need to be an A&P, or the builder (I am not) because it is a critical system. We are currently wanting to change out a pitot tube for a heated tube. We have also done a complete glass panel upgrade ourselves which he seems to be fine with, just not the pitot. He also says the pitot would require a test flight.

I will certainly treat the first flight with the respect and consideration it requires like a test flight, just don't know if it requires a phase type flight test? Although I would like to know if the changes made require the wording of the certification of the plane to include IFR, and to be legal to file IFR. If so, maybe it does require a phase?

The airplane will become IFR capable once we are done, and have a legal pitot static/ transponder check from a certified shop. It was not IFR to start with.

Any insight and information appreciated.
Mark

It is a requirement to have your A&P before you can get the IA. Unless he's not current.
14 CFR 65.91(c)(1) - Hold a currently effective mechanic certificate with both an airframe rating and a power-plant rating, each of which is currently effective and has been in effect for a total of at least 3 years.

 

[DaleB]

Unless I am forgetting something (which is possible), the only maintenance and repair activity you cannot do as the non-builder owner of an E/AB is sign off the annual condition inspection, which needs to be done by an A&P.

On the pitot thing... He may have been talking about certifying the pitot/static system for IFR use... also one of the many things about which I don't know enough to offer an opinion. That's the only thing that really makes any sense. The pitot is certainly no more "critical" than, say, control surfaces.

But off hand it sounds as if you may want to find someone more knowledgeable about experimental aircraft. Your local EAA chapter probably has members who hold A&P certificates, or can steer you toward guys who know what they're doing.

 

[Tbone]

If you let your IA lapse you lose that authorization..

 

[BobTurner]

Although I would like to know if the changes made require the wording of the certification of the plane to include IFR, and to be legal to file IFR. If so, maybe it does require a phase?

The airplane will become IFR capable once we are done, and have a legal pitot static/ transponder check from a certified shop. It was not IFR to start with.

Any insight and information appreciated.
Mark

Assuming you have the usual boilerplate operating limitations, they should say something like "VFR day only unless.....for IFR equipped per FAR 91.205.."

That's all you need. There is no other "certification" paperwork for the airplane, no additional phase 1, etc.

If you do not have the above language, then you need your operating limitations changed, that's a bigger deal.

 

[Mel]

Anyone can do maintenance, repairs, modifications, etc. on amateur-built aircraft.
A&P or repairman certificate holder for that aircraft can sign off the condition inspection.
All IAs are A&Ps.
Getting operating limitations updated or changed is not a big deal. Any FDSO inspector or DAR holding function codes 33 and 46 can do it.

 

[RV Wannabe]

Anyone can do maintenance, repairs, modifications, etc. on amateur-built aircraft.
A&P or repairman certificate holder for that aircraft can sign off the condition inspection.
All IAs are A&Ps.

This meshes with what I believed. Just wanted a second opinion since he was insistent on the subject. I did politely call him on it a while back and he stuck to his story. Then this weekend he brought it up again so I figured I would ask.

I will have to look at the operating limitations again to see what is needed there.

Thanks a bunch.
Mark

 

[krw5927]

If you wish to continue speaking with this gentleman (I wouldn't), politely ask him to educate you on the requirements for non-builder owner-performed EAB maintenance by pointing them out in the regs.