W

Wolfgang737

I'm New Here
I am new to the forum and was led here by a member because of my interest in purchasing a 7 or 8. What a great source of information and a fantastic group of enthusiasts! I was looking at an RV8A that is for sale. The A&P owner (not builder) changed the prop from a Hartzell to a WW200RV. In doing this he asked the local FSDO for an amendment to the operating limitations and permission to re-inter phase 1 testing to verify the operation of the prop. This was granted and completed. But the FSDO added a restriction to the operating limitations that prohibit the aircraft from any aerobatic flight - not just for the phase test but forever.
My questions - Was this request necessary to change out a prop on a previously tested and registered experimental aircraft? How big of a nightmare would it be to get such a limitation removed?
 
Welcome to VAF!!!!

Wolfgang737 said:
I am new to the forum
Click to expand...


Wolfgang, welcome to VAF.

Good to have you aboard.

The go to guy for many DAR issues is Mel, he can answer your questions for you.

Here is his contact info, send him a PM.

http://www.vansairforce.com/community/member.php?u=1224

Just realized you are in Florida, you have another DAR in your area that you could talk to also, Vic Syracruse.

http://www.vansairforce.com/community/member.php?u=1415

Good luck, and again, welcome to VAF :D
 
Last edited:
Thanks for the information Mike. I contacted Vic and promptly got an answer. "Yes, it is required to contact the FSDO for a major change such as a propeller. The limitations for aerobatic flight should never have been added, but they should be easy to rectify with the same FSDO. They may require you to demonstrate the aerobatics with the new prop." I say again, great forum!
Wolfgang
 
Wolfgang737 said:
Thanks for the information Mike. I contacted Vic and promptly got an answer. "Yes, it is required to contact the FSDO for a major change such as a propeller. The limitations for aerobatic flight should never have been added, but they should be easy to rectify with the same FSDO. They may require you to demonstrate the aerobatics with the new prop." I say again, great forum!
Wolfgang
Click to expand...

Demonstrate aerobatic flight!? Its a RV... I thought was done on EVERY flight? ;)

If you need someone, I'd be happy to "demonstrate" the heck out of it!:)
 
Rhino889 said:
Demonstrate aerobatic flight!? Its a RV... I thought was done on EVERY flight? ;)

If you need someone, I'd be happy to "demonstrate" the heck out of it!:)
Click to expand...
No kidding! My thought exactly. Now you can imagine my surprise to come across an 8 that specifies "no aerobatic maneuvers". Like buying an enduro motorcycle that says "for street use only". But everyone to their own.
 
Wolfgang,

You might consider contacting Whirlwind and getting a statement from them that there are no aerobatic limitations on their prop, and none on your prop/engine combo, or your prop/engine/airframe combo...if they will provide you with such a statement.

I have several buds that have WW props on RV-8s, and to my knowledge, none have aerobatic limitations imposed upon them. Of course, it will carry more weight with the FSDO coming from WW, versus from word of mouth.

Going in with some documentation should make it a slam dunk (hopefully ;), I recently did a prop change and found the FSDO easy to work with...hopefully you will find the same)...and should get your enduro back out on the moto-trail! :) Good luck!

Cheers,
Bob
 
Huh?

Changed from a 3 blade MT to the 2 blade Hartzell BA prop before heading out to Reno this year. My local FSDO didn't care one way or another if I went back into Phase 1, as it was not a major change in their eyes (CS to CS), but would not back this up with any paperwork. The Reno FSDO required it (back into Phase 1 for testing @ 5hrs) for the races, so I did it, but the paperwork ended up in the round file at Reno before all was said & done.
Call me confused!!
At any rate, the aero thing sounds like a similar misfire - get back with the FSDO & get it straightened out. Should be easy?:eek:

Carry on!
Mark
 
Major change...

I interpret a major change of prop to be associated with the type of prop, fixed or constant speed, NOT the make or brand of the prop...
 
Operating Limitations

DARs are required to go over the Operating Limitations in detail with builders getting an airworthiness inspection. Buyers of second hand machines seem to not have the same understanding obviously since they were not there for the original brief. In fact, I've met a number of new buyers who either did not get the Ops Lims with the plane, or did not understand that the Ops Lims are actually a part of the 'pink slip' Airworthiness Certificate and must be carried in the plane.

I would suggest that all non-builder RV owners actually read their Ops Lims and ask their questions now, not after a ramp check.

I recently helped a buyer of a Pitts Model 12 acro machine that had been used in airshows discover that the FSDO inspector who issued the original airworthiness cert had certified it as NON-AEROBATIC. Three owners had flown extensive acro in it.
 
Every FSDO seems to have a different definition for "major change". Call your FSDO. I once had an inspector who was of the opinion that major change was a Part 43 definition which didn't apply to experimentals at all, and thus the major change contact requirement in my operating limitations was moot. Yep, I got it in writing.

Adding to the confusion, there are two different sets of operating limitations out there. The old style required notifying the FSDO and getting a written permission before flight, while the newer style allows you to self-administer. You go back into Phase 1 with a log entry, test fly 5 hours, then make another log entry to re-enter Phase 2.

Some FSDOs will allow an exchange if you would prefer the newer style .
 
For any Canucks reading this thread, Transport Canada's interpretation on this point is that a different make/model of prop is a major change. I changed a fixed pitch for a fixed pitch and went through the paperwork including having to do a climb test report after obtaining a Specific Purpose Flight Permit to do the test flight. There was no return to a specific number of flight test hours, only enough testing to prove performance via a successful climb test.
 
FSDO differences

DanH said:
Every FSDO seems to have a different definition for "major change".
Click to expand...

Some of the rules are interpreted differently depending on who and where. Seems to come up in the certified world quite often which has resulted in owners resorting occasionally to a bit of "FSDO shopping". Until there is agreement on all rule interpretations, which of course won't happen ever :D it seems like the common sense approach is as Dan did, document compliance, whatever that happens to be.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.