[alcladrv]

During a discussion today with the owner of a certified repair station about doing some engine work, he stated point blank that I couldn't perform the annual condition inspection on my -7A for which I hold the repairman's certificate as the plane's builder. He said it could be an A&P rather an IA, but a second set of eyes was required to complete the inspection.

I responded by saying that I understood the FAR differently rather than starting an argument with him. I can read the privilege to perform the condition inspection plain as day in FAR 65.104(4)(b). This comes from a well respected shop who has built engines for many RVs. He said he had actually owned an RV-4 in the past.

The question up for discussion is: Would you do business with someone who appears to have such a fundamental misunderstanding of the regs concerning holding the repairman's certificate for the plane you built?

Mike

 

[Kyle Boatright]

Personally, I care more about the quality of the work performed more than the business' understanding of the regulations. If what I needed done was within the competencies of a shop, I wouldn't let their ignorance or misunderstanding of another issue get in the way.

 

[rv7charlie]

Another perspective, is that you might pay someone like that a lot of money and not get what you paid for, simply due to their ignorance of the regs. That particular IA probably bought his -4, and was basing his opinion on the rule that affected *him*.

 

[Mel]

You simply need to educate the gentleman. Show him the regs and ask him to show you where an IA has anything to do on an amateur-built aircraft.
While you at it you might show him where part 43 does not apply to experimental amateur-built aircraft. That would be 43.1(b)(1).

Also show him your operating limitations where it lists who can perform the condition inspection.

 

[Ironflight]

I'd base my desire to do further business with him on whether or not he can be educated and admit that he learned something new. Anyone who knows it all and can't learn more - doesn't get my business because they are dangerous.

 

[scrollF4]

I'd base my desire to do further business with him on whether or not he can be educated and admit that he learned something new. Anyone who knows it all and can't learn more - doesn't get my business because they are dangerous.

My thoughts exactly.

 

[DanBaier]

FWIW - there is a thing called a "Repairman" certificate per FAR 65.103 and a completely different thing called a "Repairman - Experimental Aircraft Builder" certificate per FAR 65.104 - R-103 and R-104 for short.

R-103 certificates are common in repair station environments. The IA is correct in this sense - a holder of the R-103 (but not a R-104) cannot do a condition inspection. The next level certificate (Mechanic with A&P) can do the condition inspection.

If one holds the R-104 per 65.104, the sole privilege of that certificate is to do the condition inspection on a specific make/model/serial number aircraft. Specifically - see http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-id...617932ea121ff180&node=se14.2.65_1104&rgn=div8. The ability to do the condition inspection with the R-104 is absolutely clear from the regulation.

The problem may stem from tossing around the term "Repairman" somewhat interchangeably - the term can apply to two completely different certificates with radically different privileges.

Dan