Typing with my .......
Is George
McQueen still on here? I always appreciated his insightful (and detailed!
) responses on these kind of engine issues...
As always, thanks in advance for your comments.
Doug broke both my hands, so I am typing with my @#^$& toes.
The short answer is by definition, an engine in an experimental plane is an experimental engine. What does that mean? Not a lot unless you're having problems getting the FAA to sign your plane off. It also means complete freedom to do almost anything you want FWF! Unless you have dreams of selling your engine back to some guy with a Cessna, Piper or Mooney, that uses that exact model engine, don't worry about it.
The insurance aspect is an important issue. I have a Lyc O-360-A1A certified, rebuilt AI (by the book), with known prop combo. However the electronic ignition puts a wrinkle in the pedigree. As suggested, be honest and disclose all to your insurance agent. I recall the policy papers asked if the engine was experimental or not. A Cessna guy whose annual was out by a week and had an accident. They did not pay off! Ouch. Don't give'em a reason to not pay.
There are "issues", regarding "experimental engines": 25 v 40 hours, data tag removal, AD compliance, maintence and return to service in a certified plane. (The last item, is least important to me, but it may be the underlying cause for Feds being so conservative or A-retentive. They can't let go of standard airworthiness regs, including part 23, 39 and 43 to name a few of many, that don't apply.)
25 v 40 hours - I can't get too excited about that. It takes about 100 hours to work all the bugs out of a new plane; another 15 hours is no big deal, even if the prop/engine are a known/approved config, with stock ignition & fuel system. Is the air box stock? No. There is no award for getting 25 hour phase I. In my case, my prop and engine are an approved combo, but the EI and prop not being yellow tagged might bother the FAA. You can't mix experimental with type cert std airworthiness. It gets to be grey when you use a cert engine in an experimental but pick a side. Its experimental RIGHT? You can't legally have a "cert engine" in an experimental because there's no TYPE CERT for the installation.
Some Feds require removal of data tags, even though the engine/prop/ignition/fuel delivery are all stock and AD's are complied with. One Fed/DAR does not care; the next Fed wants you to take the data tag off. This is where the FAA hypocrisy comes in. On one hand they say it's experimental. On the other hand they want us to comply with TYPE CERT and standard airworthiness regs? CAN'T HAVE BOTH.
Regarding AD's. Part 39, compliance with AD's does not apply to an experimental aircraft. The FAA can't make you comply with the AD! Why? It's experimental. The FAA tries to play both sides. Airworthiness Directives (part 39) do not apply to homebuilts. You can't have it both ways. You can't call cert props/engines experimental when in an experimental and than ALSO impose FAR's that apply to type cert parts & planes.
Experimental aircraft are not maintained per Part 43. Anyone can work on or modify a homebuilt, you, me, my dog or my friends 10 year old kid, regardless of who built it. So if a Fed say you need an A&P sign off, say thank you but no, this meeting is over. The FAA can not tell you an A&P sign off is needed for anything, engine, FI or prop.
The issue of returning an engine back to certified service, after living in a homebuilt, is no big deal. I'll worry if I ever come to that bridge. The certified world is where the pain is. NOW you need the A&P, AI and Fed to bless and say yes. The FAA or AI could demand a tear down of the engine, carb, FI and mags to assure "compliance" with the type certificate. If you are worried, than all your by the book documentation and "compliance" will help you later (may be avoid tear down).
Bottom line, certified engine, installed in an experimental airplane, even with a KNOWN prop combo, stock mags and stock fuel system, is EXPERIMENTAL. Why? Because the installation is not per a type certificate standard and/or not maintained per the FAR 43.
"This has me thinking, maybe I should forego this approach of keeping everything "certified" and yellow tagged. What do you think?"
Does electronic ignition affect its engine status?
Does an experimental Catto prop affect engine status?
Does a AFP FI system affect the engines status?
Who cares its experimental, but is safety affected? I had my engine and carb done by the book, like you did. The AI helping me rebuild my engine, would not entertain a little bump on compression. I'm glad I went stock, because 180HP is enough, and I know its "certified". My prop is NOT yellow tagged, the blades where 0.001 out of thickness spec near the tip, one location. Is it safe. I talked to Hartzell and they said it was no problem. The FAA can impose 40 hours and/or take my engines data tag off, but they can't make me comply with AD's or deny approval, IT'S Experimental. If they allow a Mazda or Eggen....there is no difference.
WE HAVE NO LIMITS ON Experimenting, but we all care about safety
Engines get TYPE CERTIFICATES. The type includes accessories like fuel delivery and mags, as well as compression and standard parts. The engine type cert is half the story. That engine is NOT approved for aircraft use unless it's installed Per another TYPE CERTIFICATE, per a STANDARD airworthiness and configuration (installation). This is where the approved prop/engine combo comes in. For an installation to comply with a type, every nut and bolt (and air box) must meet or comply with the type cert.
Experimental planes have no TYPE or standard airworthiness configuration or installation. Vans filtered air-box (FAB) is not FAA approved. The installation is experimental, regardless of anything else, making the engine de facto experimental. Put a stock engine back in the right plane with the right blessing, than its not experimental any more. It's magic & academic.
Don't totally ignore TYPE CERT & AD's, for safety reasons; looking at standard typ cert LIMITS is a good idea, before "experimenting". Years ago, guys cut metal props down, re-pitched them, way past their TYPE CERT limits. The results where BAD! Going from MAG to EI has a big affect on some props. If you're a conservative person, stay close to the type config as much as you can, to avoid "unknown consequences". No one knew about the mags v EI prop affect 5 yrs ago.
If you are an experimental guy, than there are no limit, and the FAA can' say squat! (Just be aware of the risks in being a true test pilot.)
The FAA?
FAA, Designee's and Mechanics are afraid to make a mistake and lose their job or licence, so they are uber conservative. They figure if they pile on rules and mix-N-match with part 23, 39 & 43 (that do not apply) they will be safe (their job).
The idea we home-builders have LOT's of freedom and few Regs, either does not grasp them or appeal to their authoritarian personality. They also may, with GOOD intentions, be trying to impose their opinion of what is safe or safer on us, Regs or not. I see GOOD intentions trying to be Regs.
FSDO's are under staffed. The FAA's main mission is AIR Carrier and commercial Op's. Who da thunk over 5000 experimental kit planes from Van would fly way back when. Some FSDO's are doing 10 experimental planes a week. Wait and see, the FAA will be privatized and Fee's imposed in the next 10 yrs. Will we get better and more consistent service or just Fee's?
Cheers Got to go, beating on the key-board with my @#$%^ toes, has tired it out.
