You’re reading way to modern of an interpretation into this rule Larry. The rules for EAB were written way back in the 1950’s to allow people to build their own airplanes. No one ever dreamed back then that there would be build assist centers or “pro builders” involved - that is a much more modern phenomenon. So no - the rules were not written to “only allow your attendance” as a builder. You sign an affidavit that says “I built this aircraft for the purpose of my own education and recreation...” - there is nothing in there about “I watched it being built”.
Those are the rules as they stand. There are movements to change the rules, and I agree that having a “custom built” category would allow pro builders to build solid airplanes for people - you wouldn’t get the wild quality variations we see in the EAB world. But....those types of rules are not yet in existence.
Paul
So, if that is the case, how are all of these builder assist centers getting away with it. You can't say you built the plane if part of the work was done by staff at the build assist center, assuming a 51% partially assembled kit. Isn't that what they are doing there. Or am I misunderstanding that. How are they pulling off the 2 week to taxi programs, where way more than 49% is being done by factory personnel, presumably not for free nor amateur? Seems the primary requirement is for the builder to be present at the factory.
Also, pretty sure the rules say that you are attesting to the fact that it was built by amateurs and that does not have to be the person applying for the cert. Only that all who built it were amateurs. I was pretty sure that I saw FAA docs that allow the hiring of professionals for assistance and the requirement was for an amateur to be present. I will see if I can find the reference.
EDIT:
I stand corrected. I suppose my research was from the original rule and not the modified ones. Found the following from the 08 rule changes. Apparently only true assistance can be counted toward the 51% now. Apparently they closed the loop hole. My questions above still apply.
Subparagraph f. Proposed Revision/Change: Revise providing commercial and/or
educational assistance as follows: “... The FAA will not credit toward the major portion
determination any tasks completed by the commercial assistance provider for educational
purposes.”
Disposition: The FAA agreed to add text that makes clear that educational instruction
provided on how to perform a task as opposed to accomplishing the task is allowable and
credited to the builder. However, this does not mean that the policy will allow all
educational assistance to be credited to the amateur builder at the discretion of the
evaluator. Instructors who actually demonstrate on actual parts (of the amateur-built
aircraft) will be restricted to only the instruction that is needed to learn a technique will
be credited to the builder.
Subparagraph e(1). Proposed Revision/Change: Revise as follows: “An aircraft that is
fabricated and assembled from a kit may be eligible for amateur-built certification,
provided the major portion of the aircraft has been fabricated and assembled by the
applicant [strike]
amateur builder(s) [add] for education or recreation purposes….”
Disposition: The FAA concurs in principle. Text will be reviewed and revise as
necessary