Van's Air Force
Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.
FAA issues new Order 8130.2K effective 8/28/24
- Thread starter Vern
- Start date
Do you have the link?
Section 1.7 and 1.8 give the synopsis of the changes. Page 1-2 of the document here:
Xkuzme1
Well Known Member
I haven’t had a chance to read it yet, but knew that the drop was imminent.
There must be some level of changes with operating limitations because us DAR’s have been notified that the AWC system is not yet set up for properly populating and issuing operating limitations, so we will have a bit of extra work for a while in putting them all manually.
There must be some level of changes with operating limitations because us DAR’s have been notified that the AWC system is not yet set up for properly populating and issuing operating limitations, so we will have a bit of extra work for a while in putting them all manually.
I made a first cut through the Ops Lims table and while there are definitely some wording changes, I didn’t see anything that is truly a significant operational change….but I have yet to get my magnifying glass out!
And yea - releasing “K” wile AWC is not updated is (as Louise, another former Fed said) “a major fail”…..
Desert Rat
Well Known Member
The only takeaway that I care about is that it clearly says slanted and shadowed N numbers are okee-dokee. That's gonna eliminate a whole category of argument over on the airplanes and coffee FB group.
The FAA is broken up into so many different sub parts, way beyond what most people would imagine, and each one of those does things in their own way, and at their own pace. I imagine one group decided they just weren’t going to wait for another group any longer.
Not likely.
The order is rules and guidance for compliance with the FAR‘s
It is the FAR‘s and to some degree advisory circulars that define what the actual rules and requirements are.
My personal take is that there is already information to imply that slanted and drop shadowed N numbers are acceptable. There is specific terminology, stating that any drop shadow can’t be counted in meeting the minimum requirement size for the end number so that in itself seems to imply that it is acceptable.
Desert Rat
Well Known Member
Yeah, I know that's in the FARs but it's now spelled out very clearly in this order on page 2-6. Was it always in there? At any rate, it seems like that argument comes up every few days in some builder group or another. It's nice to have something to point to that spells it out when people ask
Sorry, I misinterpreted your post to mean you were hoping they added those details… not that they had.
Good to know (and I guess I should have read it first before commenting
)
Well….page 2-6 also says that the N-Number must readable from 500 feet away….and I woudl be surprised if most people can read a 2” number from that distance! This just points out the problem of aging one document that covers the process for both Standard and Special Airworthiness Certificates - and I am guessing someone wasn’t paying attention to the exceptions for N-Number size in the Special AWC….. so once again, we DAR’s are somewhat on our own out there for interpreting the Regs (not the guidance). But yeah - slants seem to be OK!
scsmith
Well Known Member
What about having N-numbers on the fuselage under the horizontal tail? Do the Airplanes and Coffee FB folks argue about that? I see LOTS of airplanes that should not have been able to complete DAR inspections and issuance of CA's because of that. Even a P-51!!!.
As has been said many times before. We usually sign off an aircraft before paint. After we sign it off, we have no more control. That's why I always take pictures showing that it "complied" at certification.
