Van's Air Force
The definitive Van's Aircraft support community! Buying, building or flying an RV? Join our exclusive family of mentors and enthusiasts!
MOSAIC LSRI course completed
- Thread starter FinnFlyer
- Start date
Would someone that received their NEW OP"s limits from a trusted FSDO, list the numbers from 8130.2L appendix D, that was applied so others can make sure that when they are going over the restrictions with the FAA, that you can catch an error early.
Or maybe post their entire limits, excluding personal information.
https://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Order/Order_8130.2L.pdf starts on page 177 / 231.
Or maybe post their entire limits, excluding personal information.
https://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Order/Order_8130.2L.pdf starts on page 177 / 231.
I’m not sure that this will help, because there are people in this thread that don’t seem to want to hear what others are telling them but I will give it one more shot.
The process is standardized to where every single applicant should get the exact same operating limitations with the exception of the description of a phase one flight test area, and whether they are requesting approval of night and/or IFR operations.
It is not possible for an applicant to request specific limitations that they would like to have, with the exception of whether they will be approved for night operations and or IFR operations. All the rest of the limitations get issued if they are specified in the order for that particular category Aircraft.
An FAA ASI or DAR cannot pick and choose what operating limitations they issue for a given certification. Appendix D in 8130.2L has descriptors on each limitation in the list that specify what Aircraft it has to be issued for.
The problem that arises is it does require a bit of knowledge about the different certification categories in order to make a determination of whether a specific limitation applies to a specific Aircraft.
So in simple terms, when someone does receive a certificate with a difference in their operating limitations, it means the issuer made a mistake. Not that the issuer chose to issue differently for that specific applicant.
The reason many FAA offices suggest the use of a DAR, is because of their familiarity with the processes. A lot of DAR’s do numerous certifications per month, while many FAA ASI’s may do only one or two per year, if any at all.
So, in a nutshell, the only luck of the draw is whether you end up working with someone that is familiar with the process and can do it without any mistakes, which even all of us that do this on a regular basis still do occasionally.
As for issuing operating limitations specific to Mosaic, that is not yet relevant. When 8130.2M is released, it will have updates that are specific to new mosaic rules. Those rules don’t go into effect until July 1, so .2M will likely be released sometime shortly before that date.
The only change that was in release .2L that had any significant relevance to the new mosaic rules was updating the operating limitation that specified the level of certification required for completing a condition inspection (LIMITATION # 18).
The process is standardized to where every single applicant should get the exact same operating limitations with the exception of the description of a phase one flight test area, and whether they are requesting approval of night and/or IFR operations.
It is not possible for an applicant to request specific limitations that they would like to have, with the exception of whether they will be approved for night operations and or IFR operations. All the rest of the limitations get issued if they are specified in the order for that particular category Aircraft.
An FAA ASI or DAR cannot pick and choose what operating limitations they issue for a given certification. Appendix D in 8130.2L has descriptors on each limitation in the list that specify what Aircraft it has to be issued for.
The problem that arises is it does require a bit of knowledge about the different certification categories in order to make a determination of whether a specific limitation applies to a specific Aircraft.
So in simple terms, when someone does receive a certificate with a difference in their operating limitations, it means the issuer made a mistake. Not that the issuer chose to issue differently for that specific applicant.
The reason many FAA offices suggest the use of a DAR, is because of their familiarity with the processes. A lot of DAR’s do numerous certifications per month, while many FAA ASI’s may do only one or two per year, if any at all.
So, in a nutshell, the only luck of the draw is whether you end up working with someone that is familiar with the process and can do it without any mistakes, which even all of us that do this on a regular basis still do occasionally.
As for issuing operating limitations specific to Mosaic, that is not yet relevant. When 8130.2M is released, it will have updates that are specific to new mosaic rules. Those rules don’t go into effect until July 1, so .2M will likely be released sometime shortly before that date.
The only change that was in release .2L that had any significant relevance to the new mosaic rules was updating the operating limitation that specified the level of certification required for completing a condition inspection (LIMITATION # 18).
Last edited:
For the benefit of the community I took a couple of minutes and went through the Appendix.
For an experimental amateur built certificate for an aircraft with an internal combustion engine of less than 800 hp, you should be issued the following. (Experimental Light sport is slightly different. I noted those changes below.)
For future.... Keep in mind this is only valid for limitations issued under 8130.2L.It will likely be different for future releases.
Numbers
3
4
5
7 (there are 3, make sure it reads "The pilot must hold AIRPLANE category and SINGLE ENGINE LAND class....")
11
14
15 should read as below VVV
| No person may operate this aircraft unless within the preceding 12 calendar months it has had a condition inspection performed per the scope and detail of Part 43, appendix D, manufacturer or other FAA-approved programs, and was found to be in a condition for safe operation. The inspections must be recorded in the aircraft maintenance records showing the following, or a similarly worded, statement: “I certify that this aircraft has been inspected on [insert date] per the [insert either: scope and detail of Part 43, appendix D; or manufacturer’s inspection procedures] and was found to be in a condition for safe operation.” The entry will include the aircraft’s total time-in-service (cycles if appropriate), and the name, signature, certificate number, and type of certificate held by the person performing the inspection. (15) |
18 (Not issued for E-LSA)
20
21
22
25
36
38 (Not issued for E-LSA)
39
41
42
43
44
45
46 (only issued if night authorization was requested)
47 (only issued if IFR authorization was requested)
48
49
53 (There are 2, make sure it reads VVV)
| Flight over a densely populated area or in a congested airway is authorized for the purpose of takeoff or landing; or unless sufficient altitude is maintained to make a safe emergency landing in the event of a power unit failure, without hazard to persons or property on the ground. (53) |
In addition to those listed above, E-LSA would also be issued 12, 13, 17, and 26
Last edited:
This is the most valuable post in the past 7 pages...... Thanks Scott
AnyRVwilldo
Member
Scott. You are the man. The only question I have is the Sentence in 8130.2L #7. . "Except during Phase I flight testing, holders of a student pilot certificate with a flight instructor endorsement for solo flight may operate the aircraft in solo flight without holding a category or class rating or other Part 61 endorsements only for the purpose of meeting aeronautical experience requirements of Part 61 pursuant to a sport pilot, recreational pilot, or private pilot certificate." Thanks again.
This was added with the release of 8130.2K.
It is a nice concession that the FAA made, that allows a student pilot to fly solo in an experimental amateur built that they have been taking flight training in.
The reason being, is that they don’t have a category and class certificate when operating with a student pilot certificate, so they don’t meet the requirement as the limitation was originally written.
The FAA felt that it wouldn’t be appropriate for a student pilot to be flying an aircraft that was still operating in its phase one flight test period, so that restriction was included in the limitation, which I tend to agree with, and I think most people would.
AnyRVwilldo
Member
After Talking to my FSDO he made me realize that your Phase 1 testing location may not default to the one you want after your OL update request. I was under the impression that my local county airport would be available, he said that was not the case.
Correct
Approval of the Phase 1 test area is at the judgement and discretion of the person issuing the certificate, and has to be selected in order to assure compliance with FAR 91.305
91.305 Flight test areas.
No person may flight test an aircraft except over open water, or sparsely populated areas, having light air traffic.Previous versions of Order 8130.2 issued a limitation # 22 that just stated that the local FSDO needed to be contacted after incorporating a major change, and concurrence received in writing that they agreed with your proposed flight test area (at least one or two earlier versions didn't even require them to be contacted). So for anyone still operating with these limitations, the originally issued Phase 1 flight test area is not relevant.
The wording of limitation # 22 since .2K was released is -
| After incorporating a major change per § 21.93 that was not presented to the FAA when this airworthiness certificate was issued, the following applies: Notification of Major Changes. The responsible Flight Standards Office where the aircraft is based must be notified and its response received in writing before flying this aircraft. This notice enables the FAA to determine if operating limitations require amendment to reduce exposure of the public to risk due to the major change. Operations. Comply with § 91.319(b) using Phase I operating limitations. Registry. If the major change includes installing a different model of engine or a change of a fixed pitch from or to a controllable propeller, the aircraft owner must submit a revised FAA Form 8130-6 to update the aircraft’s file in the FAA Aircraft Registration Branch, AFB-710. (22) |
Since limitation 22 now contains -
Comply with § 91.319(b) using Phase I operating
limitations.
I interpret that to mean that the test area described in the operating limitations is once again relevant for any Phase 1 testing done post initial phase 1 flight testing, so if you are submitting an application for amended operating limitations, the program letter you submit should state what you are requesting as a Phase 1 flight test area, and what airports you would like operations to be authorized at within that test area (this is giving the issuer the opportunity to evaluate whether the requested airports can be utilized while still meeting the requirement of FAR 91.305). There is no guaranty that you request will be 100% approved, but it is a starting point. Be aware that the days of using any airport within the boundaries of your Phase 1 test area are over. All authorized airports get listed in the operating limitation that define the test area, and in my region anyway, the applicant is expected to provide justification for the need/use of each airport being requested.
Side note - Your program letter should also mention whether you want authorization for Night and/or IFR to assure that the specific limitations for these operations get issued.
I just got my amended Operating Limitations yesterday. There were a few discrepancies, but I called the guy at the FSDO who’d done the work. After some discussion and a few more emails back and forth, I have the final version, and everything’s correct.
It was fortunate that when I called, my project wasn’t yet “closed out” in the AWC Portal. So he could just open it and make edits. If it’d been closed out, it would have been a whole new submission to get things corrected.
I will say that being quite familiar with 8130.2L Appendix D helped when I was talking to him. And I’d submitted a draft of the expected Ops Limits, so I knew what I was looking for.
Overall, a pretty positive experience. I think it took 4-5 weeks from my submission on AWC to the final email with the completed Special Airworthiness Certificate and Ops Limits.
It was fortunate that when I called, my project wasn’t yet “closed out” in the AWC Portal. So he could just open it and make edits. If it’d been closed out, it would have been a whole new submission to get things corrected.
I will say that being quite familiar with 8130.2L Appendix D helped when I was talking to him. And I’d submitted a draft of the expected Ops Limits, so I knew what I was looking for.
Overall, a pretty positive experience. I think it took 4-5 weeks from my submission on AWC to the final email with the completed Special Airworthiness Certificate and Ops Limits.
Thanks for pointing this out. I vaguely noticed that in the new OpLims for my RV-3B that in Phase I I'm only allowed operations from my local (grass field) airport. I did find that a bit odd but not really important for putting airplane back in Phase I to add loops to approved maneuvers. Yet nearest paved runway (KCTY) is 15 miles away and within specified 30 miles radius Phase I test area. Would have been important for testing wheel shimmy on my RV-4.
Anyway, definitely important for others to notice.
Finn
Due to MANY protests from both DARs and applicants, this "one airport" rule lasted only a few days. You may have several airports available to use, but each has to be listed in your op lims.
Mel is of course correct.
I didn't mean to imply that only one was available.
The order (once the corrections were made to .2K) allows for more than one. The position taken by our local FAA authority here in the northwest is that the applicant should give justifiable reason for each additional airport requested in their program letter.
A few common ones are - availability of fuel (in case none is available at home base), access to a close by cross wind runway, access to a repair station that can complete a xponder certification, etc.
Good to see you back on the forums Mel
I listed almost every airport (February of 2025) in my Phase 1 and initially the DAR said "we'll see" but FSDO approved it. I also got a little push-back on my request for a 100-mile radius but after I saw on the forum a member received a 100-mile radius requested the AWC from the FAA (I think it was less than 5 bucks to get a copy) and after showing it to the DAR became no issue. (Vic was the DAR on that one)
Good to be back. After over 2 months of hospital and rehab.....Getting old is NOT for wimps!Good to see you back on the forums Mel
It's going to be a while before I can get back out in the field, but I am doing amended Op Lims from home.
Last edited:
Right now, it's Buckley Washington....
But Reedley College in CA is gearing up to offer.... check with them.
559-494-3000 ext. 3243
Thanks !!
varnoair838
I'm New Here
congrats on finishing the course tbh. sitting through those intensive classroom hours is exhausting but being legally allowed to sign off on your own annuals makes it totally worth the grind. definitely takes a huge chunk out of ownership costs.
