What's new
Van's Air Force

Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.

RV-12 EAB 51% Question

T

tboyett

Member
I'm looking for facts/opinions on the following scenario. A new builder purchases a pre-owned tail kit that is already completed (except for mating the feathers to the aft fuselage). Furthermore, he builds the fuselage and wing completely from their respective sub kits as well as most of the finish kit, and completes the project with a home brew avionics scheme and alternative engine. Any chance that new builder would be at jeopardy with the 51% rule?

Now that I composed all of that it seems like it would be remote, but I've only built a single eab and that was nearly 20 years ago....and it was not an RV.

All input appreciated.

Thanks in advance,
Tom
 
tboyett said:
I'm looking for facts/opinions on the following scenario. A new builder purchases a pre-owned tail kit that is already completed (except for mating the feathers to the aft fuselage). Furthermore, he builds the fuselage and wing completely from their respective sub kits as well as most of the finish kit, and completes the project with a home brew avionics scheme and alternative engine. Any chance that new builder would be at jeopardy with the 51% rule?

Now that I composed all of that it seems like it would be remote, but I've only built a single eab and that was nearly 20 years ago....and it was not an RV.

All input appreciated.

Thanks in advance,
Tom
Click to expand...

I am sure one of the DARs can chime in, but the 51% rule applies to amateur vs professional built parts. If the previous owner was an amateur you definitely have no worries. Heck even if a pro built the tail feathers I don't think it's enough to violate the rule. Take a look at the QB kit for other RVs. There is a substantial amount of work done and those pass the rule.

Ryan
 
As long as you can prove that the previous builder was an amateur you are good to go. It doesn't matter how many people work on an airplane, it just has to be built by amateurs. You don't have to complete 51% yourself to get the repairman's certificate either. You just have to convince the FSDO you know enough about the airplane to competently perform the condition inspection.
 
Last edited:
How does this sound?

I'm not an expert on this subject so some one feel free to correct me if I'm wrong. I'm sure Mel will know for sure. If the previous owner kept good records on the build so far then I think you could take over and finish the project and get an airworthiness certificate with out any problems. But I don't think you would be able to get the repairman's certificate for the build.
 
Jetguy said:
I'm not an expert on this subject so some one feel free to correct me if I'm wrong. I'm sure Mel will know for sure. If the previous owner kept good records on the build so far then I think you could take over and finish the project and get an airworthiness certificate with out any problems. But I don't think you would be able to get the repairman's certificate for the build.
Click to expand...

You absolutely can get a repairman's certificate.

"You may obtain a repairman certificate for your own amateur-built aircraft if you built the major portion of the aircraft. The only privilege this certificate gives you is contained in 14 CFR section 65.104, "Repairman Certificate - experimental aircraft builder - Eligibility, privileges and limitations", i.e., to do the annual condition inspection. "
 
Never thought much about it before, but can someone define an "amateur"? As an A&P and EAA Tech counselor at 74 years old, I hardly think I am an amateur. Am I?

flytoboat said:
As long as you can prove that the previous builder was an amateur you are good to go. It doesn't matter how many people work on an airplane, it just has to be built by amateurs. You don't have to complete 51% yourself to get the repairman's certificate either. You just have to convince the FSDO you know enough about the airplane to competently perform the condition inspection.
Click to expand...
 
There are shades of Grey :)

Jetguy said:
Ok sounds good to me. But can you define Major portion? Doesnt sound from Toms description he will be doing the major portion. Here is a link to another thread that Mel spoke on this. Sounds like it depends who you deal with in the FAA.
http://www.vansairforce.com/community/showthread.php?t=76016&highlight=51%

By the way Tom would you care to tell what alternative engine will be placed on the plane?;)
Click to expand...

"Major Portion. As related to a special airworthiness certificate issued for the purpose of operating amateur-build aircraft, major portion means that when the aircraft is completed, the majority of the fabrication and assembly tasks have been performed by the amateur builder(s) who submit the application for certification."

totally clear :confused:

Seriously, this should not be an issue. You still have to assemble the tail feathers and the manufacturing of them not nearly the amount of work that is completed in a quick build kit.

I guess you better find your local DAR and talk to him/her to see if they have all their marbles.

Ryan
 
Ramendala said:
I am sure one of the DARs can chime in, but the 51% rule applies to amateur vs professional built parts. If the previous owner was an amateur you definitely have no worries. Heck even if a pro built the tail feathers I don't think it's enough to violate the rule. Take a look at the QB kit for other RVs. There is a substantial amount of work done and those pass the rule.

Ryan
Click to expand...

Ryan that's very helpful to know of the distinction between amateur and pro...I guess I had forgotten about that.

Tom
 
Repairman rocks

flytoboat said:
As long as you can prove that the previous builder was an amateur you are good to go. It doesn't matter how many people work on an airplane, it just has to be built by amateurs. You don't have to complete 51% yourself to get the repairman's certificate either. You just have to convince the FSDO you know enough about the airplane to competently perform the condition inspection.
Click to expand...

Wow, Don that's another great piece of info about one builder not having to do 51% himself, although that is my intent. The repairman's certificate has been an awesome privilege on my current eab and I don't want to relinquish that on a new project.

Thanks,
Tom
 
Fire fight??

Jetguy said:
Ok sounds good to me. But can you define Major portion? Doesnt sound from Toms description he will be doing the major portion. Here is a link to another thread that Mel spoke on this. Sounds like it depends who you deal with in the FAA.
http://www.vansairforce.com/community/showthread.php?t=76016&highlight=51%

By the way Tom would you care to tell what alternative engine will be placed on the plane?;)
Click to expand...

John, it is my intent to build the entire remaining kits (just not the tail, since it is already complete) and add my own unique requirements. As far as an alternate engine, let's just say it starts with a V and ends with a G, but I don't want to start anything...:p

BTW, I have been happily flying behind a 912 for the past 14+ years and nearly 500 hours without any issues other than the ones that have been self inflicted. The current 912S powerplant kit for the RV-12 is just too expensive for me.

Tom
 
Last edited:
If you do a non-Rotax and your own instrumentation design, that will be WAAAAAAAY more time involved (keep track of all your thinking and design and planning time) which certainly should put you over 51% by even a very strict DAR!!!
 
I hate gray areas!

After rereading your first post I take it all back. You probably wont have any problems. I misunderstood what you were saying. Good luck with your endeavor.:)
 
Last edited:
Thanks everyone!

You guys are awesome. Thanks for all the good input, I learned several good points on the subject. Very helpful.

Best,
Tom
 
The "Major Portion" rule simply means that the aircraft must be built by "amateurs". i.e. Not for hire.
Anyone can maintain or modify an experimental amateur-built aircraft. The only restriction is the annual condition inspection. This must be done by an A&P or the repairman certificate holder for that particular aircraft.
If you purchase an incomplete amateur-built aircraft, be sure to acquire the "builder's log" along with the project showing that the aircraft has been built by amateurs.

To obtain the repairman certificate, you are not required to have built 51% yourself. You just have to show that you built enough of the aircraft to competently accomplish the condition inspection.
 
DonFromTX said:
Never thought much about it before, but can someone define an "amateur"? As an A&P and EAA Tech counselor at 74 years old, I hardly think I am an amateur. Am I?
Click to expand...

By Amateur they mean not receiving compensation.
it is not meant to be a definition os skill level.

I presume you are not charging yourself for your time (or claiming it a tax deducatble income)
in which case you are acting as an amateur builder.
 
I would submit that they made a poor choice of words, this is what Merriam Webster defines an amateur:
"One who engages in a pursuit, study, science, or sport as a pastime rather than as a profession
One lacking in experience and competence in an art or science"
Many of the professionals on this forum miss out on that definition.
EAB means built by one "lacking in competence"? Wow


tim walter said:
By Amateur they mean not receiving compensation.
it is not meant to be a definition os skill level.

I presume you are not charging yourself for your time (or claiming it a tax deducatble income)
in which case you are acting as an amateur builder.
Click to expand...
 
Don,
Judging by your posts and considering that you are an A&P and EAA Tech counselor, I believe that your work is of professional quality (even though your RV-12 will be registered as Experimental-Amateur-Built).
You said that you received the Viking engine. Was it complete? I ask because I heard that the gear reduction drive and electronic ignition are on back order until June 2012.
Joe Gores
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top