Conversion to Experimental Category

[Geoff]

I am aware that there are downsides as far as airframe value for resale but for those of us with older airframes >30 years this is propbably not that big a deal as the cost of many engine rebuilds are getting close to the airframe values (ex avionics).

The upsides could be much greater flexibilty and cheaper costs with maintenance and avionics.

Has anyone looked into this?  Will the FAA allow it?

[danb35]

It seems to be very common, but I've never understood where the idea comes from that you can just "convert" your plane into the experimental-amateur built category, and thereby free yourself from the requirements of STC, PMA, 337, etc.  You can't.  Your plane is factory-built, and will always be so.

You can have the plane classified as experimental, but only for R&D or other very limited purposes, which involve very limited operating restrictions.  If you were, for example, pursuing an STC to install a DeltaHawk diesel engine on your Mooney (which seems like an excellent idea, IMO), you could get a new airworthiness certificate issued as Experimental/R&D, which would allow you to make that change.  However, your operations would be limited to an approved flight test plan and would almost certainly prohibit carrying passengers or flight over congested areas.

[triple8s]

I recall seeing a single engine Beech for sale, maybe an A-36 that had a turboshaft FWF, how did they do that? Did they have all those restrictions on that aircraft? (Just wondering) Would seem to me a small turboshaft would be excellant for a newer long body.

[triple8s]

Guess I found the answer to my own question..... the answer is.........MONEY!    http://www.turbinebonanza.com/

[smccray]

Tradewinds also did a turbine conversion on an A36.  There's a couple owners on beechtalk along with pros/cons of the conversion.

There's also a single engine turbine conversion of a Barron 58P called a Lightning.  They removed the wings from a 58P and mated A36 wings to the pressure vessle.  Then the engineers mounted a turbine on the front to give you a pressurized single engine turbine.  Timing was the early 80s...and we all know what happened to aviation later that decade.  It didn't go into production.  I believe they did the same thing to a couple standard B58 barrons yielding a non-pressurized option single engine turbo prop at about the same time.

[DaV8or]

Quote: danb35

It seems to be very common, but I've never understood where the idea comes from that you can just "convert" your plane into the experimental-amateur built category, and thereby free yourself from the requirements of STC, PMA, 337, etc.  You can't.  Your plane is factory-built, and will always be so.

You can have the plane classified as experimental, but only for R&D or other very limited purposes, which involve very limited operating restrictions.  If you were, for example, pursuing an STC to install a DeltaHawk diesel engine on your Mooney (which seems like an excellent idea, IMO), you could get a new airworthiness certificate issued as Experimental/R&D, which would allow you to make that change.  However, your operations would be limited to an approved flight test plan and would almost certainly prohibit carrying passengers or flight over congested areas.

[Frank B.]

I realize that this is an old thread but it is pertinent to a plane that I am currently looking at and was previously owned by a MS member. It is a late 60’s model that has been highly modified. It is currently owned by an aviation attorney. Although it was built in the late 60’s and shows that as the date of MFG but it shows an airworthy certification date of the middle 90’s. It shows an AW Classification as Experimental and Approved Operation as Research and Development. I am just wondering what restrictions that puts on the use of the plane?

I found this but it appears that there are no restrictions for part 91 operations when operating with an experimental R&D AW Cert.

https://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Order/ND/8130.29A.pdf

[carusoam]

Often planes move in and out of the experimental category when doing test installations on avionics and things...

There probably isn’t a record of staying on the experimental side and be useable as a GA plane...

For another example... show category... if you only fly from one show to another show... you have it made....

Let us know if you find an example of a plane that successfully stays on the experimental list...

One day, this will make a lot of sense... and a lot of people happy about it...

Otherwise the STC route is the method people use to add things like turbines to their favorite plane... this is not a cost saving route by any means...

Best regards,

-a-

[takair]

4 hours ago, Frank B. said:

I realize that this is an old thread but it is pertinent to a plane that I am currently looking at and was previously owned by a MS member. It is a late 60’s model that has been highly modified. It is currently owned by an aviation attorney. Although it was built in the late 60’s and shows that as the date of MFG but it shows an airworthy certification date of the middle 90’s. It shows an AW Classification as Experimental and Approved Operation as Research and Development. I am just wondering what restrictions that puts on the use of the plane?

I found this but it appears that there are no restrictions for part 91 operations when operating with an experimental R&D AW Cert.

https://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Order/ND/8130.29A.pdf

I have moved my plane in and out of experimental R&D while working STCs with it.  It was very restrictive and not practical to keep it there.  It restricted where I could fly, who I could fly and VFR only.  Also, it did not give me any broad authority, but limited me to what I said I would be doing.  I suspect older X R&D tickets may have been broader, but there should still be a limitations document with it.  In addition, I’m not sure it is readily transferable.  I would investigate further before buying.