1964-M20E Posted April 20, 2012 Report Share Posted April 20, 2012 How about these categories small 6 places or less piston aircraft: Certified – (factory built certified aircraft) all current rules apply Factory Built – (factory built non-certified aircraft) Owner can perform all maintenance functions and modifications having an IA do bi-annual inspections (annual by owner, A&P or IA every other year). Any owner of a certified aircraft can have his plane placed in this category all be it a one way street unless he can demonstrate no major changes to the type certificate has been made. Experimental class 1- Owner built and can perform all maintenance functions and modifications and do annual inspections Experimental class 2- non-builder Owner can perform all maintenance functions and modifications having an IA do bi-annual inspections (annual by owner, A&P or IA every other year). Categories 2, 3 & 4 can use any available avionics The manufacturers could still produce the certified planes if they wanted to or they could produce the same plane with the Factory Built non-certified label instead of certified. Experimental kit manufactures could even build the planes completely for the owners but then it would be listed as class 2. I’ll play devils advocate for a minute. One drawback to this could be the possibility of fewer GA mechanics available. Prop shops, avionics shops, engine shops would probably survive and thrive but the local GA general mechanic shop might experience some changes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaV8or Posted April 20, 2012 Author Report Share Posted April 20, 2012 Quote: 1964-M20E The only way to really save GA is to get plentiful low cost, efficient and easy to operate airplanes. This is what the LSA movement was supposed to do but so far I do not think it is working fully. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaV8or Posted April 20, 2012 Author Report Share Posted April 20, 2012 Quote: 1964-M20E How about these categories small 6 places or less piston aircraft: Certified – (factory built certified aircraft) all current rules apply Factory Built – (factory built non-certified aircraft) Owner can perform all maintenance functions and modifications having an IA do bi-annual inspections (annual by owner, A&P or IA every other year). Any owner of a certified aircraft can have his plane placed in this category all be it a one way street unless he can demonstrate no major changes to the type certificate has been made. Experimental class 1- Owner built and can perform all maintenance functions and modifications and do annual inspections Experimental class 2- non-builder Owner can perform all maintenance functions and modifications having an IA do bi-annual inspections (annual by owner, A&P or IA every other year). Categories 2, 3 & 4 can use any available avionics The manufacturers could still produce the certified planes if they wanted to or they could produce the same plane with the Factory Built non-certified label instead of certified. Experimental kit manufactures could even build the planes completely for the owners but then it would be listed as class 2. I’ll play devils advocate for a minute. One drawback to this could be the possibility of fewer GA mechanics available. Prop shops, avionics shops, engine shops would probably survive and thrive but the local GA general mechanic shop might experience some changes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aviatoreb Posted April 20, 2012 Report Share Posted April 20, 2012 Quote: 1964-M20E This is a very good discussion. And I think the main points are these: Let the owner perform more maintenance tasks that the owner feels competent on such as replacing, starters, alternators, avionics etc. (do not fool yourself this is already happening as stated above) Open up the flood gates for lower cost modern innovation for things like avionics, auto pilots and engine accessories, electronic ignition. Drop requiring certified avionics. Maybe have an FAA reviewed testing program and min requirements for new items but much less onerous than the present STC, certification or PMA processes. The less critical the system the less need for FAA intervention. (Example position lights, all that should be required is the proper viewing angle, and light output. And then you should be able to install them.) No STC, no PMA, just a simple statement they meet the requirements in XXXX. Dave you may not get your rocket C model I would keep the engine changes to a minimum maybe same general type and HP. How about a 200HP Delta Hawk turbocharged diesel that fits in the same footprint of the IO360 and a couple of gallons per hour less. Now we are talking. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1964-M20E Posted April 20, 2012 Report Share Posted April 20, 2012 Quote: aviatoreb What is the deal with LSA? It seems like there is new a category of factory built LSA craft that are essentiallt factory built experimentals in the LSA weight/speed class but otherwise allow for otherwise experimental avionics. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
231flyer Posted April 20, 2012 Report Share Posted April 20, 2012 Great discussion, unfortunately the industry had failed to come up with a succesful formula to keep GA healthy. The certified and kit makers are both suffering as are the various suppliers. The big boys (Boeing and Airbus) are doing well as is the commercial aerospace eco-system (Lockheed, Goodrich, Honeywell, etc). The trick is to translate their successful strategy into the GA space. Their key has been international growth in Asia (Latin America to a lesser extent) but GA is in its infancy there and most Asian countries tend to be very GA unfriendly. I realize the Chinese are buying into many troubled GA manufacturers (Cirrus, Continental, etc) but their motivation seems to be unclear at best. The US pilot population is in free-fall. According to the 2010 FAA report, active civilian pilots have fallen from a high of 847,000 (1980) to ~530,000. The private pilot population stands at ~220,000 now down from a high of 380,000 in 1980. Active pilot is defined as those with a current medical, flying currency is another matter yet. I agree with Dave, given the shrinking market for GA, "The salvation of GA in this country isn't going to involve new manufacturered planes of any size or shape". The economics just dont work, ergo every GA major is in CH 7/11 or nursing heavy operating losses and headed there. The LSA experiment seems to be less than a success. Clearly the cost of aviation is the key here. Acquisition, operating, and maintenance costs are pricing most out of the market as is the cost/commitment in getting a pilot's license. We need a holistic solution - more pilots demand more planes, so will more affordable aviation encourage more pilots? Its the old chicken and egg thing again! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaV8or Posted April 20, 2012 Author Report Share Posted April 20, 2012 Quote: 231flyer The LSA experiment seems to be less than a success. Clearly the cost of aviation is the key here. Acquisition, operating, and maintenance costs are pricing most out of the market as is the cost/commitment in getting a pilot's license. We need a holistic solution - more pilots demand more planes, so will more affordable aviation encourage more pilots? Its the old chicken and egg thing again! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aviatoreb Posted April 20, 2012 Report Share Posted April 20, 2012 Quote: 1964-M20E LSA is a good try but why spend $160k on a new LSA when you can have a very good Mooney, B,C or P that will fly twice as fast with twice as many people and twice as far. LSA is good for what it is and that is to just go tooling around on short hops near your base. If you are serious about Xcountry >200NM then you need something more. IMHO The idea is to allow owners and future owners of older small planes to do upgrades and keep them flying with a minimum of FAA regs. FYI AOPA just had an article about an solar/electric motor glider 100kts, 500+NM range. Not bad but also $160k there abouts and would be slower in US under ultralight catagory. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wildhorsesracing Posted April 22, 2012 Report Share Posted April 22, 2012 I have been studying the market for a few (4) years now trying to find "that perfect plane" for me. I know that isn't long enough to truly know the market but I have noticed a few trends: 1) prices have been dropping every year, especially on twins 2) experimental prices are steady compared to certificated 3) there are definitely aircraft out there that are completely owner maintained and the annuals are "pencil whipped" I think that any aircraft over 30 yrs old is a prime candidate for enhancements like the experimental. I'd like to see how many certificated older aircraft are actually used for commercial purposes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1964-M20E Posted April 22, 2012 Report Share Posted April 22, 2012 Quote: aviatoreb LSA is a good try but why spend $160k on a new LSA when you can have a very good Mooney, B,C or P that will fly twice as fast with twice as many people and twice as far. LSA is good for what it is and that is to just go tooling around on short hops near your base. If you are serious about Xcountry >200NM then you need something more. IMHO The idea is to allow owners and future owners of older small planes to do upgrades and keep them flying with a minimum of FAA regs. FYI AOPA just had an article about an solar/electric motor glider 100kts, 500+NM range. Not bad but also $160k there abouts and would be slower in US under ultralight catagory. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aviatoreb Posted April 22, 2012 Report Share Posted April 22, 2012 Quote: 1964-M20E I understand your point and it is certainly a good tactic to use this is how I was able to purchase my motorcycle and later my plane over the objections of my wife. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1964-M20E Posted April 22, 2012 Report Share Posted April 22, 2012 You go 80mph on the interstate when the speed limit is 70 right. :-) at least I do. Mooney = speed :-)) I can always prsent my PPL or firefighter credentials if the officer asks. Not only that how many people have a plane not an ultralight with no annual, no medical, and or no PPL and fly. You only have an issue when somone asks or you go to sell it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wildhorsesracing Posted April 22, 2012 Report Share Posted April 22, 2012 If someone had a 50 yr old Mooney and added enhancements that are not STC'd (avionics, interior or speed mods) - how much of a hit to the value are they going to get? Probably not enough to worry about! What mods would constitute the airplane to become "experimental"? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaV8or Posted April 22, 2012 Author Report Share Posted April 22, 2012 Quote: Wildhorsesracing I think that any aircraft over 30 yrs old is a prime candidate for enhancements like the experimental. I'd like to see how many certificated older aircraft are actually used for commercial purposes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaV8or Posted April 22, 2012 Author Report Share Posted April 22, 2012 Quote: 1964-M20E The other method is if enough people simply ignore the rules (especially when it comes to lighting, avionics and the inside of the cabin) then there is little they can do about it. The only issue you have is when you go to sell it unless the person buying does not care. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jetdriven Posted April 23, 2012 Report Share Posted April 23, 2012 How would you get the annual signed off? Just ignore that as well? Also, if there is an element of deliberate noncompliance, they could pursue a certificate suspension or revocation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
231flyer Posted April 23, 2012 Report Share Posted April 23, 2012 I know of two friends who have installed Dynon EFIS in certified a/c (one is a Mooney 252). They both claim the Dynon is a standby instrument and the original equipmment is still primary (although the location has obviously changed). I am not sure about the paperwork but they both continue to get annual signoffs. I have noticed most AP/IA don't bother with avionics during annuals, I assume they figure that will be checked out during the pitot/static checks. As DaV8or claims, Insurance companies will be sure to pursue any such loophole in denying a claim. However, I know for a fact my other friend with the Dynon in a Cessna 172 got ramp checked and had no issues. Apparently the FAA inspector even asked to look at the panel and the inside. He was interested in the paperwork not the aircraft. I have been ramp checked twice in the last 20 years of powered flying and had similar experience. The FAA is interested in the paperwork (AROW and license + medical). All that said I would not encourage open rebellion against the rules. As a/c owners we usually have a lot more to lose than gain by going rouge. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1964-M20E Posted April 23, 2012 Report Share Posted April 23, 2012 Going rouge? Well I’m not saying that either but using a liberal interpretation of the regulations definitely. I read the regulations on owner performed maintenance very liberally and will push them as far as I feel I can and as far as my mechanic will let me before objecting. However, there are some good things out there that if we were allowed could enhance reliably and reduce operational costs such as full dual electronic ignition and fuel injection. The point being these aircraft belong to us and we should be able to make changes to them with some oversight and the FAA should get out of the small aircraft certification business. They should have guidelines for small aircraft and parts but not certifications. When you get to commercial passenger service all this goes away. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wildhorsesracing Posted April 23, 2012 Report Share Posted April 23, 2012 Quote: 1964-M20E The point being these aircraft belong to us and we should be able to make changes to them with some oversight and the FAA should get out of the small aircraft certification business. They should have guidelines for small aircraft and parts but not certifications. When you get to commercial passenger service all this goes away. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Igor_U Posted April 23, 2012 Report Share Posted April 23, 2012 Quote: jetdriven Igor, I think the further from the type certificate you get with your Mooney the less the value will be. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aviatoreb Posted April 23, 2012 Report Share Posted April 23, 2012 Quote: Igor_U That is true but keep in mind most of vintage Mooneys (and other airplanes) are worth more as parts! It would be interesting to look at Canadian market for these decertified planes and see what market says. Even it’s much smaller then in USA. Igor N9514M @ KPAE Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaV8or Posted April 24, 2012 Author Report Share Posted April 24, 2012 Here's all I'm asking for myself and the sake of GA's future here in America- Currently, I can buy an Vans RV-10 that somebody else built and work on it myself, modify myself and continually improve to the latest tech. At the same time, I can buy a Mooney M20F that somebody else built and work on it only if I can find someone licensed and willing to inspect and sign off on my work for a fee, I can modify it myself if I can find and afford a modification that is licensed and registered with the government and I have the licensed person sign off on it and finally, I really can't update it to the latest tech. All I want is equality. I want my Mooney to be all it can be. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wildhorsesracing Posted April 24, 2012 Report Share Posted April 24, 2012 Quote: DaV8or Here's all I'm asking for myself and the sake of GA's future here in America- Currently, I can buy an Vans RV-10 that somebody else built and work on it myself, modify myself and continually improve to the latest tech. At the same time, I can buy a Mooney M20F that somebody else built and work on it only if I can find someone licensed and willing to inspect and sign off on my work for a fee, I can modify it myself if I can find and afford a modification that is licensed and registered with the government and I have the licensed person sign off on it and finally, I really can't update it to the latest tech. All I want is equality. I want my Mooney to be all it can be. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danb35 Posted April 24, 2012 Report Share Posted April 24, 2012 Quote: Wildhorsesracing My lack of knowledge of the Regulations might be showing here, but can I not declare my Mooney M20C to be experimental and do all I want to the airplane? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1964-M20E Posted April 24, 2012 Report Share Posted April 24, 2012 Quote: danb35 Short answer: No, you can't. Longer answer: did you build it yourself? Then no, you can't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.