Club Homepage Forums Classified Ads Buy & Sell - Everything But Airplanes N46CA panel.

Unless I'm mistaken, any owner can work on or modify a homebuilt that they own. You have to be the builder, in compliance with the 51%, rule to be able to do the annual inspections yourself. The trade off is that if you sell a homebuilt that you put together, you are the manufacturer. I'm sure that there is some liability.

It would be nice if there was a course and a test you could take to be able to work on your own certified aircraft without having to get an A&P to sign it off. The trade off here would be that it might be smart to undo any modifications that you might make before selling the plane.

That's my point! Anyone CAN perform ANY maintenance on their 150's or 152's... under properly certified supervision, which often can be as little as an inspection after the fact! I agree that you won't be allowed to do everything without some over-the-shoulder coaching, and the A&P still does the signoff!


You still need A&P supervision on a homebuilt! The FAA designated examiner who periodically inspects your work during the build is also an A&P/IA, and you will require his signoff before first flight. Afterwards, while you might perform any maintenance on your homebuilt and signoff any logs yourself, you'll still need a repairman's certificate good only for your plane, requiring documentation acceptable to the FAA that you built 51% of the plane. If you built less than 51% (after buying someone's partially completed project, for instance), you don't get the repairman's certificate, and an A&P still has to do all the signoffs. I also believe the annual re-certification inspection still needs an A&P signoff, regardless (somebody correct me if I'm wrong here). I believe there are also certain operational restrictions with homebuilts that aircraft built under a production authorization don't have, such as airspace where they CAN'T be flown (again, I may be wrong).

Nobody clearly understands the FAA (even the FAA) but there is reasoning behind most of the madness!

OK, I know I am teetering on the edge of heresy by disagreeing with Carl (given the disparaties in our knowledge and experience), but I have an anecdote that comes under the heading "all indians travel in single file, at least, the only one I ever saw did"...

I have a friend who built one of the kits (I forget which one, I didn't know him then, but it seems to me it was a Murphy of some variety), and decided to tackle a certified aircraft restoration. So he hold his kit built and bought a Pacer project.

He is finding that restoring a certified airplane is much more difficult, and time consuming, than building a well-designed kit.

Of course, if my memory serves (RIGHT!) the kit was riveted aluminum, and the airplane he is trying to restore is rag.

Reg

I would imagine its hard and expensive to get parts for some of these old planes.

Hopefully I'm wrong here, but if I understand the rules, even a guy like me, with a full machine shop, cannot make parts for certified aircraft, unless under license from the original maker.

-corey

Hard to get? Sometimes. Expensive? Definitely. Don't know if it's much better with homebuilts though.

Hey Corey

Here in Canada there is the "Owner Maintenance" category of aircraft. Basically you can take any certified airplane you want, including a 150, and place it under this category where the owner can do any maintenance and repair to it. If you want to install a PT6 into a 150, go for it!

The catch is, though, that the aircraft can never be returned to one of the conventional categories (normal, utility, etc). The aircraft will become, basically, a homebuilt aircraft, thus the aircraft's value will be reduced greatly. Oh yeah, by the way, the FAA DOES NOT allow any such registered aircraft to cross the border into the USA because they do not recognize this category within the FARS. I have heard stories of guys going down this road and then finding out later that the FAA will not allow them to enter the USA. Oops!!

You can distinguish these aircraft in the Canadian Registration Database by the serial number of the aircraft having an "X" added to it (eg: 150-664321X). If you look, I believe most of these aircraft are small Cessna's and Pipers.

My point with bringing up this? If you want a certified aircraft, have one. If you want a homebuilt aircraft, have one. But trying to have a certified - homebuilt, just leads to problems, mostly in the pocketbook! I weighed the options when I was looking for an aircraft and decided to go with the good old 150!

John


The above got me wondering so I dived into the Canadian CARS for a refresher. I know, I need to get a life!

The section of interest is CAR Standard 507.03. I forgot that the owner maintenance class is a sub-part of the "Special C of A" category. Also, I believe that an aircraft can return from the owner class, providing that all the requirements for the normal / utility category are met. But that would entail big $$ I would think. Like i said before, I feel it's best to leave the certified aircraft where they belong and the amateur built aircraft where they belong. Each has its good and bad points.

John


CARS Standard 507.03 [tc.gc.ca]

Interesting John,

How about flying a USA Homebuilt into Canada? Legal?
I'm assuming a FAA certified 150 is legal. And now that I think about it, would I need a Passport?

I need to get out more.

-corey

A few years ago we had a guest speaker at the Clinton Fly-In who gave a presentation on a similar process. I believe he was a professor at a technical university. His FAA-approved program will give you training (almost to the regular A&P level) to work on your C150/152, but the catch is your airplane will be de-certified and can't ever be re-certified. Good luck if you ever want to sell it. His program wasn't cheap either, more than $10K I think.

Actually the rules allow for owners to manufacture parts for their own airplane under certain circumstances (no license/no PMA). It's funny but a mechanic can't manufacture parts, but an owner can and then provide them to a mechanic for installation (there are certain restrictions.) "Manufacture", by the way, doesn't necessarily mean doing everything to cause a particular part to be made. It could involve an owner "participating" in the making of the part in some meaningful way such as drawing up the design specs and providing the raw material to a fabricator. The part is only to be used on the owner's plane and can't be marketed to others (unless you do get PMA or an STC).

I do have to inject some clarification on what Carl has said about non-A&Ps working on certificated aircraft. (Don't shoot the messenger!) The FAA has said in various rulings that it is not enough for a non-A&P's work to be inspected after the fact by an A&P and signed off. The non-A&P has to be working under the direct supervision of the mechanic. They have further defined this supervision in terms of the mechanic having to be physically present, in close proximity, to the work being done. Having the A&P over at the FBO while you work on your own plane in the hangar 3 doors down doesn't meet the FAA standard for direct supervision. Again, don't shoot the messenger.

You don't have to have built 51% of the aircraft to qualify for the repairman's certificate. The figure of 51% in relation to homebuilts concerns whether a kit plane can be licensed as experimental amateur built or is considered "factory" built.

To get the repairman's certificate you have to prove to the FAA that you are familiar with all aspects of the construction of the aircraft. Only one repairman's certificate per airframe. Thus if you and four buddies decided to build an RV-10 and each of you did exactly 20% of the build, one of you could be designated the lead builder and apply for and receive the repairman's certificate for that airframe. If you bought a newly constructed RV-10 from someone who never applied for the repairman's certificate, you could, theoretically, apply for and receive the certificate yourself provided that you could convince the FAA that you knew everything there was to know about building an RV-10 (good luck).