What's new
Van's Air Force

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

A question of legality

cdeerinck

Well Known Member
Here is the situation: An Experimental aircraft that was not amateur-built, but was issued an Experimental Airworthiness for Exhibition, has a panel rebuilt and new avionics installed by the owner.

This is not the exact case for RV's, but I think the situation is the same in regards to making changes to a panel if the owner does not have a repairman certificate for that plane.

Per 43.1, Part 43 does not apply to Experimental aircraft.

43.1 (b) This part does not apply to --
(1) Any aircraft for which the FAA has issued an experimental certificate, unless the FAA has previously issued a different kind of airworhiness certificate for that aircraft;

However Part 91 does apply, specifically Subpart E

In looking at 91.407

91.407 Operation after maintenance, preventive maintenance, rebuilding, or alteration.

(a) No person may operate any aircraft that has undergone maintenance, preventive maintenance, rebuilding, or alteration unless ?

(1) It has been approved for return to service by a person authorized under 43.7 of this chapter; and

(2) The maintenance record entry required by 43.9 or 43.11, as applicable, of this chapter has been made.

So it appears that some parts of 43 must apply in regards to maintenance records. So my question surrounds who is allowed to make those maintenance entries, and who is authorized to return the aircraft to service.

43.7 Persons authorized to approve aircraft, airframes, aircraft engines, propellers, appliances, or component parts for return to service after maintenance, preventive maintenance, rebuilding, or alteration.

(a) Except as provided in this section and 43.17, no person, other than the Administrator, may approve an aircraft, airframe, eaircraft engine, propeller, applieance, or component part for return to service after it has undergone maintenance, preventive maintenance, rebuild, or alteration.

(f) A person holding at least a private pilot certificate may approve an aircraft for return to service after performing preventive maintenance under the provisions of 43.3(g)

But 43.7 (f) only applies to preventive maintenance.

So can anyone tell me what authorizes a pilot/owner to either perform an alteration (not major), or to return to service after an alteration (again, not major), or does one or both of those require an A&P signoff?
 
Exhibition is still experimental.
So in the same way that FAR 91 applies to Experimental / Amateur Built, but no certification is required to make a return to service maint. record entry because of the non application note regarding experimentals, the same would go for Experimental / Exhibition.
 
Exhibition is still experimental.
So in the same way that FAR 91 applies to Experimental / Amateur Built, but no certification is required to make a return to service maint. record entry because of the non application note regarding experimentals, the same would go for Experimental / Exhibition.

Scott - Thanks for the quick reply. Can you point me to something specific regarding the "non application note". Are you referring to 43.1 (b) or something else? Experimentals still need to have annual inspections signed off by an A&P, so how do alterations differ from that?

I'm not trying to argue at all, I'm just trying to fully understand this.
 
Experimentals still need to have annual inspections signed off by an A&P, so how do alterations differ from that?

This is not true. At least, it's not the entire truth. :)

Our experimental amateur-built airplanes need to have an annual condition inspection which may be signed off by an A&P or the holder of the Repairman certificate for that specific airframe. This, in fact, is the only use for a Repairman certificate in our context and the only point to obtaining one for the airplanes we complete.

Beyond the annual condition inspection, no certification of any kind is required to do any work on an experimental amateur-built. Anybody may do anything to these planes and sign the log attesting to that work.
 
This is not true. At least, it's not the entire truth. :)

Our experimental amateur-built airplanes need to have an annual condition inspection which may be signed off by an A&P or the holder of the Repairman certificate for that specific airframe. This, in fact, is the only use for a Repairman certificate in our context and the only point to obtaining one for the airplanes we complete.

Beyond the annual condition inspection, no certification of any kind is required to do any work on an experimental amateur-built. Anybody may do anything to these planes and sign the log attesting to that work.

I got a very cogent answer here (that agrees with both of what you wrote): http://twisted-wrench.com/Experimental.html

The short of it is that my annual (not everyones) is called for in my Operating Limitations. And there it specifies who can do it. For many RV builders, their Operating Limitations differ. Mine state the following:
34. Only FAA-certificated repair stations and FAA-certificated mechanics with appropriate ratings as authorized by 14 CFR 43.3 may perform inspections required by these operating limitations.

Anyway, in closing, I thank both of you for your time and attention on this.
 
This is not true. At least, it's not the entire truth. :)

Our experimental amateur-built airplanes need to have an annual condition inspection which may be signed off by an A&P or the holder of the Repairman certificate for that specific airframe. This, in fact, is the only use for a Repairman certificate in our context and the only point to obtaining one for the airplanes we complete.

Beyond the annual condition inspection, no certification of any kind is required to do any work on an experimental amateur-built. Anybody may do anything to these planes and sign the log attesting to that work.

Ken is correct.

Remember, the A&P or Repairman's Certificate holder only attests the aircraft is in "condition for safe flight". An IA attests a "certified" aircraft complies will its type certificate plus any AD's and approved mods. There is a BIG difference between the two.

It is not uncommon for someone to purchase an Experimental and make major changes throughout the year, fly the plane for a number of hours, and then have the Condition Inspection performed when required. All legal.
 
Scott - Thanks for the quick reply. Can you point me to something specific regarding the "non application note". Are you referring to 43.1 (b) or something else? Experimentals still need to have annual inspections signed off by an A&P, so how do alterations differ from that?

I'm not trying to argue at all, I'm just trying to fully understand this.

Yes I was refering to 43.1 (b)

Experimentals have to have annual condition inspections done because it is one of the requirements specified in the experimental operating limitations. Not because of FAR 43 (because it doesn't apply to experimentals). It is in the operating limitations to "write it back in" as a requirement, since nothing in FAR 43 applys... so without teh operating limitation, there would be no maintenance or inspection requirements at all.

I think it is a mistake to assume that some parts of FAR 43 apply to experimentals just because part 91 does. The very first paragraph of FAR 43 states that the entire part does not apply.

I believe the reference in FAR 91 really only is applicable to Standard certificated aircraft. That is why the experimental operating limitations even give an example of what a proper condition inspection entry wording would be (once again, because FAR 43 doesn't apply).
 
So can anyone tell me what authorizes a pilot/owner to either perform an alteration (not major), or to return to service after an alteration (again, not major), or does one or both of those require an A&P signoff?

Don't overthink this, or try to "read into" the regulations something that is not there. Your regulation quoted from Part 91 contains the language "... a person authorized under 43.7 of this chapter;" But we have established that Part 43 does not apply at all to this aircraft. So there cannot be a "person authorized by part 43" since it doesn't apply.

Same thing for the maintenance recording requirements. Your quote from Part 91 states "....maintenance record entry required by 43.9 or 43.11, as applicable," But since we know that part 43 does not apply, nothing in it can be "applicable".

So, except for the condition inspection, which is required by the aircraft's operating limitations, there is no restriction on who performs maintenance, repair, or modification, and there is no requirement that such work be logged.

Now, it is a best-practices recommendation that maintenance records are kept even though they are not required, but the fact is, they are not required (other than condition inspections).

Note that transponder/pitot-static and ELT tests are required to be recorded, as called out in Part 91. These requirements do not reference part 43, so they do apply.
 
Quote:
43.1 (b) This part does not apply to --
(1) Any aircraft for which the FAA has issued an experimental certificate, unless the FAA has previously issued a different kind of airworhiness certificate for that aircraft;

Don't forget to account for the "unless..." part of 43.1. If it's a Standard category aircraft that got switched to an Experimental category for some reason (Exhibition, R&D, etc.) the exemption would not apply, presumably so it could be returned to Standard. If it's something like a Red Star aircraft that got its initial AW as Experimental - Exhibition then the exemption would apply.
 
Back
Top