---------------------------------------------------------- RVCanada-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Thu 11/09/06: 1 ---------------------------------------------------------- Today's Message Index: ---------------------- 1. 01:04 AM - Re: re- RV6a maximum gross weight @1650 lb. (f1rocket@telus.net) ________________________________ Message 1 _____________________________________ Time: 01:04:32 AM PST US From: f1rocket@telus.net Subject: Re: RVCanada-List: re- RV6a maximum gross weight @1650 lb. Jim, I have a Stits Playboy that I bought and the empty weight was wrong (an outright lie in my opinion). So I thought I would apply for an increase in GW from 1500 to 1800 lbs. I filled out all the paperwork as I did for my Rocket (flap area, wing loading etc) and thought I was set. MOT has come back and told me that if I wish to have a GW higher than original design, I need to run all the stress analysis my self and prove it to them. OK wing was easy, but fuse is beyond my current means, without hiring a professional or getting a program. I also can't contact the original designer to get a statement from him (they would also accept this), so I'm not sure what to do, other than fly under 1500 lbs. I would think that you could get a statement from Vans that you can have the higher GW. I wonder what would happen though if Vans refuses? Guess you would be back to calculating. With my Rocket I found that as soon as my paperwork was done with MDRA (final inspection) I was on my own with TC. I can tell you that I had more problems with the TC paperwork than anything. Basically I didn't mail anything as they claimed to have lost my file. So I spent a total of three days going back and forth to get my paperwork in order. Oh and one thing to watch - after your 25 hours are done, make sure they don't just give you day VFR. They tried that with me and I made them go back and re-type it up to read day/night VFR. Don't know if I helped or confused? Jeff Quoting Jim Jewell : > > A month or two ago I registered my RV6-a with the MOT. The application > included the requested gross weight which I set at 1775 lb. > A week later I received the as applied for registration which now resides in > > the aircraft as required. > My local inspector is an acquaintance. He was professional diligent and > helpful in all regards. He is in fact a highly trained aircraft structural > AME. By trade. > Yesterday upon having completed the final inspection process of my RV6-a he > had to inform me of the following; It has been decided that the maximum > gross weight during the 25 hr. flight test period will be set by the MDRA at > > the kit manufacturers stated (in my case1650 lb.) regardless of the > applicant's requested weight. > > It is as yet unclear to me and the inspector exactly how this will effect my > > intention to maintain the previously applied for and accepted 1775 maximum > gross weight. > > Is this little more than a mild shifting of weight by the MDRA with little > or no effect on the builders? > > Will I have to re-test the aircraft for some as yet undetermined additional > flight period?. > > It might mean that I have to re-do the gross weight climb test at the > requested 1775 lb. weight. > > Will the onus be on me to go through a structural testing regime to prove > the airframe is up to the task. > > The first three options can be complied with, the later would of course be > out of the question. > > I have no word from the MDRA administration or the local provincial rep. as > to the why's and how's this rule change was arrived at. No advance warning. > No background or explanations offered to the local inspector. No word as to > where this will leave me in dealing with the MOT ? I was informed that after > > the 25 hr. test period I will be on my own with the MOT. in this regard. > No opportunity at all to have input on the matter! > > My bet is that after turning over one or two rocks in this pile,, a lawyer > will be found !? > > Jim in Kelowna > > P.S. I almost put the sealed envelope containing the paper work re- the > inpection into the mailbox without checking the amount of postage that was > on it. > Upon doing so I went to the post office and had the postage increased to the > > required $1.xx additional amount. > Had I not done so the affixed return address was to the head office in > Ontario instead of here in Kelowna. With the incorrect postage it would have > > been returned or sent to Ontario then back to B.C. to be scrutinized By > Terry Elgood before arriving back here. Who knows how long that would take?. > > This might explain some of the gripes I have heard about the paperwork turn > around time? If by chance you are given the wrong envelope, a small error > will have a fairly big effect. > > > > > > >