Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 01:38 AM - CJ6 Housai Mixture adjustment (Harv)
2. 01:47 AM - Re: Looking for a flight in NZ (Steve Geard)
3. 02:01 AM - Re: Aerobatics Impacts on Props (Steve Geard)
4. 02:51 AM - Re: Yak18T air leak (Rob Rowe)
5. 03:09 AM - Re: YAK sac (Rob Rowe)
6. 05:17 AM - Re: CJ Nose Strut (Greg Wrobel)
7. 06:29 AM - Re: YAK sac (Etienne Verhellen)
8. 07:01 AM - Re: Re: MT Prop TBO (Chris Ober)
9. 08:49 AM - Re: Re: MT Prop TBO (Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD)
10. 09:30 AM - Re: Yak18T air leak (PaulW)
11. 10:10 AM - Re: Yak18T air leak (Rob Rowe)
12. 10:11 AM - Re: Re: MT Prop TBO (Richard Goode)
13. 11:21 AM - AW Certificate (Ernest Martinez)
14. 11:36 AM - Re: AW Certificate (Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD)
15. 11:43 AM - Re: AW Certificate (Ernest Martinez)
16. 11:52 AM - Re: Re: MT Prop TBO (DaBear)
17. 11:56 AM - Re: AW Certificate (Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD)
18. 12:02 PM - Re: AW Certificate (Ernest Martinez)
19. 12:16 PM - Re: AW Certificate (Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD)
20. 12:22 PM - Re: AW Certificate (Ernest Martinez)
21. 12:33 PM - Re: AW Certificate (Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD)
22. 12:43 PM - Re: AW Certificate (Richard Hess)
23. 01:35 PM - Re: AW Certificate (A. Dennis Savarese)
24. 01:42 PM - Re: AW Certificate (Ernest Martinez)
25. 01:48 PM - Re: AW Certificate (Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD)
26. 01:53 PM - Re: AW Certificate (Ernest Martinez)
27. 01:59 PM - Re: Re: Yak18T air leak (Michael Wikstrom)
28. 02:17 PM - Re: AW Certificate (Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD)
29. 03:12 PM - Re: AW Certificate Mods (Gill Gutierrez)
30. 03:20 PM - Re: AW Certificate (Ernest Martinez)
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | CJ6 Housai Mixture adjustment |
Good morning
With all this talk of mixture setting.....
Has anyone changed the (by turning the screw in the carb body located behind the
wire locked plug) setting on their HS6 Housai engine?
My CJ6 has low CHT temps in the climb (at max continuous power) and also low oil
temps and I'm sure its running slightly too rich and guzzling fuel.
Is there's a proper procedure for set-up, or is it a case of leaning off half a
turn and then see how that affects things?
Rgs
Harv
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=428076#428076
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Looking for a flight in NZ |
Try Norm Davis.
davisn@xtra.co.nz
He has contacts with a Yak 52 syndicate in Ashburton and has contacts in Wanaka.
:-) Steve.
--------
SteveO
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=428077#428077
Message 3
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Aerobatics Impacts on Props |
Excellent. Humor is a very important part of life.
I shall forthwith inspect all my rubbers for wear after each use.
I hereby understand that if they be black, cracked and wrinkled, then they for
sure have seen good service.......
Steve [Laughing]
--------
SteveO
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=428078#428078
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Yak18T air leak |
Michael,
Looks like it's the 562300 protection valve (#12 bleeding down valve in attached
PDF schematic - machine translated from Russian so make allowances for phrasing!).
This valve vents to atmosphere below 5 bar pressure and is used primarily to bleed
down the emergency air system after use.
However it's secondary function is to vent small air leaks entering the emergency
system from defective seals on either the gear up-locks or the adjacent non-return
valve (NRV) emergency feed to the brakes (and flaps in the case of the
-18T) .
If these get large enough (>5 bar) it shuts and the pressure build up will release
the up-locks and slowly blows the gear down, which tends to get your attention!
In your case it appears whatever is leaking has yet to get to 5 bar so the protection
valve is just venting it to the exterior (which you can hear).
Off the top of my head the easiest way to diagnose on the ground whether it's the
adjacent NRV or an up-lock seal (#13 or #22 x 2 on diagram) is to (with CAUTION)
select the gear lever to neutral to vent the gear air lines.
If the leak persists then it's probably the NRV. If the leak stops then it's probably
one of the up-locks and that will be more difficult to isolate other than
by carefully listening to each up-lock in turn (adjacent to actuator) for air
flowing through it. A stethoscope might be useful!
Hope this helps.
Rob R
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=428080#428080
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/yak_18t_air_system_194.pdf
Message 5
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Bought my Yak-Sak from Cambrai Covers in 2003 for c.USD140+ as I recall, so much
more now I would expect.
http://www.cambraicovers.com/
So not cheap but good quality and still in use today. See this item is no longer
shown on their price list, but I found the proprietor to be very helpful before
so hopefully this might get a result for you.
Rob R
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=428082#428082
Message 6
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: CJ Nose Strut |
Speaking of struts, I would like some info on how and the equipment I need
to service the struts on a CJ. Also a source for he equipment. I have
Schrader valves installed. Any info would help. I hear some use scuba air
in lieu of Nitrogen. Scuba air although relatively dry is not the way to
go. I believe nitrogen is what should be used. Thanks
On Aug 2, 2014 1:46 PM, "Colin McGeachy" <colinmcgeachy@gmail.com> wrote:
> 20 (+/- 1) atmospheres (293 PSI) for the nose wheel strut. Main wheels
> (FYI) are 48 atmospheres.
>
> Colin
>
> C-FTGZ
>
>
> On 1 August 2014 19:35, Byron Fox <byronmfox@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> Gentlemen, my nose strut seems a bit soft. How many PSI of nitrogen
>> should I inflate it to?
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Blitz Fox
>> 415-307-2405
>>
>> ==========
>> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
>> ==========
>> MS -
>> k">http://forums.matronics.com
>> ==========
>> e -
>> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
>> t="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>> ==========
>>
>>
>>
>>
> *
>
>
> *
>
>
Message 7
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
The Yak-52 Cambrai covers are very good ...
http://www.cambraicovers.com/Yak_52_Page.htm
Most Yak-50 / 52 pilots in the UK use them.
Yak sac not bad either but not essential ...
Cheers.
https://flic.kr/p/o393Db
--------
http://www.airplane-pictures.net/photo/240525/g-cbss-private-yakovlev-yak-52/
http://www.airplane-pictures.net/photo/215762/g-cbss-private-yakovlev-yak-52/
http://www.airplane-pictures.net/photo/403690/g-cbss-private-yakovlev-yak-52/
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=428085#428085
Message 8
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
I've only had my Yak for 8 months. I talked extensively to the previous owner and
he is one that purchased the MT prop in late 2001. He had no idea that it was
Russian made. They didn't disclose that to him. He had no knowledge of it being
made in Russia. He thought he was buying a MT.
After talking with the prop shop, they are unsure if they realized it at the time
that it was Russian made. These were being made on a contract to German specs,
they were always intended to be genuine MT props.
They made it very clear that they knew that they sold it. However it's MT, not
them that won't allow it to be serviced.
Chris
Sent from my iPhone
On Aug 5, 2014, at 1:19 PM, "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
wrote:
When did you purchased this prop Chris? I ran into this issue myself in 2004/2005
time frame. If this shop sold you this prop AFTER that year, then I would
offer that they might have committed fraud, plain and simple. That is at least
my opinion based on conversations with MT, a few emails from Richard, and
more than a few folks in Russia.
And Richard... it would probably be a good thing if MT told the world about these
Russian props, that they included the details and their refusal to service
them at EVERY SERVICE CENTER OUT THERE, and also put word of it on their WEB SITE
along with a complete method by which to identify them.
This would be the responsable and professional thing to do in order to keep their
present and potential customers from being burnt. That would be a lot better
than an occasional email on the YAK List. That being said, this is yet another
reason why I look at MT somewhat askance. Hey, I get that it makes sense
to Germans.
Let's look at the facts. You say it was manufactured illegally, did not have
MT certification, and by definition is not airworthy.
But in reality, "If it looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it's a .... um...
ah... IT'S A GOOSE"...... well, how are people supposed to KNOW that?
I believe the reality is that ORIGINALLY Russia was supposed to be able to LEGALLY
manufacture these props, but "the deal fell through" and why that exactly
happened is open to a lot of hear-say and interpretation.
Chris got screwed. And MT holds part of the blame. The percentage to be determined.
________________________________
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com]
on behalf of Chris Ober [christopherjober@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2014 1:05 PM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: MT Prop TBO
It was purchased from Aircraft Propeller Services, Inc. in Wheeling, IL. They are
a MT approved shop listed on the MT website for certified service shops. Needing
service I called them and they informed me that even though they sold it,
they cannot service it. They knew exactly what it was (Russian) when they sold
it. Only now under direction from MT in Florida (corporate USA) they cannot
service the prop. They said they use to be able to service them. Now they can
not. It's as simple as that.
Sent from my iPhone
On Aug 5, 2014, at 11:18 AM, "Richard Goode" <richard.goode@russianaeros.com> wrote:
Of course, I know nothing about the particular circumstances of your propeller.
But, are you saying that an official MT agent sold you this (Russian) propeller;
installed it and now won't support it? Or, are you saying that you obtained
the propeller and had it installed on your plane by an MT agent? If the first,
then I suggest they have a strong responsibility to continue to support it.
But I suspect the practicality is the second case, and if so, I would agree with
their position. To be specific, did they know what prop it was before installing
it?
Then, you are being rather simplistic to think that MT are going to look for reasons
not to service your prop why on earth would they do that, except in this
very particular case of removing props from service that were manufactured illegally;
did not have MT certification so were, by definition, not legally airworthy.
Richard
Rhodds Farm
Lyonshall
Hereford
HR5 3LW
United Kingdom
Tel: +94 (0) 81 241 5137 (Sri Lanka)
Tel: +44 (0) 1544 340120
Fax: +44 (0) 1544 340129
www.russianaeros.com<http://www.russianaeros.com/>
Im currently in Sri Lanka but this Mail is working,and my local phone is +94 779
132 160.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Chris Ober
Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2014 8:02 PM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: MT Prop TBO
MT "blacked out" these propellers so now they are screwing their customers. My
prop was bought and installed by a MT prop shop in Illinois. MT tried to tell
me it shouldn't have been brought into the country. They were trying to blame
someone when it was one if their approved service companies that sold and installed
it! Now when I try to go back to the same company that installed it, they
won't touch it. They're telling me that MT won't allow it. They're using the
Russian made excuse to not servicing my prop. They allowed this prop to go to
a factory approved center, be installed, then refuse to service it?! What's to
stop them from using another excuse next time? I for one will not risk buying
another 'single use' prop only to be stuck with a wall ornament!
Chris
Sent from my iPhone
On Aug 5, 2014, at 7:18 AM, "Richard Goode" <richard.goode@russianaeros.com> wrote:
--> <richard.goode@russianaeros.com>
I will try to set some issues straight:
To make my position clear, I am biased in favour of MT props, firstly because I
sell them and secondly because I really believe they are good. For me a really
important aspect is that they are fully certificated and if you have had, like
me, a propeller failure on a "experimental" propeller you certainly would never
want to have it again!
Then, MT will overhaul any prop of theirs, however old or however much beyond the
TBO.
In terms of the Russian MT props, the situation is simply that MT gave a licence
to Speriot in Russia to make MTV-9 props, on the basis that they would be given
a certain royalty for each propeller produced. In the event, the Russians
only declared every second? third? Propeller that they made, so clearly saved
a huge amount on royalty fees! It took MT a while to realise what was happening
since these Russian props with serial numbers that had never been declared to
MT started coming back to the factory or MT overseas agents for overhaul.
So MT decided to "black" all these Russian props, which simply means that you cannot
get them overhauled, and since the Russian factory is no longer in business,
owners of these props will end up with quite expensive ornaments. Because
of our relationship with MT they have allowed us to buy some of these Russian
props that they themselves have bought in, but strictly for non-aviation use,
and we have made a number of "wind machines"
with these props and M 14 P engines for film studios.
I have heard excellent reports of the Whirlwind propellers, but I will always have
the basic concern about the lack of certification and the test program that
this implies. Yurgis Kairis had a catastrophic failure when an entire blade
departed from his Whirlwind on his Sukhoi 31. The forces tore the gearbox from
the crankcase; broke most of the engine mounts and a lot of other frame tubes.
Fortunately he was at low altitude with a long runway ahead. Having said that,
I am sure that appropriate modifications were subsequently made.
Richard Goode
Rhodds Farm
Lyonshall
Hereford
HR5 3LW
United Kingdom
Tel: +94 (0) 81 241 5137 (Sri Lanka)
Tel: +44 (0) 1544 340120
Fax: +44 (0) 1544 340129
www.russianaeros.com<http://www.russianaeros.com/>
Im currently in Sri Lanka but this Mail is working,and my local phone is
+94 779 132 160.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dale
Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2014 8:17 AM
Subject: Yak-List: Re: MT Prop TBO
When MT blades are overhauled they are only done in Germany from what I understand.
The blades are stripped, inspected, repaired, re-glassed, painted and a
new stainless edge is installed and your time starts over..
The Hub can be overhauled in the states and all service bulletins are complied
with and there are some of those. At overhaul all the seals , bolts and basically
anything that get wear or tightened is replaced.
I got the distinct impression that if you needed a repair after TBO that would
not happen per a agreement with MT. Same as the Russian MT , No Service at all
on those. Someone can correct me but that is what I ran into.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=427994#427994
--
This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner,
and is believed to be clean.
--
This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner,
and is believed to be clean.
Message 9
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Richard, I think you offer good advice in your email here, but that said .....
please be aware that I wrote Gerd Muhlbauer myself on this matter rather extensively.
In my case it had to do with an AD on some of the screws used in the
prop, which I am guessing you might remember.
My take-away from those emails was that MT did not feel they had ANY moral or ANY
commercial obligation in this regard, however my circumstances were much different
in that I did not have an approved MT shop (listed on their web page)
sell or mount the prop on my aircraft. And to be fair, that is a BIG difference
as you yourself mentioned.
Being that "The Yak List" has a rather extensive following that includes contact
with many owners and prospective buyers of MT props Chris, I think you have
a much better chance than most to get some resolution to this matter. Please
give a shot to contacting Gerd and keeping the members of this list informed
of your progress. I for one, will support your effort in any way that I can.
Mark
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Richard Goode
Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2014 1:20 AM
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: MT Prop TBO
--> <richard.goode@russianaeros.com>
I would say that that is completely unacceptable, and that they have a strong moral
and commercial obligation to you to resolve the problem that they have created,
even if unwittingly.
I would also suggest that you write directly to Gerd Muhlbauer, the owner of MT
and complain directly.
Richard
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Chris Ober
Sent: 05 August 2014 18:05
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: MT Prop TBO
It was purchased from Aircraft Propeller Services, Inc. in Wheeling, IL. They are
a MT approved shop listed on the MT website for certified service shops. Needing
service I called them and they informed me that even though they sold it,
they cannot service it. They knew exactly what it was (Russian) when they sold
it. Only now under direction from MT in Florida (corporate USA) they cannot
service the prop. They said they use to be able to service them. Now they can
not. It's as simple as that.
Sent from my iPhone
On Aug 5, 2014, at 11:18 AM, "Richard Goode" <richard.goode@russianaeros.com> wrote:
--> <richard.goode@russianaeros.com>
Of course, I know nothing about the particular circumstances of your propeller.
But, are you saying that an official MT agent sold you this (Russian) propeller;
installed it and now won't support it? Or, are you saying that you obtained
the propeller and had it installed on your plane by an MT agent? If the first,
then I suggest they have a strong responsibility to continue to support it.
But I suspect the practicality is the second case, and if so, I would agree with
their position. To be specific, did they know what prop it was before installing
it?
Then, you are being rather simplistic to think that MT are going to look for reasons
not to service your prop why on earth would they do that, except in this
very particular case of removing props from service that were manufactured illegally;
did not have MT certification so were, by definition, not legally airworthy.
Richard
Rhodds Farm
Lyonshall
Hereford
HR5 3LW
United Kingdom
Tel: +94 (0) 81 241 5137 (Sri Lanka)
Tel: +44 (0) 1544 340120
Fax: +44 (0) 1544 340129
www.russianaeros.com
Im currently in Sri Lanka but this Mail is working,and my local phone is +94 779
132 160.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Chris Ober
Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2014 8:02 PM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: MT Prop TBO
MT "blacked out" these propellers so now they are screwing their customers. My
prop was bought and installed by a MT prop shop in Illinois. MT tried to tell
me it shouldn't have been brought into the country. They were trying to blame
someone when it was one if their approved service companies that sold and installed
it! Now when I try to go back to the same company that installed it, they
won't touch it. They're telling me that MT won't allow it. They're using the
Russian made excuse to not servicing my prop. They allowed this prop to go to
a factory approved center, be installed, then refuse to service it?! What's to
stop them from using another excuse next time? I for one will not risk buying
another 'single use' prop only to be stuck with a wall ornament!
Chris
Sent from my iPhone
On Aug 5, 2014, at 7:18 AM, "Richard Goode" <richard.goode@russianaeros.com> wrote:
--> <richard.goode@russianaeros.com>
I will try to set some issues straight:
To make my position clear, I am biased in favour of MT props, firstly because I
sell them and secondly because I really believe they are good. For me a really
important aspect is that they are fully certificated and if you have had, like
me, a propeller failure on a "experimental" propeller you certainly would never
want to have it again!
Then, MT will overhaul any prop of theirs, however old or however much beyond the
TBO.
In terms of the Russian MT props, the situation is simply that MT gave a licence
to Speriot in Russia to make MTV-9 props, on the basis that they would be given
a certain royalty for each propeller produced. In the event, the Russians
only declared every second? third? Propeller that they made, so clearly saved
a huge amount on royalty fees! It took MT a while to realise what was happening
since these Russian props with serial numbers that had never been declared to
MT started coming back to the factory or MT overseas agents for overhaul.
So MT decided to "black" all these Russian props, which simply means that you cannot
get them overhauled, and since the Russian factory is no longer in business,
owners of these props will end up with quite expensive ornaments. Because
of our relationship with MT they have allowed us to buy some of these Russian
props that they themselves have bought in, but strictly for non-aviation use,
and we have made a number of "wind machines"
with these props and M 14 P engines for film studios.
I have heard excellent reports of the Whirlwind propellers, but I will always have
the basic concern about the lack of certification and the test program that
this implies. Yurgis Kairis had a catastrophic failure when an entire blade
departed from his Whirlwind on his Sukhoi 31. The forces tore the gearbox from
the crankcase; broke most of the engine mounts and a lot of other frame tubes.
Fortunately he was at low altitude with a long runway ahead. Having said that,
I am sure that appropriate modifications were subsequently made.
Richard Goode
Rhodds Farm
Lyonshall
Hereford
HR5 3LW
United Kingdom
Tel: +94 (0) 81 241 5137 (Sri Lanka)
Tel: +44 (0) 1544 340120
Fax: +44 (0) 1544 340129
www.russianaeros.com
Im currently in Sri Lanka but this Mail is working,and my local phone is
+94 779 132 160.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dale
Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2014 8:17 AM
Subject: Yak-List: Re: MT Prop TBO
When MT blades are overhauled they are only done in Germany from what I understand.
The blades are stripped, inspected, repaired, re-glassed, painted and a
new stainless edge is installed and your time starts over..
The Hub can be overhauled in the states and all service bulletins are complied
with and there are some of those. At overhaul all the seals , bolts and basically
anything that get wear or tightened is replaced.
I got the distinct impression that if you needed a repair after TBO that would
not happen per a agreement with MT. Same as the Russian MT , No Service at all
on those. Someone can correct me but that is what I ran into.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=427994#427994
--
This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner,
and is believed to be clean.
--
This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner,
and is believed to be clean.
--
This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner,
and is believed to be clean.
Message 10
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Yak18T air leak |
Hi
I actually never check the emergency systems and or tap/valve that it will actually
work in the case of an emergency.
Also never saw this in check lists.
What is the best way to do this and how often?
Will that assist in finding faults as described in this thread?
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=428105#428105
Message 11
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Yak18T air leak |
PaulW wrote:
>
> I actually never check the emergency systems and or tap/valve that it will actually
work in the case of an emergency.
> Also never saw this in check lists.
> What is the best way to do this and how often?
This is an annual maintenance emergency gear operation check item with the aircraft
mounted on jacks.
> Will that assist in finding faults as described in this thread?
Not really - the primary issue here is what's the source of the leak, not whether
the protection valve will work >5 bar (secondary issue).
Rob R
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=428109#428109
Message 12
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
I understand what you say, but the simple fact, as you have explained it anyway,
is that these guys sold this propeller and now refuse to service it. This becomes
their problem and not yours in my view. Of course, I know nothing of the
detail of what happened, but anyone who sells a product and then either refuses
to, or is unable to, for whatever reason, service it must come up with a solution
to the problem!
I have personally taken up this issue today with Gerd Mulhbauer, and said very
forcefully that he needs to get better PR and needs to make sure that customers
are far better informed about what has happened and why. But this should not
prevent you acting against this original seller.
Richard
Rhodds Farm
Lyonshall
Hereford
HR5 3LW
United Kingdom
Tel: +94 (0) 81 241 5137 (Sri Lanka)
Tel: +44 (0) 1544 340120
Fax: +44 (0) 1544 340129
www.russianaeros.com
Im currently in Sri Lanka but this Mail is working,and my local phone is +94 779
132 160.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Chris Ober
Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2014 7:28 PM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: MT Prop TBO
I've only had my Yak for 8 months. I talked extensively to the previous owner and
he is one that purchased the MT prop in late 2001. He had no idea that it was
Russian made. They didn't disclose that to him. He had no knowledge of it being
made in Russia. He thought he was buying a MT.
After talking with the prop shop, they are unsure if they realized it at the time
that it was Russian made. These were being made on a contract to German specs,
they were always intended to be genuine MT props.
They made it very clear that they knew that they sold it. However it's MT, not
them that won't allow it to be serviced.
Chris
Sent from my iPhone
On Aug 5, 2014, at 1:19 PM, "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
wrote:
--> <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
When did you purchased this prop Chris? I ran into this issue myself in 2004/2005
time frame. If this shop sold you this prop AFTER that year, then I would
offer that they might have committed fraud, plain and simple. That is at least
my opinion based on conversations with MT, a few emails from Richard, and
more than a few folks in Russia.
And Richard... it would probably be a good thing if MT told the world about these
Russian props, that they included the details and their refusal to service
them at EVERY SERVICE CENTER OUT THERE, and also put word of it on their WEB SITE
along with a complete method by which to identify them.
This would be the responsable and professional thing to do in order to keep their
present and potential customers from being burnt. That would be a lot better
than an occasional email on the YAK List. That being said, this is yet another
reason why I look at MT somewhat askance. Hey, I get that it makes sense
to Germans.
Let's look at the facts. You say it was manufactured illegally, did not have
MT certification, and by definition is not airworthy.
But in reality, "If it looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it's a .... um...
ah... IT'S A GOOSE"...... well, how are people supposed to KNOW that?
I believe the reality is that ORIGINALLY Russia was supposed to be able to LEGALLY
manufacture these props, but "the deal fell through" and why that exactly
happened is open to a lot of hear-say and interpretation.
Chris got screwed. And MT holds part of the blame. The percentage to be determined.
________________________________
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com]
on behalf of Chris Ober [christopherjober@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2014 1:05 PM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: MT Prop TBO
It was purchased from Aircraft Propeller Services, Inc. in Wheeling, IL. They are
a MT approved shop listed on the MT website for certified service shops. Needing
service I called them and they informed me that even though they sold it,
they cannot service it. They knew exactly what it was (Russian) when they sold
it. Only now under direction from MT in Florida (corporate USA) they cannot
service the prop. They said they use to be able to service them. Now they can
not. It's as simple as that.
Sent from my iPhone
On Aug 5, 2014, at 11:18 AM, "Richard Goode" <richard.goode@russianaeros.com> wrote:
--> <richard.goode@russianaeros.com>
Of course, I know nothing about the particular circumstances of your propeller.
But, are you saying that an official MT agent sold you this (Russian) propeller;
installed it and now won't support it? Or, are you saying that you obtained
the propeller and had it installed on your plane by an MT agent? If the first,
then I suggest they have a strong responsibility to continue to support it.
But I suspect the practicality is the second case, and if so, I would agree with
their position. To be specific, did they know what prop it was before installing
it?
Then, you are being rather simplistic to think that MT are going to look for reasons
not to service your prop why on earth would they do that, except in this
very particular case of removing props from service that were manufactured illegally;
did not have MT certification so were, by definition, not legally airworthy.
Richard
Rhodds Farm
Lyonshall
Hereford
HR5 3LW
United Kingdom
Tel: +94 (0) 81 241 5137 (Sri Lanka)
Tel: +44 (0) 1544 340120
Fax: +44 (0) 1544 340129
www.russianaeros.com<http://www.russianaeros.com/>
Im currently in Sri Lanka but this Mail is working,and my local phone is +94 779
132 160.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Chris Ober
Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2014 8:02 PM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: MT Prop TBO
MT "blacked out" these propellers so now they are screwing their customers. My
prop was bought and installed by a MT prop shop in Illinois. MT tried to tell
me it shouldn't have been brought into the country. They were trying to blame
someone when it was one if their approved service companies that sold and installed
it! Now when I try to go back to the same company that installed it, they
won't touch it. They're telling me that MT won't allow it. They're using the
Russian made excuse to not servicing my prop. They allowed this prop to go to
a factory approved center, be installed, then refuse to service it?! What's to
stop them from using another excuse next time? I for one will not risk buying
another 'single use' prop only to be stuck with a wall ornament!
Chris
Sent from my iPhone
On Aug 5, 2014, at 7:18 AM, "Richard Goode" <richard.goode@russianaeros.com> wrote:
--> <richard.goode@russianaeros.com>
I will try to set some issues straight:
To make my position clear, I am biased in favour of MT props, firstly because I
sell them and secondly because I really believe they are good. For me a really
important aspect is that they are fully certificated and if you have had, like
me, a propeller failure on a "experimental" propeller you certainly would never
want to have it again!
Then, MT will overhaul any prop of theirs, however old or however much beyond the
TBO.
In terms of the Russian MT props, the situation is simply that MT gave a licence
to Speriot in Russia to make MTV-9 props, on the basis that they would be given
a certain royalty for each propeller produced. In the event, the Russians
only declared every second? third? Propeller that they made, so clearly saved
a huge amount on royalty fees! It took MT a while to realise what was happening
since these Russian props with serial numbers that had never been declared to
MT started coming back to the factory or MT overseas agents for overhaul.
So MT decided to "black" all these Russian props, which simply means that you cannot
get them overhauled, and since the Russian factory is no longer in business,
owners of these props will end up with quite expensive ornaments. Because
of our relationship with MT they have allowed us to buy some of these Russian
props that they themselves have bought in, but strictly for non-aviation use,
and we have made a number of "wind machines"
with these props and M 14 P engines for film studios.
I have heard excellent reports of the Whirlwind propellers, but I will always have
the basic concern about the lack of certification and the test program that
this implies. Yurgis Kairis had a catastrophic failure when an entire blade
departed from his Whirlwind on his Sukhoi 31. The forces tore the gearbox from
the crankcase; broke most of the engine mounts and a lot of other frame tubes.
Fortunately he was at low altitude with a long runway ahead. Having said that,
I am sure that appropriate modifications were subsequently made.
Richard Goode
Rhodds Farm
Lyonshall
Hereford
HR5 3LW
United Kingdom
Tel: +94 (0) 81 241 5137 (Sri Lanka)
Tel: +44 (0) 1544 340120
Fax: +44 (0) 1544 340129
www.russianaeros.com<http://www.russianaeros.com/>
Im currently in Sri Lanka but this Mail is working,and my local phone is
+94 779 132 160.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dale
Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2014 8:17 AM
Subject: Yak-List: Re: MT Prop TBO
When MT blades are overhauled they are only done in Germany from what I understand.
The blades are stripped, inspected, repaired, re-glassed, painted and a
new stainless edge is installed and your time starts over..
The Hub can be overhauled in the states and all service bulletins are complied
with and there are some of those. At overhaul all the seals , bolts and basically
anything that get wear or tightened is replaced.
I got the distinct impression that if you needed a repair after TBO that would
not happen per a agreement with MT. Same as the Russian MT , No Service at all
on those. Someone can correct me but that is what I ran into.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=427994#427994
--
This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner,
and is believed to be clean.
--
This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner,
and is believed to be clean.
--
This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner,
and is believed to be clean.
Message 13
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
I just spoke with the FSDO this morning about getting a new set of Op's
limitations for the CJ I just bought. He started talking about phase 1
flight and such, and I had to stop him to explain that I just need the home
base and the pilot changed, and that the plane has already gone through all
it's flight tests.
He said to mail in the info or get a DAR.
Can I get any suggestions on the the most painless way, I can't remember
the process from my previous airplanes.
Ernie
Message 14
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Ernie,
Hopefully you have the set of operating limitations that the previous owner had
from the previous base of operations.
Here is a note about that.
It is against regulations for the FAA to make any changes to Operating Limitations
already established for your aircraft that presently exist for a simple owner
change. If you do not hold those op limits in hand, then a call to the FSDO
of the previous owner will produce them. They .. .the FAA.... are required
to keep them on file.
You simply take the old Operating Limitations, and send them in along with everything
else needed to get the new Special Airworthiness Cert. as both must have
the same date.
If the guy at your FSDO does not want to listen to this, do not debate it. I
assume you are already an EAA member. Call the EAA's Govt. branch and tell them
about your issue. They will give you every single rule and regulation that
you need to know, and you then PROVIDE that to the FAA and tell them that IAW
such and such, you need them to perform said actions. Never ask the FAA what
YOU need to do. Tell them what THEY need to do, and have in advance a copy
of the rules and regs accordingly.
Now on the other hand.... if you desire to CHANGE any of your Operating Limitations,
that opens up a bag of worms that you have to be very careful of, because
then is when a DAR will come in, and then is when the FAA can add all sorts
of bad things.
Be careful.
Mark
p.s. This is the short version. Others on here know much more, but that is how
I recommend handling it.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ernest Martinez
Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2014 2:20 PM
Subject: Yak-List: AW Certificate
I just spoke with the FSDO this morning about getting a new set of Op's limitations
for the CJ I just bought. He started talking about phase 1 flight and such,
and I had to stop him to explain that I just need the home base and the pilot
changed, and that the plane has already gone through all it's flight tests.
He said to mail in the info or get a DAR.
Can I get any suggestions on the the most painless way, I can't remember the process
from my previous airplanes.
Ernie
Message 15
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: AW Certificate |
I have the original Ops limitations in hand. Do I also mail in the AW cert
that I have? That will ground the airplane for as long as they wish to hold
this up.
Ernie
On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 2:35 PM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD <
mark.bitterlich@navy.mil> wrote:
> mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>
> Ernie,
>
> Hopefully you have the set of operating limitations that the previous
> owner had from the previous base of operations.
>
> Here is a note about that.
>
> It is against regulations for the FAA to make any changes to Operating
> Limitations already established for your aircraft that presently exist for
> a simple owner change. If you do not hold those op limits in hand, then a
> call to the FSDO of the previous owner will produce them. They .. .the
> FAA.... are required to keep them on file.
>
> You simply take the old Operating Limitations, and send them in along with
> everything else needed to get the new Special Airworthiness Cert. as both
> must have the same date.
>
> If the guy at your FSDO does not want to listen to this, do not debate it.
> I assume you are already an EAA member. Call the EAA's Govt. branch and
> tell them about your issue. They will give you every single rule and
> regulation that you need to know, and you then PROVIDE that to the FAA and
> tell them that IAW such and such, you need them to perform said actions.
> Never ask the FAA what YOU need to do. Tell them what THEY need to do,
> and have in advance a copy of the rules and regs accordingly.
>
> Now on the other hand.... if you desire to CHANGE any of your Operating
> Limitations, that opens up a bag of worms that you have to be very careful
> of, because then is when a DAR will come in, and then is when the FAA can
> add all sorts of bad things.
>
> Be careful.
>
> Mark
>
> p.s. This is the short version. Others on here know much more, but that
> is how I recommend handling it.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:
> owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ernest Martinez
> Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2014 2:20 PM
> To: yak-list
> Subject: Yak-List: AW Certificate
>
> I just spoke with the FSDO this morning about getting a new set of Op's
> limitations for the CJ I just bought. He started talking about phase 1
> flight and such, and I had to stop him to explain that I just need the home
> base and the pilot changed, and that the plane has already gone through all
> it's flight tests.
>
> He said to mail in the info or get a DAR.
>
> Can I get any suggestions on the the most painless way, I can't remember
> the process from my previous airplanes.
>
> Ernie
>
>
Message 16
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
I agree with Richard,
This is why I FIRST do with business with those that support our planes/group.
Doug, Richard, Kimball's, Jill, etc. Thanks all.
Bear
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Richard Goode
Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2014 1:10 PM
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: MT Prop TBO
--> <richard.goode@russianaeros.com>
I understand what you say, but the simple fact, as you have explained it anyway,
is that these guys sold this propeller and now refuse to service it. This becomes
their problem and not yours in my view. Of course, I know nothing of the
detail of what happened, but anyone who sells a product and then either refuses
to, or is unable to, for whatever reason, service it must come up with a solution
to the problem!
I have personally taken up this issue today with Gerd Mulhbauer, and said very
forcefully that he needs to get better PR and needs to make sure that customers
are far better informed about what has happened and why. But this should not
prevent you acting against this original seller.
Richard
Rhodds Farm
Lyonshall
Hereford
HR5 3LW
United Kingdom
Tel: +94 (0) 81 241 5137 (Sri Lanka)
Tel: +44 (0) 1544 340120
Fax: +44 (0) 1544 340129
www.russianaeros.com
Im currently in Sri Lanka but this Mail is working,and my local phone is +94 779
132 160.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Chris Ober
Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2014 7:28 PM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: MT Prop TBO
I've only had my Yak for 8 months. I talked extensively to the previous owner and
he is one that purchased the MT prop in late 2001. He had no idea that it was
Russian made. They didn't disclose that to him. He had no knowledge of it being
made in Russia. He thought he was buying a MT.
After talking with the prop shop, they are unsure if they realized it at the time
that it was Russian made. These were being made on a contract to German specs,
they were always intended to be genuine MT props.
They made it very clear that they knew that they sold it. However it's MT, not
them that won't allow it to be serviced.
Chris
Sent from my iPhone
On Aug 5, 2014, at 1:19 PM, "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
wrote:
--> <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
When did you purchased this prop Chris? I ran into this issue myself in 2004/2005
time frame. If this shop sold you this prop AFTER that year, then I would
offer that they might have committed fraud, plain and simple. That is at least
my opinion based on conversations with MT, a few emails from Richard, and
more than a few folks in Russia.
And Richard... it would probably be a good thing if MT told the world about these
Russian props, that they included the details and their refusal to service
them at EVERY SERVICE CENTER OUT THERE, and also put word of it on their WEB SITE
along with a complete method by which to identify them.
This would be the responsable and professional thing to do in order to keep their
present and potential customers from being burnt. That would be a lot better
than an occasional email on the YAK List. That being said, this is yet another
reason why I look at MT somewhat askance. Hey, I get that it makes sense
to Germans.
Let's look at the facts. You say it was manufactured illegally, did not have
MT certification, and by definition is not airworthy.
But in reality, "If it looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it's a .... um...
ah... IT'S A GOOSE"...... well, how are people supposed to KNOW that?
I believe the reality is that ORIGINALLY Russia was supposed to be able to LEGALLY
manufacture these props, but "the deal fell through" and why that exactly
happened is open to a lot of hear-say and interpretation.
Chris got screwed. And MT holds part of the blame. The percentage to be determined.
________________________________
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com]
on behalf of Chris Ober [christopherjober@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2014 1:05 PM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: MT Prop TBO
It was purchased from Aircraft Propeller Services, Inc. in Wheeling, IL. They are
a MT approved shop listed on the MT website for certified service shops. Needing
service I called them and they informed me that even though they sold it,
they cannot service it. They knew exactly what it was (Russian) when they sold
it. Only now under direction from MT in Florida (corporate USA) they cannot
service the prop. They said they use to be able to service them. Now they can
not. It's as simple as that.
Sent from my iPhone
On Aug 5, 2014, at 11:18 AM, "Richard Goode" <richard.goode@russianaeros.com> wrote:
--> <richard.goode@russianaeros.com>
Of course, I know nothing about the particular circumstances of your propeller.
But, are you saying that an official MT agent sold you this (Russian) propeller;
installed it and now won't support it? Or, are you saying that you obtained
the propeller and had it installed on your plane by an MT agent? If the first,
then I suggest they have a strong responsibility to continue to support it.
But I suspect the practicality is the second case, and if so, I would agree with
their position. To be specific, did they know what prop it was before installing
it?
Then, you are being rather simplistic to think that MT are going to look for reasons
not to service your prop why on earth would they do that, except in this
very particular case of removing props from service that were manufactured illegally;
did not have MT certification so were, by definition, not legally airworthy.
Richard
Rhodds Farm
Lyonshall
Hereford
HR5 3LW
United Kingdom
Tel: +94 (0) 81 241 5137 (Sri Lanka)
Tel: +44 (0) 1544 340120
Fax: +44 (0) 1544 340129
www.russianaeros.com<http://www.russianaeros.com/>
Im currently in Sri Lanka but this Mail is working,and my local phone is +94 779
132 160.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Chris Ober
Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2014 8:02 PM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: MT Prop TBO
MT "blacked out" these propellers so now they are screwing their customers. My
prop was bought and installed by a MT prop shop in Illinois. MT tried to tell
me it shouldn't have been brought into the country. They were trying to blame
someone when it was one if their approved service companies that sold and installed
it! Now when I try to go back to the same company that installed it, they
won't touch it. They're telling me that MT won't allow it. They're using the
Russian made excuse to not servicing my prop. They allowed this prop to go to
a factory approved center, be installed, then refuse to service it?! What's to
stop them from using another excuse next time? I for one will not risk buying
another 'single use' prop only to be stuck with a wall ornament!
Chris
Sent from my iPhone
On Aug 5, 2014, at 7:18 AM, "Richard Goode" <richard.goode@russianaeros.com> wrote:
--> <richard.goode@russianaeros.com>
I will try to set some issues straight:
To make my position clear, I am biased in favour of MT props, firstly because I
sell them and secondly because I really believe they are good. For me a really
important aspect is that they are fully certificated and if you have had, like
me, a propeller failure on a "experimental" propeller you certainly would never
want to have it again!
Then, MT will overhaul any prop of theirs, however old or however much beyond the
TBO.
In terms of the Russian MT props, the situation is simply that MT gave a licence
to Speriot in Russia to make MTV-9 props, on the basis that they would be given
a certain royalty for each propeller produced. In the event, the Russians
only declared every second? third? Propeller that they made, so clearly saved
a huge amount on royalty fees! It took MT a while to realise what was happening
since these Russian props with serial numbers that had never been declared to
MT started coming back to the factory or MT overseas agents for overhaul.
So MT decided to "black" all these Russian props, which simply means that you cannot
get them overhauled, and since the Russian factory is no longer in business,
owners of these props will end up with quite expensive ornaments. Because
of our relationship with MT they have allowed us to buy some of these Russian
props that they themselves have bought in, but strictly for non-aviation use,
and we have made a number of "wind machines"
with these props and M 14 P engines for film studios.
I have heard excellent reports of the Whirlwind propellers, but I will always have
the basic concern about the lack of certification and the test program that
this implies. Yurgis Kairis had a catastrophic failure when an entire blade
departed from his Whirlwind on his Sukhoi 31. The forces tore the gearbox from
the crankcase; broke most of the engine mounts and a lot of other frame tubes.
Fortunately he was at low altitude with a long runway ahead. Having said that,
I am sure that appropriate modifications were subsequently made.
Richard Goode
Rhodds Farm
Lyonshall
Hereford
HR5 3LW
United Kingdom
Tel: +94 (0) 81 241 5137 (Sri Lanka)
Tel: +44 (0) 1544 340120
Fax: +44 (0) 1544 340129
www.russianaeros.com<http://www.russianaeros.com/>
Im currently in Sri Lanka but this Mail is working,and my local phone is
+94 779 132 160.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dale
Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2014 8:17 AM
Subject: Yak-List: Re: MT Prop TBO
When MT blades are overhauled they are only done in Germany from what I understand.
The blades are stripped, inspected, repaired, re-glassed, painted and a
new stainless edge is installed and your time starts over..
The Hub can be overhauled in the states and all service bulletins are complied
with and there are some of those. At overhaul all the seals , bolts and basically
anything that get wear or tightened is replaced.
I got the distinct impression that if you needed a repair after TBO that would
not happen per a agreement with MT. Same as the Russian MT , No Service at all
on those. Someone can correct me but that is what I ran into.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=427994#427994
--
This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner,
and is believed to be clean.
--
This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner,
and is believed to be clean.
--
This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner,
and is believed to be clean.
Message 17
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Actually Ernie, I believe the aircraft is grounded as soon as you purchased and
moved it. Not that people really do this that often, but you are supposed to
have had a Ferry Flight permit to move it from where it was to where it now
is. Once it gets to its new home, the old Op Limits that went along with the
old AW Cert are null and void, the moment the new registration cert paperwork
is dated.
If the FAA has not officially been informed that the plane is sold, then you could
probably fly it with the old paperwork but you're walking on thin ice. Also
is the matter of insurance. Bet you dollars to donuts that they would not
be real happy with that kind of situation should an accident occur.
I am in NO WAY a Legal Eagle on this matter. The EAA Govt. Branch is very supportive,
they know EVERYTHING, and are your go-to folks. Listen to them, not
me... I am merely "suggesting".
Mark
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ernest Martinez
Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2014 2:42 PM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: AW Certificate
I have the original Ops limitations in hand. Do I also mail in the AW cert that
I have? That will ground the airplane for as long as they wish to hold this up.
Ernie
On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 2:35 PM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
wrote:
Ernie,
Hopefully you have the set of operating limitations that the previous owner
had from the previous base of operations.
Here is a note about that.
It is against regulations for the FAA to make any changes to Operating
Limitations already established for your aircraft that presently exist for a simple
owner change. If you do not hold those op limits in hand, then a call
to the FSDO of the previous owner will produce them. They .. .the FAA.... are
required to keep them on file.
You simply take the old Operating Limitations, and send them in along with
everything else needed to get the new Special Airworthiness Cert. as both
must have the same date.
If the guy at your FSDO does not want to listen to this, do not debate
it. I assume you are already an EAA member. Call the EAA's Govt. branch and
tell them about your issue. They will give you every single rule and regulation
that you need to know, and you then PROVIDE that to the FAA and tell them
that IAW such and such, you need them to perform said actions. Never ask the
FAA what YOU need to do. Tell them what THEY need to do, and have in advance
a copy of the rules and regs accordingly.
Now on the other hand.... if you desire to CHANGE any of your Operating
Limitations, that opens up a bag of worms that you have to be very careful of,
because then is when a DAR will come in, and then is when the FAA can add all
sorts of bad things.
Be careful.
Mark
p.s. This is the short version. Others on here know much more, but that
is how I recommend handling it.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ernest Martinez
Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2014 2:20 PM
To: yak-list
Subject: Yak-List: AW Certificate
I just spoke with the FSDO this morning about getting a new set of Op's
limitations for the CJ I just bought. He started talking about phase 1 flight
and such, and I had to stop him to explain that I just need the home base and
the pilot changed, and that the plane has already gone through all it's flight
tests.
He said to mail in the info or get a DAR.
Can I get any suggestions on the the most painless way, I can't remember
the process from my previous airplanes.
Ernie
==========
target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
==========
MS -
k">http://forums.matronics.com
==========
e -
-Matt Dralle, List Admin.
t="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
==========
Message 18
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: AW Certificate |
Mark,
Thanks for your advice on checking with EAA. With a few clicks I found
this. Turns out, when an EE aircraft changes hands all that one needs to do
is send a program letter to the local FSDO, no need for new AW cert or Ops
Limitations. Yaaa!
*FAA Clarifies Guidance for Experimental Exhibition and Air Racing
Airworthiness Certificates*
*By Bill Fischer, Executive Director, EAA Warbirds of America*
January 20, 2012 - The Federal Aviation Administration has issued a
memorandum providing clarification to FAA Order 8130.2G, Airworthiness
Certification of Aircraft and Related Products, chapter 4, section 10. T
he
memorandum authorizes deviation to the Order, clarifying operating
limitations placed on experimental airworthiness certificates issued for
the purpose of exhibition or air racing.
This is welcomed news for EAA Warbirds of America and other industry
groups, who have advocated for years to simplify the Order, yet maintain
the highest levels of aviation safety. Going back as far as 2005, EAA
Warbirds of America, along with the Commemorative Air Force, Classic Jet
Aircraft Association, Army Aviation Heritage Foundation, Aircraft Owners
and Pilots Association, Courtesy Aircraft, and others have worked
collaboratively with the FAA to identify areas in the Order which needed
clarification =93 both for the owner/operator and the FAA Inspecto
rs in the
field. Meetings were held at EAA Headquarters in Oshkosh, WI and FAA
Headquarters in Washington D.C.
All parties agreed to review existing operating limitations based on
four safety and operational qualifiers:
Aircraft fleet and individual aircraft flight safety records;
Proven aircraft maintenance programs;
Pilot training and proficiency programs;
Eliminating duplication of 14 CFR Part 91 requirements.
What does this mean for owners who operate aircraft certificated in the
experimental exhibition or air racing category? Here are several key poi
nts:
All previously issued airworthiness certificates and operating
limitations will remain valid unless changes are requested by the applic
ant
or reexamined by the FAA in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 44709.
If the aircraft changes owners or its home base airport, owners need to
submit a new Program Letter to the geographically responsible FSDO, but
it=99s not necessary to re-issue the airworthiness certificate & o
perating
limitations.
Pilots operating aircraft and passengers of aircraft equipped with an
ejection propellant system installed, whether armed or not armed, must
satisfactorily complete and FAA accepted ejection seat training program
for
the pilot and passenger.
Provisions have been made for consideration of Pioneer Era (prior to
1914) Aircraft =93 replica, reproduction, restoration, or similar
aircraft
for certification.
Aircraft are now divided into six (6) groups, based on the aircraft
weight, power plant, or other operational considerations. These aircraft
groupings help establish standardized operating limitations and inspecti
on
requirements.
Aircraft powered by electric or rocket motors are allowed to be
certificated within Group 6. While this is would tend not to apply to
Warbird type aircraft (unless someone plans to restore and fly a ME-163!
),
it does provide an avenue for innovative aviators to get their aircraft
certificated.
On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 2:53 PM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD <
mark.bitterlich@navy.mil> wrote:
> mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>
> Actually Ernie, I believe the aircraft is grounded as soon as you
> purchased and moved it. Not that people really do this that often, but
> you are supposed to have had a Ferry Flight permit to move it from where
it
> was to where it now is. Once it gets to its new home, the old Op Limits
> that went along with the old AW Cert are null and void, the moment the ne
w
> registration cert paperwork is dated.
>
> If the FAA has not officially been informed that the plane is sold, then
> you could probably fly it with the old paperwork but you're walking on th
in
> ice. Also is the matter of insurance. Bet you dollars to donuts that
> they would not be real happy with that kind of situation should an accide
nt
> occur.
>
> I am in NO WAY a Legal Eagle on this matter. The EAA Govt. Branch is
> very supportive, they know EVERYTHING, and are your go-to folks. Listen
> to them, not me... I am merely "suggesting".
>
> Mark
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:
> owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ernest Martinez
> Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2014 2:42 PM
> To: yak-list
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: AW Certificate
>
> I have the original Ops limitations in hand. Do I also mail in the AW cer
t
> that I have? That will ground the airplane for as long as they wish to ho
ld
> this up.
>
> Ernie
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 2:35 PM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD <
> mark.bitterlich@navy.mil> wrote:
>
>
> WD" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>
> Ernie,
>
> Hopefully you have the set of operating limitations that the
> previous owner had from the previous base of operations.
>
> Here is a note about that.
>
> It is against regulations for the FAA to make any changes to
> Operating Limitations already established for your aircraft that presentl
y
> exist for a simple owner change. If you do not hold those op limits in
> hand, then a call to the FSDO of the previous owner will produce them.
> They .. .the FAA.... are required to keep them on file.
>
> You simply take the old Operating Limitations, and send them in
> along with everything else needed to get the new Special Airworthiness
> Cert. as both must have the same date.
>
> If the guy at your FSDO does not want to listen to this, do not
> debate it. I assume you are already an EAA member. Call the EAA's Gov
t.
> branch and tell them about your issue. They will give you every single
> rule and regulation that you need to know, and you then PROVIDE that to t
he
> FAA and tell them that IAW such and such, you need them to perform said
> actions. Never ask the FAA what YOU need to do. Tell them what THEY nee
d
> to do, and have in advance a copy of the rules and regs accordingly.
>
> Now on the other hand.... if you desire to CHANGE any of your
> Operating Limitations, that opens up a bag of worms that you have to be
> very careful of, because then is when a DAR will come in, and then is whe
n
> the FAA can add all sorts of bad things.
>
> Be careful.
>
> Mark
>
> p.s. This is the short version. Others on here know much more,
> but that is how I recommend handling it.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:
> owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ernest Martinez
> Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2014 2:20 PM
> To: yak-list
> Subject: Yak-List: AW Certificate
>
> I just spoke with the FSDO this morning about getting a new set o
f
> Op's limitations for the CJ I just bought. He started talking about phase
1
> flight and such, and I had to stop him to explain that I just need the ho
me
> base and the pilot changed, and that the plane has already gone through a
ll
> it's flight tests.
>
> He said to mail in the info or get a DAR.
>
> Can I get any suggestions on the the most painless way, I can't
> remember the process from my previous airplanes.
>
> Ernie
>
>
> ==========
> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
> ==========
> MS -
> k">http://forums.matronics.com
> ==========
> e -
> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
> t="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
> ==========
>
>
===========
===========
===========
===========
>
>
Message 19
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Well see? I was totally wrong... or more nicely put.... out of touch with the
present requirements.
Thanks for teaching me the right gouge!
You got the best answer possible.... and you can ignore the FAA guy that SHOULD
have told you that. The part where I said "Tell the FAA what THEY need to do"
remains accurate. :-)
So does contacting the EAA. Those folks have been ACES for everything I have ever
needed.
Mark
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ernest Martinez
Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2014 3:02 PM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: AW Certificate
Mark,
Thanks for your advice on checking with EAA. With a few clicks I found this. Turns
out, when an EE aircraft changes hands all that one needs to do is send a
program letter to the local FSDO, no need for new AW cert or Ops Limitations.
Yaaa!
FAA Clarifies Guidance for Experimental Exhibition and Air Racing Airworthiness
Certificates
By Bill Fischer, Executive Director, EAA Warbirds of America
January 20, 2012 - The Federal Aviation Administration has issued a memorandum
providing clarification to FAA Order 8130.2G, Airworthiness Certification
of Aircraft and Related Products, chapter 4, section 10. The memorandum authorizes
deviation to the Order, clarifying operating limitations placed on experimental
airworthiness certificates issued for the purpose of exhibition or
air racing.
This is welcomed news for EAA Warbirds of America and other industry groups,
who have advocated for years to simplify the Order, yet maintain the highest
levels of aviation safety. Going back as far as 2005, EAA Warbirds of America,
along with the Commemorative Air Force, Classic Jet Aircraft Association,
Army Aviation Heritage Foundation, Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association, Courtesy
Aircraft, and others have worked collaboratively with the FAA to identify
areas in the Order which needed clarification both for the owner/operator
and the FAA Inspectors in the field. Meetings were held at EAA Headquarters in
Oshkosh, WI and FAA Headquarters in Washington D.C.
All parties agreed to review existing operating limitations based on four
safety and operational qualifiers:
Aircraft fleet and individual aircraft flight safety records;
Proven aircraft maintenance programs;
Pilot training and proficiency programs;
Eliminating duplication of 14 CFR Part 91 requirements.
What does this mean for owners who operate aircraft certificated in the
experimental exhibition or air racing category? Here are several key points:
All previously issued airworthiness certificates and operating limitations
will remain valid unless changes are requested by the applicant or reexamined
by the FAA in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 44709.
If the aircraft changes owners or its home base airport, owners need to
submit a new Program Letter to the geographically responsible FSDO, but its not
necessary to re-issue the airworthiness certificate & operating limitations.
Pilots operating aircraft and passengers of aircraft equipped with an ejection
propellant system installed, whether armed or not armed, must satisfactorily
complete and FAA accepted ejection seat training program for the pilot
and passenger.
Provisions have been made for consideration of Pioneer Era (prior to 1914)
Aircraft replica, reproduction, restoration, or similar aircraft for certification.
Aircraft are now divided into six (6) groups, based on the aircraft weight,
power plant, or other operational considerations. These aircraft groupings
help establish standardized operating limitations and inspection requirements.
Aircraft powered by electric or rocket motors are allowed to be certificated
within Group 6. While this is would tend not to apply to Warbird type aircraft
(unless someone plans to restore and fly a ME-163!), it does provide an
avenue for innovative aviators to get their aircraft certificated.
On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 2:53 PM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
wrote:
Actually Ernie, I believe the aircraft is grounded as soon as you purchased
and moved it. Not that people really do this that often, but you are supposed
to have had a Ferry Flight permit to move it from where it was to where
it now is. Once it gets to its new home, the old Op Limits that went along with
the old AW Cert are null and void, the moment the new registration cert paperwork
is dated.
If the FAA has not officially been informed that the plane is sold, then
you could probably fly it with the old paperwork but you're walking on thin
ice. Also is the matter of insurance. Bet you dollars to donuts that they would
not be real happy with that kind of situation should an accident occur.
I am in NO WAY a Legal Eagle on this matter. The EAA Govt. Branch is
very supportive, they know EVERYTHING, and are your go-to folks. Listen to them,
not me... I am merely "suggesting".
Mark
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ernest Martinez
Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2014 2:42 PM
To: yak-list
Subject: Re: Yak-List: AW Certificate
I have the original Ops limitations in hand. Do I also mail in the AW cert
that I have? That will ground the airplane for as long as they wish to hold
this up.
Ernie
On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 2:35 PM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
wrote:
Ernie,
Hopefully you have the set of operating limitations that the previous
owner had from the previous base of operations.
Here is a note about that.
It is against regulations for the FAA to make any changes to Operating
Limitations already established for your aircraft that presently exist
for a simple owner change. If you do not hold those op limits in hand, then
a call to the FSDO of the previous owner will produce them. They .. .the FAA....
are required to keep them on file.
You simply take the old Operating Limitations, and send them in
along with everything else needed to get the new Special Airworthiness Cert.
as both must have the same date.
If the guy at your FSDO does not want to listen to this, do not
debate it. I assume you are already an EAA member. Call the EAA's Govt. branch
and tell them about your issue. They will give you every single rule and
regulation that you need to know, and you then PROVIDE that to the FAA and tell
them that IAW such and such, you need them to perform said actions. Never
ask the FAA what YOU need to do. Tell them what THEY need to do, and have in
advance a copy of the rules and regs accordingly.
Now on the other hand.... if you desire to CHANGE any of your Operating
Limitations, that opens up a bag of worms that you have to be very careful
of, because then is when a DAR will come in, and then is when the FAA can
add all sorts of bad things.
Be careful.
Mark
p.s. This is the short version. Others on here know much more,
but that is how I recommend handling it.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ernest Martinez
Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2014 2:20 PM
To: yak-list
Subject: Yak-List: AW Certificate
I just spoke with the FSDO this morning about getting a new set
of Op's limitations for the CJ I just bought. He started talking about phase
1 flight and such, and I had to stop him to explain that I just need the home
base and the pilot changed, and that the plane has already gone through all it's
flight tests.
He said to mail in the info or get a DAR.
Can I get any suggestions on the the most painless way, I can't
remember the process from my previous airplanes.
Ernie
==========
target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
==========
MS -
k">http://forums.matronics.com
==========
e -
-Matt Dralle, List Admin.
t="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
==========
==========
target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
==========
MS -
k">http://forums.matronics.com
==========
e -
-Matt Dralle, List Admin.
t="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
==========
Message 20
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: AW Certificate |
As an added precaution I printed out the order, and will keep it in the
airplane along with the program letter and the original ops limitations.
Ernie
On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 3:15 PM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD <
mark.bitterlich@navy.mil> wrote:
> mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>
> Well see? I was totally wrong... or more nicely put.... out of touch wit
h
> the present requirements.
>
> Thanks for teaching me the right gouge!
>
> You got the best answer possible.... and you can ignore the FAA guy that
> SHOULD have told you that. The part where I said "Tell the FAA what THEY
> need to do" remains accurate. :-)
>
> So does contacting the EAA. Those folks have been ACES for everything I
> have ever needed.
>
>
> Mark
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:
> owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ernest Martinez
> Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2014 3:02 PM
> To: yak-list
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: AW Certificate
>
> Mark,
>
> Thanks for your advice on checking with EAA. With a few clicks I found
> this. Turns out, when an EE aircraft changes hands all that one needs to
do
> is send a program letter to the local FSDO, no need for new AW cert or Op
s
> Limitations. Yaaa!
>
>
> FAA Clarifies Guidance for Experimental Exhibition and Air Racing
> Airworthiness Certificates
>
>
> By Bill Fischer, Executive Director, EAA Warbirds of America
>
> January 20, 2012 - The Federal Aviation Administration has issued
> a memorandum providing clarification to FAA Order 8130.2G, Airworthiness
> Certification of Aircraft and Related Products, chapter 4, section 10. Th
e
> memorandum authorizes deviation to the Order, clarifying operating
> limitations placed on experimental airworthiness certificates issued for
> the purpose of exhibition or air racing.
>
> This is welcomed news for EAA Warbirds of America and other
> industry groups, who have advocated for years to simplify the Order, yet
> maintain the highest levels of aviation safety. Going back as far as 2005
,
> EAA Warbirds of America, along with the Commemorative Air Force, Classic
> Jet Aircraft Association, Army Aviation Heritage Foundation, Aircraft
> Owners and Pilots Association, Courtesy Aircraft, and others have worked
> collaboratively with the FAA to identify areas in the Order which needed
> clarification =93 both for the owner/operator and the FAA Inspector
s in the
> field. Meetings were held at EAA Headquarters in Oshkosh, WI and FAA
> Headquarters in Washington D.C.
>
> All parties agreed to review existing operating limitations based
> on four safety and operational qualifiers:
>
> Aircraft fleet and individual aircraft flight safety records;
>
> Proven aircraft maintenance programs;
>
> Pilot training and proficiency programs;
>
> Eliminating duplication of 14 CFR Part 91 requirements.
>
> What does this mean for owners who operate aircraft certificated
> in the experimental exhibition or air racing category? Here are several k
ey
> points:
>
> All previously issued airworthiness certificates and operating
> limitations will remain valid unless changes are requested by the applica
nt
> or reexamined by the FAA in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 44709.
>
> If the aircraft changes owners or its home base airport, owners
> need to submit a new Program Letter to the geographically responsible FSD
O,
> but it=99s not necessary to re-issue the airworthiness certificate
&
> operating limitations.
>
> Pilots operating aircraft and passengers of aircraft equipped wit
h
> an ejection propellant system installed, whether armed or not armed, must
> satisfactorily complete and FAA accepted ejection seat training program f
or
> the pilot and passenger.
>
> Provisions have been made for consideration of Pioneer Era (prior
> to 1914) Aircraft =93 replica, reproduction, restoration, or simila
r aircraft
> for certification.
>
> Aircraft are now divided into six (6) groups, based on the
> aircraft weight, power plant, or other operational considerations. These
> aircraft groupings help establish standardized operating limitations and
> inspection requirements.
>
> Aircraft powered by electric or rocket motors are allowed to be
> certificated within Group 6. While this is would tend not to apply to
> Warbird type aircraft (unless someone plans to restore and fly a ME-163!)
,
> it does provide an avenue for innovative aviators to get their aircraft
> certificated.
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 2:53 PM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD <
> mark.bitterlich@navy.mil> wrote:
>
>
> WD" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>
>
> Actually Ernie, I believe the aircraft is grounded as soon as you
> purchased and moved it. Not that people really do this that often, but
> you are supposed to have had a Ferry Flight permit to move it from where
it
> was to where it now is. Once it gets to its new home, the old Op Limits
> that went along with the old AW Cert are null and void, the moment the ne
w
> registration cert paperwork is dated.
>
> If the FAA has not officially been informed that the plane is
> sold, then you could probably fly it with the old paperwork but you're
> walking on thin ice. Also is the matter of insurance. Bet you dollars
to
> donuts that they would not be real happy with that kind of situation shou
ld
> an accident occur.
>
> I am in NO WAY a Legal Eagle on this matter. The EAA Govt.
> Branch is very supportive, they know EVERYTHING, and are your go-to folks
.
> Listen to them, not me... I am merely "suggesting".
>
> Mark
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:
> owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ernest Martinez
>
> Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2014 2:42 PM
> To: yak-list
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: AW Certificate
>
> I have the original Ops limitations in hand. Do I also mail in th
e
> AW cert that I have? That will ground the airplane for as long as they wi
sh
> to hold this up.
>
> Ernie
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 2:35 PM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD
<
> mark.bitterlich@navy.mil> wrote:
>
>
> NAVAIR, WD" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>
> Ernie,
>
> Hopefully you have the set of operating limitations that
> the previous owner had from the previous base of operations.
>
> Here is a note about that.
>
> It is against regulations for the FAA to make any changes
> to Operating Limitations already established for your aircraft that
> presently exist for a simple owner change. If you do not hold those op
> limits in hand, then a call to the FSDO of the previous owner will produc
e
> them. They .. .the FAA.... are required to keep them on file.
>
> You simply take the old Operating Limitations, and send
> them in along with everything else needed to get the new Special
> Airworthiness Cert. as both must have the same date.
>
> If the guy at your FSDO does not want to listen to this,
> do not debate it. I assume you are already an EAA member. Call the
> EAA's Govt. branch and tell them about your issue. They will give you
> every single rule and regulation that you need to know, and you then
> PROVIDE that to the FAA and tell them that IAW such and such, you need th
em
> to perform said actions. Never ask the FAA what YOU need to do. Tell th
em
> what THEY need to do, and have in advance a copy of the rules and regs
> accordingly.
>
> Now on the other hand.... if you desire to CHANGE any of
> your Operating Limitations, that opens up a bag of worms that you have to
> be very careful of, because then is when a DAR will come in, and then is
> when the FAA can add all sorts of bad things.
>
> Be careful.
>
> Mark
>
> p.s. This is the short version. Others on here know muc
h
> more, but that is how I recommend handling it.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:
> owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ernest Martinez
> Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2014 2:20 PM
> To: yak-list
> Subject: Yak-List: AW Certificate
>
> I just spoke with the FSDO this morning about getting a
> new set of Op's limitations for the CJ I just bought. He started talking
> about phase 1 flight and such, and I had to stop him to explain that I ju
st
> need the home base and the pilot changed, and that the plane has already
> gone through all it's flight tests.
>
> He said to mail in the info or get a DAR.
>
> Can I get any suggestions on the the most painless way, I
> can't remember the process from my previous airplanes.
>
> Ernie
>
>
> ==========
> target="_blank">
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
> ==========
> MS -
> k">http://forums.matronics.com
> ==========
> e -
> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
> t="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
> ==========
>
>
> ==========
> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
> ==========
> MS -
> k">http://forums.matronics.com
> ==========
> e -
> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
> t="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
> ==========
>
>
===========
===========
===========
===========
>
>
Message 21
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
One last thing on the topic of operating limitations for EE aircraft. If your
old Op Limits have the 300 NM flight limitation rule, and the "must send in an
amendment every time you fly to an airport not listed in your Program Letter"....
those can be removed, but you have to be careful when requesting it. Again,
see EAA.
Mark
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ernest Martinez
Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2014 3:22 PM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: AW Certificate
As an added precaution I printed out the order, and will keep it in the airplane
along with the program letter and the original ops limitations.
Ernie
On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 3:15 PM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
wrote:
Well see? I was totally wrong... or more nicely put.... out of touch with
the present requirements.
Thanks for teaching me the right gouge!
You got the best answer possible.... and you can ignore the FAA guy that
SHOULD have told you that. The part where I said "Tell the FAA what THEY need
to do" remains accurate. :-)
So does contacting the EAA. Those folks have been ACES for everything
I have ever needed.
Mark
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ernest Martinez
Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2014 3:02 PM
To: yak-list
Subject: Re: Yak-List: AW Certificate
Mark,
Thanks for your advice on checking with EAA. With a few clicks I found
this. Turns out, when an EE aircraft changes hands all that one needs to do is
send a program letter to the local FSDO, no need for new AW cert or Ops Limitations.
Yaaa!
FAA Clarifies Guidance for Experimental Exhibition and Air Racing
Airworthiness Certificates
By Bill Fischer, Executive Director, EAA Warbirds of America
January 20, 2012 - The Federal Aviation Administration has issued
a memorandum providing clarification to FAA Order 8130.2G, Airworthiness Certification
of Aircraft and Related Products, chapter 4, section 10. The memorandum
authorizes deviation to the Order, clarifying operating limitations placed
on experimental airworthiness certificates issued for the purpose of exhibition
or air racing.
This is welcomed news for EAA Warbirds of America and other industry
groups, who have advocated for years to simplify the Order, yet maintain
the highest levels of aviation safety. Going back as far as 2005, EAA Warbirds
of America, along with the Commemorative Air Force, Classic Jet Aircraft Association,
Army Aviation Heritage Foundation, Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association,
Courtesy Aircraft, and others have worked collaboratively with the FAA
to identify areas in the Order which needed clarification both for the owner/operator
and the FAA Inspectors in the field. Meetings were held at EAA Headquarters
in Oshkosh, WI and FAA Headquarters in Washington D.C.
All parties agreed to review existing operating limitations based
on four safety and operational qualifiers:
Aircraft fleet and individual aircraft flight safety records;
Proven aircraft maintenance programs;
Pilot training and proficiency programs;
Eliminating duplication of 14 CFR Part 91 requirements.
What does this mean for owners who operate aircraft certificated
in the experimental exhibition or air racing category? Here are several key
points:
All previously issued airworthiness certificates and operating
limitations will remain valid unless changes are requested by the applicant or
reexamined by the FAA in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 44709.
If the aircraft changes owners or its home base airport, owners
need to submit a new Program Letter to the geographically responsible FSDO, but
its not necessary to re-issue the airworthiness certificate & operating limitations.
Pilots operating aircraft and passengers of aircraft equipped with
an ejection propellant system installed, whether armed or not armed, must
satisfactorily complete and FAA accepted ejection seat training program for the
pilot and passenger.
Provisions have been made for consideration of Pioneer Era (prior
to 1914) Aircraft replica, reproduction, restoration, or similar aircraft
for certification.
Aircraft are now divided into six (6) groups, based on the aircraft
weight, power plant, or other operational considerations. These aircraft
groupings help establish standardized operating limitations and inspection requirements.
Aircraft powered by electric or rocket motors are allowed to be
certificated within Group 6. While this is would tend not to apply to Warbird
type aircraft (unless someone plans to restore and fly a ME-163!), it does provide
an avenue for innovative aviators to get their aircraft certificated.
On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 2:53 PM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
wrote:
Actually Ernie, I believe the aircraft is grounded as soon as you
purchased and moved it. Not that people really do this that often, but you
are supposed to have had a Ferry Flight permit to move it from where it was
to where it now is. Once it gets to its new home, the old Op Limits that went
along with the old AW Cert are null and void, the moment the new registration
cert paperwork is dated.
If the FAA has not officially been informed that the plane is sold,
then you could probably fly it with the old paperwork but you're walking
on thin ice. Also is the matter of insurance. Bet you dollars to donuts that
they would not be real happy with that kind of situation should an accident
occur.
I am in NO WAY a Legal Eagle on this matter. The EAA Govt. Branch
is very supportive, they know EVERYTHING, and are your go-to folks. Listen
to them, not me... I am merely "suggesting".
Mark
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ernest Martinez
Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2014 2:42 PM
To: yak-list
Subject: Re: Yak-List: AW Certificate
I have the original Ops limitations in hand. Do I also mail in
the AW cert that I have? That will ground the airplane for as long as they wish
to hold this up.
Ernie
On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 2:35 PM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR,
WD <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil> wrote:
Ernie,
Hopefully you have the set of operating limitations that
the previous owner had from the previous base of operations.
Here is a note about that.
It is against regulations for the FAA to make any changes
to Operating Limitations already established for your aircraft that presently
exist for a simple owner change. If you do not hold those op limits in hand,
then a call to the FSDO of the previous owner will produce them. They ..
.the FAA.... are required to keep them on file.
You simply take the old Operating Limitations, and send
them in along with everything else needed to get the new Special Airworthiness
Cert. as both must have the same date.
If the guy at your FSDO does not want to listen to this,
do not debate it. I assume you are already an EAA member. Call the EAA's
Govt. branch and tell them about your issue. They will give you every single
rule and regulation that you need to know, and you then PROVIDE that to the FAA
and tell them that IAW such and such, you need them to perform said actions.
Never ask the FAA what YOU need to do. Tell them what THEY need to do, and
have in advance a copy of the rules and regs accordingly.
Now on the other hand.... if you desire to CHANGE any of
your Operating Limitations, that opens up a bag of worms that you have to be
very careful of, because then is when a DAR will come in, and then is when the
FAA can add all sorts of bad things.
Be careful.
Mark
p.s. This is the short version. Others on here know much
more, but that is how I recommend handling it.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ernest Martinez
Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2014 2:20 PM
To: yak-list
Subject: Yak-List: AW Certificate
I just spoke with the FSDO this morning about getting a
new set of Op's limitations for the CJ I just bought. He started talking about
phase 1 flight and such, and I had to stop him to explain that I just need the
home base and the pilot changed, and that the plane has already gone through
all it's flight tests.
He said to mail in the info or get a DAR.
Can I get any suggestions on the the most painless way,
I can't remember the process from my previous airplanes.
Ernie
==========
target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
==========
MS -
k">http://forums.matronics.com
==========
e -
-Matt Dralle, List Admin.
t="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
==========
==========
target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
==========
MS -
k">http://forums.matronics.com
==========
e -
-Matt Dralle, List Admin.
t="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
==========
==========
target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
==========
MS -
k">http://forums.matronics.com
==========
e -
-Matt Dralle, List Admin.
t="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
==========
Message 22
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: AW Certificate |
Earnie
A lot of FSDOs want to issue new everything. That is wrong. FAA Order 8130.2
F was likely in use when your acft was put in service. It specifically says y
our ops limits and A/W cert do NOT expire. When you change ownership or loca
tion you have to notify the geographically responsible FSDO of that change a
nd provide any FAA approved mx program (jets) as that is on file at the FSDO
that issued it. Your ops limits and A/W cert are on file at FAA national.
Also remember your Documents are tied to your N number. If you change that t
hen you need to have your FSDO update the ops limits as an example, and you w
ould get a new registration. Lastly, 8130.2G eliminated the 300 nm proficien
cy range restriction as did a previously issues FAA Memo under 8130.2F. Chec
k your ops limits to see what you have.
Hope this is useful :-)
Richard Hess
C 404-964-4885
> On Aug 7, 2014, at 3:21, Ernest Martinez <erniel29@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> As an added precaution I printed out the order, and will keep it in the ai
rplane along with the program letter and the original ops limitations.
>
> Ernie
>
>
>> On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 3:15 PM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD <mark.b
itterlich@navy.mil> wrote:
.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>>
>> Well see? I was totally wrong... or more nicely put.... out of touch wit
h the present requirements.
>>
>> Thanks for teaching me the right gouge!
>>
>> You got the best answer possible.... and you can ignore the FAA guy that S
HOULD have told you that. The part where I said "Tell the FAA what THEY nee
d to do" remains accurate. :-)
>>
>> So does contacting the EAA. Those folks have been ACES for everything I h
ave ever needed.
>>
>>
>> Mark
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@m
atronics.com] On Behalf Of Ernest Martinez
>> Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2014 3:02 PM
>> To: yak-list
>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: AW Certificate
>>
>> Mark,
>>
>> Thanks for your advice on checking with EAA. With a few clicks I found th
is. Turns out, when an EE aircraft changes hands all that one needs to do is
send a program letter to the local FSDO, no need for new AW cert or Ops Lim
itations. Yaaa!
>>
>>
>>
>> FAA Clarifies Guidance for Experimental Exhibition and Air Racing
Airworthiness Certificates
>>
>>
>> By Bill Fischer, Executive Director, EAA Warbirds of America
>>
>> January 20, 2012 - The Federal Aviation Administration has issued
a memorandum providing clarification to FAA Order 8130.2G, Airworthiness Ce
rtification of Aircraft and Related Products, chapter 4, section 10. The mem
orandum authorizes deviation to the Order, clarifying operating limitations p
laced on experimental airworthiness certificates issued for the purpose of e
xhibition or air racing.
>>
>> This is welcomed news for EAA Warbirds of America and other indus
try groups, who have advocated for years to simplify the Order, yet maintain
the highest levels of aviation safety. Going back as far as 2005, EAA Warbi
rds of America, along with the Commemorative Air Force, Classic Jet Aircraft
Association, Army Aviation Heritage Foundation, Aircraft Owners and Pilots A
ssociation, Courtesy Aircraft, and others have worked collaboratively with t
he FAA to identify areas in the Order which needed clarification =93 b
oth for the owner/operator and the FAA Inspectors in the field. Meetings wer
e held at EAA Headquarters in Oshkosh, WI and FAA Headquarters in Washington
D.C.
>>
>> All parties agreed to review existing operating limitations based
on four safety and operational qualifiers:
>>
>> Aircraft fleet and individual aircraft flight safety records;
>>
>> Proven aircraft maintenance programs;
>>
>> Pilot training and proficiency programs;
>>
>> Eliminating duplication of 14 CFR Part 91 requirements.
>>
>> What does this mean for owners who operate aircraft certificated i
n the experimental exhibition or air racing category? Here are several key p
oints:
>>
>> All previously issued airworthiness certificates and operating li
mitations will remain valid unless changes are requested by the applicant or
reexamined by the FAA in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 44709.
>>
>> If the aircraft changes owners or its home base airport, owners n
eed to submit a new Program Letter to the geographically responsible FSDO, b
ut it=99s not necessary to re-issue the airworthiness certificate & op
erating limitations.
>>
>> Pilots operating aircraft and passengers of aircraft equipped wit
h an ejection propellant system installed, whether armed or not armed, must s
atisfactorily complete and FAA accepted ejection seat training program for t
he pilot and passenger.
>>
>> Provisions have been made for consideration of Pioneer Era (prior
to 1914) Aircraft =93 replica, reproduction, restoration, or similar a
ircraft for certification.
>>
>> Aircraft are now divided into six (6) groups, based on the aircra
ft weight, power plant, or other operational considerations. These aircraft g
roupings help establish standardized operating limitations and inspection re
quirements.
>>
>> Aircraft powered by electric or rocket motors are allowed to be c
ertificated within Group 6. While this is would tend not to apply to Warbird
type aircraft (unless someone plans to restore and fly a ME-163!), it does p
rovide an avenue for innovative aviators to get their aircraft certificated.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 2:53 PM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD <mark.b
itterlich@navy.mil> wrote:
>>
>>
D" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>>
>>
>> Actually Ernie, I believe the aircraft is grounded as soon as you
purchased and moved it. Not that people really do this that often, but yo
u are supposed to have had a Ferry Flight permit to move it from where it wa
s to where it now is. Once it gets to its new home, the old Op Limits that w
ent along with the old AW Cert are null and void, the moment the new registr
ation cert paperwork is dated.
>>
>> If the FAA has not officially been informed that the plane is sol
d, then you could probably fly it with the old paperwork but you're walking o
n thin ice. Also is the matter of insurance. Bet you dollars to donuts th
at they would not be real happy with that kind of situation should an accide
nt occur.
>>
>> I am in NO WAY a Legal Eagle on this matter. The EAA Govt. Bran
ch is very supportive, they know EVERYTHING, and are your go-to folks. Lis
ten to them, not me... I am merely "suggesting".
>>
>> Mark
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-
server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ernest Martinez
>>
>> Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2014 2:42 PM
>> To: yak-list
>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: AW Certificate
>>
>> I have the original Ops limitations in hand. Do I also mail in th
e AW cert that I have? That will ground the airplane for as long as they wis
h to hold this up.
>>
>> Ernie
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 2:35 PM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD
<mark.bitterlich@navy.mil> wrote:
>>
>>
AVAIR, WD" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>>
>> Ernie,
>>
>> Hopefully you have the set of operating limitations that t
he previous owner had from the previous base of operations.
>>
>> Here is a note about that.
>>
>> It is against regulations for the FAA to make any changes
to Operating Limitations already established for your aircraft that present
ly exist for a simple owner change. If you do not hold those op limits in h
and, then a call to the FSDO of the previous owner will produce them. They .
. .the FAA.... are required to keep them on file.
>>
>> You simply take the old Operating Limitations, and send t
hem in along with everything else needed to get the new Special Airworthines
s Cert. as both must have the same date.
>>
>> If the guy at your FSDO does not want to listen to this, d
o not debate it. I assume you are already an EAA member. Call the EAA's G
ovt. branch and tell them about your issue. They will give you every single
rule and regulation that you need to know, and you then PROVIDE that to the
FAA and tell them that IAW such and such, you need them to perform said act
ions. Never ask the FAA what YOU need to do. Tell them what THEY need to d
o, and have in advance a copy of the rules and regs accordingly.
>>
>> Now on the other hand.... if you desire to CHANGE any of y
our Operating Limitations, that opens up a bag of worms that you have to be v
ery careful of, because then is when a DAR will come in, and then is when th
e FAA can add all sorts of bad things.
>>
>> Be careful.
>>
>> Mark
>>
>> p.s. This is the short version. Others on here know muc
h more, but that is how I recommend handling it.
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-y
ak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ernest Martinez
>> Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2014 2:20 PM
>> To: yak-list
>> Subject: Yak-List: AW Certificate
>>
>> I just spoke with the FSDO this morning about getting a n
ew set of Op's limitations for the CJ I just bought. He started talking abou
t phase 1 flight and such, and I had to stop him to explain that I just need
the home base and the pilot changed, and that the plane has already gone th
rough all it's flight tests.
>>
>> He said to mail in the info or get a DAR.
>>
>> Can I get any suggestions on the the most painless way, I
can't remember the process from my previous airplanes.
>>
>> Ernie
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ==========
>> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-
List
>> ==========
>> MS -
>> k">http://forums.matronics.com
>> ==========
>> e -
>> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
>> t="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>> ==========
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ==========
>> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
>> ==========
>> MS -
>> k">http://forums.matronics.com
>> ==========
>> e -
>> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
>> t="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>> ==========
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ==========
>> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
>> ==========
>> MS -
>> k">http://forums.matronics.com
>> ==========
>> e -
>> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
>> t="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>> ==========
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3
D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3
D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3
D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3
D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
>
Message 23
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: AW Certificate |
If requesting the removal of the 300 NM proficiency area, which means
the OL's were written prior to Sept. 2007 when the 300 NM proficiency
area was deleted, the FSDO's only choice is to rewrite your OL's to
comply with the latest version of 8130.2x.
Dennis
A. Dennis Savarese
334-285-6263
334-546-8182 (mobile)
www.yak-52.com
Skype - Yakguy1
On 8/6/2014 2:31 PM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD wrote:
>
> One last thing on the topic of operating limitations for EE aircraft. If your
old Op Limits have the 300 NM flight limitation rule, and the "must send in
an amendment every time you fly to an airport not listed in your Program Letter"....
those can be removed, but you have to be careful when requesting it.
Again, see EAA.
>
> Mark
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ernest Martinez
> Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2014 3:22 PM
> To: yak-list
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: AW Certificate
>
> As an added precaution I printed out the order, and will keep it in the airplane
along with the program letter and the original ops limitations.
>
> Ernie
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 3:15 PM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
wrote:
>
>
>
>
> Well see? I was totally wrong... or more nicely put.... out of touch
with the present requirements.
>
> Thanks for teaching me the right gouge!
>
> You got the best answer possible.... and you can ignore the FAA guy
that SHOULD have told you that. The part where I said "Tell the FAA what THEY
need to do" remains accurate. :-)
>
> So does contacting the EAA. Those folks have been ACES for everything
I have ever needed.
>
>
> Mark
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ernest Martinez
>
> Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2014 3:02 PM
> To: yak-list
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: AW Certificate
>
> Mark,
>
> Thanks for your advice on checking with EAA. With a few clicks I found
this. Turns out, when an EE aircraft changes hands all that one needs to do
is send a program letter to the local FSDO, no need for new AW cert or Ops Limitations.
Yaaa!
>
>
> FAA Clarifies Guidance for Experimental Exhibition and Air Racing
Airworthiness Certificates
>
>
> By Bill Fischer, Executive Director, EAA Warbirds of America
>
> January 20, 2012 - The Federal Aviation Administration has issued
a memorandum providing clarification to FAA Order 8130.2G, Airworthiness
Certification of Aircraft and Related Products, chapter 4, section 10. The memorandum
authorizes deviation to the Order, clarifying operating limitations placed
on experimental airworthiness certificates issued for the purpose of exhibition
or air racing.
>
> This is welcomed news for EAA Warbirds of America and other
industry groups, who have advocated for years to simplify the Order, yet maintain
the highest levels of aviation safety. Going back as far as 2005, EAA Warbirds
of America, along with the Commemorative Air Force, Classic Jet Aircraft
Association, Army Aviation Heritage Foundation, Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association,
Courtesy Aircraft, and others have worked collaboratively with the FAA
to identify areas in the Order which needed clarification -- both for the owner/operator
and the FAA Inspectors in the field. Meetings were held at EAA Headquarters
in Oshkosh, WI and FAA Headquarters in Washington D.C.
>
> All parties agreed to review existing operating limitations
based on four safety and operational qualifiers:
>
> Aircraft fleet and individual aircraft flight safety records;
>
> Proven aircraft maintenance programs;
>
> Pilot training and proficiency programs;
>
> Eliminating duplication of 14 CFR Part 91 requirements.
>
> What does this mean for owners who operate aircraft certificated
in the experimental exhibition or air racing category? Here are several key
points:
>
> All previously issued airworthiness certificates and operating
limitations will remain valid unless changes are requested by the applicant
or reexamined by the FAA in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 44709.
>
> If the aircraft changes owners or its home base airport, owners
need to submit a new Program Letter to the geographically responsible FSDO,
but it's not necessary to re-issue the airworthiness certificate & operating
limitations.
>
> Pilots operating aircraft and passengers of aircraft equipped
with an ejection propellant system installed, whether armed or not armed, must
satisfactorily complete and FAA accepted ejection seat training program for
the pilot and passenger.
>
> Provisions have been made for consideration of Pioneer Era (prior
to 1914) Aircraft -- replica, reproduction, restoration, or similar aircraft
for certification.
>
> Aircraft are now divided into six (6) groups, based on the aircraft
weight, power plant, or other operational considerations. These aircraft
groupings help establish standardized operating limitations and inspection
requirements.
>
> Aircraft powered by electric or rocket motors are allowed to
be certificated within Group 6. While this is would tend not to apply to Warbird
type aircraft (unless someone plans to restore and fly a ME-163!), it does
provide an avenue for innovative aviators to get their aircraft certificated.
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 2:53 PM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
wrote:
>
>
>
>
> Actually Ernie, I believe the aircraft is grounded as soon as
you purchased and moved it. Not that people really do this that often, but
you are supposed to have had a Ferry Flight permit to move it from where it was
to where it now is. Once it gets to its new home, the old Op Limits that went
along with the old AW Cert are null and void, the moment the new registration
cert paperwork is dated.
>
> If the FAA has not officially been informed that the plane is
sold, then you could probably fly it with the old paperwork but you're walking
on thin ice. Also is the matter of insurance. Bet you dollars to donuts
that they would not be real happy with that kind of situation should an accident
occur.
>
> I am in NO WAY a Legal Eagle on this matter. The EAA Govt.
Branch is very supportive, they know EVERYTHING, and are your go-to folks.
Listen to them, not me... I am merely "suggesting".
>
> Mark
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ernest Martinez
>
> Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2014 2:42 PM
> To: yak-list
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: AW Certificate
>
> I have the original Ops limitations in hand. Do I also mail
in the AW cert that I have? That will ground the airplane for as long as they
wish to hold this up.
>
> Ernie
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 2:35 PM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR,
WD <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil> wrote:
>
>
>
> Ernie,
>
> Hopefully you have the set of operating limitations
that the previous owner had from the previous base of operations.
>
> Here is a note about that.
>
> It is against regulations for the FAA to make any changes
to Operating Limitations already established for your aircraft that presently
exist for a simple owner change. If you do not hold those op limits in
hand, then a call to the FSDO of the previous owner will produce them. They
.. .the FAA.... are required to keep them on file.
>
> You simply take the old Operating Limitations, and send
them in along with everything else needed to get the new Special Airworthiness
Cert. as both must have the same date.
>
> If the guy at your FSDO does not want to listen to this,
do not debate it. I assume you are already an EAA member. Call the EAA's
Govt. branch and tell them about your issue. They will give you every single
rule and regulation that you need to know, and you then PROVIDE that to the
FAA and tell them that IAW such and such, you need them to perform said actions.
Never ask the FAA what YOU need to do. Tell them what THEY need to do,
and have in advance a copy of the rules and regs accordingly.
>
> Now on the other hand.... if you desire to CHANGE any
of your Operating Limitations, that opens up a bag of worms that you have to
be very careful of, because then is when a DAR will come in, and then is when
the FAA can add all sorts of bad things.
>
> Be careful.
>
> Mark
>
> p.s. This is the short version. Others on here know
much more, but that is how I recommend handling it.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ernest Martinez
> Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2014 2:20 PM
> To: yak-list
> Subject: Yak-List: AW Certificate
>
> I just spoke with the FSDO this morning about getting
a new set of Op's limitations for the CJ I just bought. He started talking about
phase 1 flight and such, and I had to stop him to explain that I just need
the home base and the pilot changed, and that the plane has already gone through
all it's flight tests.
>
> He said to mail in the info or get a DAR.
>
> Can I get any suggestions on the the most painless way,
I can't remember the process from my previous airplanes.
>
> Ernie
>
>
> ==========
> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
> ==========
> MS -
> k">http://forums.matronics.com
> ==========
> e -
> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
> t="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
> ==========
>
>
> ==========
> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
> ==========
> MS -
> k">http://forums.matronics.com
> ==========
> e -
> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
> t="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
> ==========
>
>
> ==========
> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
> ==========
> MS -
> k">http://forums.matronics.com
> ==========
> e -
> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
> t="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
> ==========
>
>
Message 24
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: AW Certificate |
I don't know if it even matters anymore, since the new rule states that new
OL's aren't required with the change of ownership even if the home base has
changed. In my case I'm 1800 miles away from the home base listed in my
OL's, not to mention it has the previous owners name on it.
Ernie
On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 4:33 PM, A. Dennis Savarese <
dsavarese0812@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> If requesting the removal of the 300 NM proficiency area, which means
> the OL's were written prior to Sept. 2007 when the 300 NM proficiency
> area was deleted, the FSDO's only choice is to rewrite your OL's to
> comply with the latest version of 8130.2x.
> Dennis
>
> A. Dennis Savarese334-285-6263334-546-8182 (mobile)www.yak-52.com
> Skype - Yakguy1
>
> On 8/6/2014 2:31 PM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD wrote:
>
.bitterlich@navy.mil> <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>
> One last thing on the topic of operating limitations for EE aircraft. I
f your old Op Limits have the 300 NM flight limitation rule, and the "must
send in an amendment every time you fly to an airport not listed in your Pr
ogram Letter".... those can be removed, but you have to be careful when req
uesting it. Again, see EAA.
>
> Mark
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@m
atronics.com <owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com>] On Behalf Of Ernest Mar
tinez
> Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2014 3:22 PM
> To: yak-list
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: AW Certificate
>
> As an added precaution I printed out the order, and will keep it in the a
irplane along with the program letter and the original ops limitations.
>
> Ernie
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 3:15 PM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD <mark.b
itterlich@navy.mil> <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil> wrote:
>
>
D" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil> <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>
>
> Well see? I was totally wrong... or more nicely put.... out of t
ouch with the present requirements.
>
> Thanks for teaching me the right gouge!
>
> You got the best answer possible.... and you can ignore the FAA g
uy that SHOULD have told you that. The part where I said "Tell the FAA wha
t THEY need to do" remains accurate. :-)
>
> So does contacting the EAA. Those folks have been ACES for every
thing I have ever needed.
>
>
> Mark
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-
server@matronics.com <owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com>] On Behalf Of Er
nest Martinez
>
> Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2014 3:02 PM
> To: yak-list
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: AW Certificate
>
> Mark,
>
> Thanks for your advice on checking with EAA. With a few clicks I
found this. Turns out, when an EE aircraft changes hands all that one needs
to do is send a program letter to the local FSDO, no need for new AW cert
or Ops Limitations. Yaaa!
>
>
> FAA Clarifies Guidance for Experimental Exhibition and Ai
r Racing Airworthiness Certificates
>
>
> By Bill Fischer, Executive Director, EAA Warbirds of Amer
ica
>
> January 20, 2012 - The Federal Aviation Administration ha
s issued a memorandum providing clarification to FAA Order 8130.2G, Airwort
hiness Certification of Aircraft and Related Products, chapter 4, section 1
0. The memorandum authorizes deviation to the Order, clarifying operating l
imitations placed on experimental airworthiness certificates issued for the
purpose of exhibition or air racing.
>
> This is welcomed news for EAA Warbirds of America and oth
er industry groups, who have advocated for years to simplify the Order, yet
maintain the highest levels of aviation safety. Going back as far as 2005,
EAA Warbirds of America, along with the Commemorative Air Force, Classic J
et Aircraft Association, Army Aviation Heritage Foundation, Aircraft Owners
and Pilots Association, Courtesy Aircraft, and others have worked collabor
atively with the FAA to identify areas in the Order which needed clarificat
ion =93 both for the owner/operator and the FAA Inspectors in the fie
ld. Meetings were held at EAA Headquarters in Oshkosh, WI and FAA Headquart
ers in Washington D.C.
>
> All parties agreed to review existing operating limitatio
ns based on four safety and operational qualifiers:
>
> Aircraft fleet and individual aircraft flight safety reco
rds;
>
> Proven aircraft maintenance programs;
>
> Pilot training and proficiency programs;
>
> Eliminating duplication of 14 CFR Part 91 requirements.
>
> What does this mean for owners who operate aircraft certi
ficated in the experimental exhibition or air racing category? Here are sev
eral key points:
>
> All previously issued airworthiness certificates and oper
ating limitations will remain valid unless changes are requested by the app
licant or reexamined by the FAA in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 44709.
>
> If the aircraft changes owners or its home base airport,
owners need to submit a new Program Letter to the geographically responsibl
e FSDO, but it=99s not necessary to re-issue the airworthiness certif
icate & operating limitations.
>
> Pilots operating aircraft and passengers of aircraft equi
pped with an ejection propellant system installed, whether armed or not arm
ed, must satisfactorily complete and FAA accepted ejection seat training pr
ogram for the pilot and passenger.
>
> Provisions have been made for consideration of Pioneer Er
a (prior to 1914) Aircraft =93 replica, reproduction, restoration, or
similar aircraft for certification.
>
> Aircraft are now divided into six (6) groups, based on th
e aircraft weight, power plant, or other operational considerations. These
aircraft groupings help establish standardized operating limitations and in
spection requirements.
>
> Aircraft powered by electric or rocket motors are allowed
to be certificated within Group 6. While this is would tend not to apply t
o Warbird type aircraft (unless someone plans to restore and fly a ME-163!)
, it does provide an avenue for innovative aviators to get their aircraft c
ertificated.
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 2:53 PM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD
<mark.bitterlich@navy.mil> <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil> wrote:
>
>
AVAIR, WD" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil> <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>
>
> Actually Ernie, I believe the aircraft is grounded as soo
n as you purchased and moved it. Not that people really do this that ofte
n, but you are supposed to have had a Ferry Flight permit to move it from w
here it was to where it now is. Once it gets to its new home, the old Op L
imits that went along with the old AW Cert are null and void, the moment th
e new registration cert paperwork is dated.
>
> If the FAA has not officially been informed that the plan
e is sold, then you could probably fly it with the old paperwork but you're
walking on thin ice. Also is the matter of insurance. Bet you dollars t
o donuts that they would not be real happy with that kind of situation shou
ld an accident occur.
>
> I am in NO WAY a Legal Eagle on this matter. The EAA Go
vt. Branch is very supportive, they know EVERYTHING, and are your go-to fol
ks. Listen to them, not me... I am merely "suggesting".
>
> Mark
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-y
ak-list-server@matronics.com <owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com>] On Beha
lf Of Ernest Martinez
>
> Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2014 2:42 PM
> To: yak-list
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: AW Certificate
>
> I have the original Ops limitations in hand. Do I also ma
il in the AW cert that I have? That will ground the airplane for as long as
they wish to hold this up.
>
> Ernie
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 2:35 PM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NA
VAIR, WD <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil> <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil> wrote:
>
>
G CIV NAVAIR, WD" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil> <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>
> Ernie,
>
> Hopefully you have the set of operating limitatio
ns that the previous owner had from the previous base of operations.
>
> Here is a note about that.
>
> It is against regulations for the FAA to make any
changes to Operating Limitations already established for your aircraft tha
t presently exist for a simple owner change. If you do not hold those op
limits in hand, then a call to the FSDO of the previous owner will produce
them. They .. .the FAA.... are required to keep them on file.
>
> You simply take the old Operating Limitations, an
d send them in along with everything else needed to get the new Special Air
worthiness Cert. as both must have the same date.
>
> If the guy at your FSDO does not want to listen t
o this, do not debate it. I assume you are already an EAA member. Call
the EAA's Govt. branch and tell them about your issue. They will give you
every single rule and regulation that you need to know, and you then PROVID
E that to the FAA and tell them that IAW such and such, you need them to pe
rform said actions. Never ask the FAA what YOU need to do. Tell them what
THEY need to do, and have in advance a copy of the rules and regs accordin
gly.
>
> Now on the other hand.... if you desire to CHANGE
any of your Operating Limitations, that opens up a bag of worms that you h
ave to be very careful of, because then is when a DAR will come in, and the
n is when the FAA can add all sorts of bad things.
>
> Be careful.
>
> Mark
>
> p.s. This is the short version. Others on here
know much more, but that is how I recommend handling it.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto
:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com <owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com>]
On Behalf Of Ernest Martinez
> Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2014 2:20 PM
> To: yak-list
> Subject: Yak-List: AW Certificate
>
> I just spoke with the FSDO this morning about get
ting a new set of Op's limitations for the CJ I just bought. He started tal
king about phase 1 flight and such, and I had to stop him to explain that I
just need the home base and the pilot changed, and that the plane has alre
ady gone through all it's flight tests.
>
> He said to mail in the info or get a DAR.
>
> Can I get any suggestions on the the most painles
s way, I can't remember the process from my previous airplanes.
>
> Ernie
>
>
> ==========
> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Naviga
tor?Yak-List
> ==========
> MS -
> k">http://forums.matronics.com
> ==========
> e -
> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
> t="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contributio
n
> ==========
>
>
> ==========
> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-
List
> ==========
> MS -
> k">http://forums.matronics.com
> ==========
> e -
> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
> t="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
> ==========
>
>
> ==========
> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
> ==========
> MS -
> k">http://forums.matronics.com
> ==========
> e -
> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
> t="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
> ==========
>
>
> *
>
===========
nics.com/Navigator?Yak-List>
===========
===========
om/contribution>
===========
>
> *
>
>
Message 25
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Be careful of assuming that common sense applies when dealing with the FAA.
Mark
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ernest Martinez
Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2014 4:41 PM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: AW Certificate
I don't know if it even matters anymore, since the new rule states that new OL's
aren't required with the change of ownership even if the home base has changed.
In my case I'm 1800 miles away from the home base listed in my OL's, not to
mention it has the previous owners name on it.
Ernie
On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 4:33 PM, A. Dennis Savarese <dsavarese0812@bellsouth.net>
wrote:
If requesting the removal of the 300 NM proficiency area, which means the
OL's were written prior to Sept. 2007 when the 300 NM proficiency area was
deleted, the FSDO's only choice is to rewrite your OL's to comply with the latest
version of 8130.2x.
Dennis
A. Dennis Savarese
334-285-6263
334-546-8182 (mobile)
www.yak-52.com
Skype - Yakguy1
On 8/6/2014 2:31 PM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD wrote:
One last thing on the topic of operating limitations for EE aircraft.
If your old Op Limits have the 300 NM flight limitation rule, and the
"must send in an amendment every time you fly to an airport not listed in your
Program Letter".... those can be removed, but you have to be careful when requesting
it. Again, see EAA.
Mark
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ernest Martinez
Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2014 3:22 PM
To: yak-list
Subject: Re: Yak-List: AW Certificate
As an added precaution I printed out the order, and will keep it
in the airplane along with the program letter and the original ops limitations.
Ernie
On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 3:15 PM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil> <mailto:mark.bitterlich@navy.mil> wrote:
Well see? I was totally wrong... or more nicely put....
out of touch with the present requirements.
Thanks for teaching me the right gouge!
You got the best answer possible.... and you can ignore
the FAA guy that SHOULD have told you that. The part where I said "Tell the
FAA what THEY need to do" remains accurate. :-)
So does contacting the EAA. Those folks have been ACES
for everything I have ever needed.
Mark
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ernest Martinez
Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2014 3:02 PM
To: yak-list
Subject: Re: Yak-List: AW Certificate
Mark,
Thanks for your advice on checking with EAA. With a few
clicks I found this. Turns out, when an EE aircraft changes hands all that one
needs to do is send a program letter to the local FSDO, no need for new AW cert
or Ops Limitations. Yaaa!
FAA Clarifies Guidance for Experimental Exhibition
and Air Racing Airworthiness Certificates
By Bill Fischer, Executive Director, EAA Warbirds
of America
January 20, 2012 - The Federal Aviation Administration
has issued a memorandum providing clarification to FAA Order 8130.2G,
Airworthiness Certification of Aircraft and Related Products, chapter 4, section
10. The memorandum authorizes deviation to the Order, clarifying operating
limitations placed on experimental airworthiness certificates issued for the purpose
of exhibition or air racing.
This is welcomed news for EAA Warbirds of America
and other industry groups, who have advocated for years to simplify the Order,
yet maintain the highest levels of aviation safety. Going back as far as 2005,
EAA Warbirds of America, along with the Commemorative Air Force, Classic
Jet Aircraft Association, Army Aviation Heritage Foundation, Aircraft Owners and
Pilots Association, Courtesy Aircraft, and others have worked collaboratively
with the FAA to identify areas in the Order which needed clarification both
for the owner/operator and the FAA Inspectors in the field. Meetings were held
at EAA Headquarters in Oshkosh, WI and FAA Headquarters in Washington D.C.
All parties agreed to review existing operating
limitations based on four safety and operational qualifiers:
Aircraft fleet and individual aircraft flight safety
records;
Proven aircraft maintenance programs;
Pilot training and proficiency programs;
Eliminating duplication of 14 CFR Part 91 requirements.
What does this mean for owners who operate aircraft
certificated in the experimental exhibition or air racing category? Here
are several key points:
All previously issued airworthiness certificates
and operating limitations will remain valid unless changes are requested by
the applicant or reexamined by the FAA in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 44709.
If the aircraft changes owners or its home base
airport, owners need to submit a new Program Letter to the geographically responsible
FSDO, but its not necessary to re-issue the airworthiness certificate
& operating limitations.
Pilots operating aircraft and passengers of aircraft
equipped with an ejection propellant system installed, whether armed or
not armed, must satisfactorily complete and FAA accepted ejection seat training
program for the pilot and passenger.
Provisions have been made for consideration of
Pioneer Era (prior to 1914) Aircraft replica, reproduction, restoration, or similar
aircraft for certification.
Aircraft are now divided into six (6) groups, based
on the aircraft weight, power plant, or other operational considerations.
These aircraft groupings help establish standardized operating limitations and
inspection requirements.
Aircraft powered by electric or rocket motors are
allowed to be certificated within Group 6. While this is would tend not to
apply to Warbird type aircraft (unless someone plans to restore and fly a ME-163!),
it does provide an avenue for innovative aviators to get their aircraft
certificated.
On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 2:53 PM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil> <mailto:mark.bitterlich@navy.mil> wrote:
Actually Ernie, I believe the aircraft is grounded
as soon as you purchased and moved it. Not that people really do this that
often, but you are supposed to have had a Ferry Flight permit to move it from
where it was to where it now is. Once it gets to its new home, the old Op
Limits that went along with the old AW Cert are null and void, the moment the
new registration cert paperwork is dated.
If the FAA has not officially been informed that
the plane is sold, then you could probably fly it with the old paperwork but
you're walking on thin ice. Also is the matter of insurance. Bet you dollars
to donuts that they would not be real happy with that kind of situation should
an accident occur.
I am in NO WAY a Legal Eagle on this matter.
The EAA Govt. Branch is very supportive, they know EVERYTHING, and are your go-to
folks. Listen to them, not me... I am merely "suggesting".
Mark
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ernest Martinez
Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2014 2:42 PM
To: yak-list
Subject: Re: Yak-List: AW Certificate
I have the original Ops limitations in hand. Do
I also mail in the AW cert that I have? That will ground the airplane for as
long as they wish to hold this up.
Ernie
On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 2:35 PM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil> <mailto:mark.bitterlich@navy.mil> wrote:
Ernie,
Hopefully you have the set of operating
limitations that the previous owner had from the previous base of operations.
Here is a note about that.
It is against regulations for the FAA to
make any changes to Operating Limitations already established for your aircraft
that presently exist for a simple owner change. If you do not hold those
op limits in hand, then a call to the FSDO of the previous owner will produce
them. They .. .the FAA.... are required to keep them on file.
You simply take the old Operating Limitations,
and send them in along with everything else needed to get the new Special
Airworthiness Cert. as both must have the same date.
If the guy at your FSDO does not want to
listen to this, do not debate it. I assume you are already an EAA member.
Call the EAA's Govt. branch and tell them about your issue. They will give
you every single rule and regulation that you need to know, and you then PROVIDE
that to the FAA and tell them that IAW such and such, you need them to perform
said actions. Never ask the FAA what YOU need to do. Tell them what THEY
need to do, and have in advance a copy of the rules and regs accordingly.
Now on the other hand.... if you desire
to CHANGE any of your Operating Limitations, that opens up a bag of worms that
you have to be very careful of, because then is when a DAR will come in, and
then is when the FAA can add all sorts of bad things.
Be careful.
Mark
p.s. This is the short version. Others
on here know much more, but that is how I recommend handling it.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ernest Martinez
Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2014 2:20 PM
To: yak-list
Subject: Yak-List: AW Certificate
I just spoke with the FSDO this morning
about getting a new set of Op's limitations for the CJ I just bought. He started
talking about phase 1 flight and such, and I had to stop him to explain that
I just need the home base and the pilot changed, and that the plane has already
gone through all it's flight tests.
He said to mail in the info or get a DAR.
Can I get any suggestions on the the most
painless way, I can't remember the process from my previous airplanes.
Ernie
==========
target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
==========
MS -
k">http://forums.matronics.com
==========
e -
-Matt Dralle, List Admin.
t="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
==========
==========
target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
==========
MS -
k">http://forums.matronics.com
==========
e -
-Matt Dralle, List Admin.
t="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
==========
==========
target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
==========
MS -
k">http://forums.matronics.com
==========
e -
-Matt Dralle, List Admin.
t="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
==========
et="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
tp://forums.matronics.com
_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
Message 26
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: AW Certificate |
Here it is:
If the aircraft changes owners or its home base airport, owners need to
submit a new Program Letter to the geographically responsible FSDO, but
it=99s not necessary to re-issue the airworthiness certificate & oper
ating
limitations.
On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 4:47 PM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD <
mark.bitterlich@navy.mil> wrote:
> mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>
> Be careful of assuming that common sense applies when dealing with the FA
A.
>
> Mark
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:
> owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ernest Martinez
> Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2014 4:41 PM
> To: yak-list
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: AW Certificate
>
> I don't know if it even matters anymore, since the new rule states that
> new OL's aren't required with the change of ownership even if the home ba
se
> has changed. In my case I'm 1800 miles away from the home base listed in
my
> OL's, not to mention it has the previous owners name on it.
>
> Ernie
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 4:33 PM, A. Dennis Savarese <
> dsavarese0812@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
>
> If requesting the removal of the 300 NM proficiency area, which
> means the OL's were written prior to Sept. 2007 when the 300 NM proficien
cy
> area was deleted, the FSDO's only choice is to rewrite your OL's to compl
y
> with the latest version of 8130.2x.
> Dennis
>
> A. Dennis Savarese
> 334-285-6263
> 334-546-8182 (mobile)
> www.yak-52.com
> Skype - Yakguy1
> On 8/6/2014 2:31 PM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD wrote:
>
>
> NAVAIR, WD" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil> <mailto:mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>
> One last thing on the topic of operating limitations for
> EE aircraft. If your old Op Limits have the 300 NM flight limitation
> rule, and the "must send in an amendment every time you fly to an airport
> not listed in your Program Letter".... those can be removed, but you have
> to be careful when requesting it. Again, see EAA.
>
> Mark
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:
> owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ernest Martinez
> Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2014 3:22 PM
> To: yak-list
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: AW Certificate
>
> As an added precaution I printed out the order, and will
> keep it in the airplane along with the program letter and the original op
s
> limitations.
>
> Ernie
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 3:15 PM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV
> NAVAIR, WD <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil> <mailto:mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
> wrote:
>
>
> G CIV NAVAIR, WD" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil> <mailto:
> mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>
>
> Well see? I was totally wrong... or more nicely
> put.... out of touch with the present requirements.
>
> Thanks for teaching me the right gouge!
>
> You got the best answer possible.... and you can
> ignore the FAA guy that SHOULD have told you that. The part where I said
> "Tell the FAA what THEY need to do" remains accurate. :-)
>
> So does contacting the EAA. Those folks have bee
n
> ACES for everything I have ever needed.
>
>
> Mark
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto
:
> owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ernest Martinez
>
> Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2014 3:02 PM
> To: yak-list
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: AW Certificate
>
> Mark,
>
> Thanks for your advice on checking with EAA. With
> a few clicks I found this. Turns out, when an EE aircraft changes hands a
ll
> that one needs to do is send a program letter to the local FSDO, no need
> for new AW cert or Ops Limitations. Yaaa!
>
>
> FAA Clarifies Guidance for Experimental
> Exhibition and Air Racing Airworthiness Certificates
>
>
> By Bill Fischer, Executive Director, EAA
> Warbirds of America
>
> January 20, 2012 - The Federal Aviation
> Administration has issued a memorandum providing clarification to FAA Ord
er
> 8130.2G, Airworthiness Certification of Aircraft and Related Products,
> chapter 4, section 10. The memorandum authorizes deviation to the Order,
> clarifying operating limitations placed on experimental airworthiness
> certificates issued for the purpose of exhibition or air racing.
>
> This is welcomed news for EAA Warbirds of
> America and other industry groups, who have advocated for years to simpli
fy
> the Order, yet maintain the highest levels of aviation safety. Going back
> as far as 2005, EAA Warbirds of America, along with the Commemorative Air
> Force, Classic Jet Aircraft Association, Army Aviation Heritage Foundatio
n,
> Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association, Courtesy Aircraft, and others hav
e
> worked collaboratively with the FAA to identify areas in the Order which
> needed clarification =93 both for the owner/operator and the FAA In
spectors
> in the field. Meetings were held at EAA Headquarters in Oshkosh, WI and F
AA
> Headquarters in Washington D.C.
>
> All parties agreed to review existing
> operating limitations based on four safety and operational qualifiers:
>
> Aircraft fleet and individual aircraft
> flight safety records;
>
> Proven aircraft maintenance programs;
>
> Pilot training and proficiency programs;
>
> Eliminating duplication of 14 CFR Part 91
> requirements.
>
> What does this mean for owners who operat
e
> aircraft certificated in the experimental exhibition or air racing
> category? Here are several key points:
>
> All previously issued airworthiness
> certificates and operating limitations will remain valid unless changes a
re
> requested by the applicant or reexamined by the FAA in accordance with 49
> U.S.C. 44709.
>
> If the aircraft changes owners or its hom
e
> base airport, owners need to submit a new Program Letter to the
> geographically responsible FSDO, but it=99s not necessary to re-iss
ue the
> airworthiness certificate & operating limitations.
>
> Pilots operating aircraft and passengers
> of aircraft equipped with an ejection propellant system installed, whethe
r
> armed or not armed, must satisfactorily complete and FAA accepted ejectio
n
> seat training program for the pilot and passenger.
>
> Provisions have been made for
> consideration of Pioneer Era (prior to 1914) Aircraft =93 replica,
> reproduction, restoration, or similar aircraft for certification.
>
> Aircraft are now divided into six (6)
> groups, based on the aircraft weight, power plant, or other operational
> considerations. These aircraft groupings help establish standardized
> operating limitations and inspection requirements.
>
> Aircraft powered by electric or rocket
> motors are allowed to be certificated within Group 6. While this is would
> tend not to apply to Warbird type aircraft (unless someone plans to resto
re
> and fly a ME-163!), it does provide an avenue for innovative aviators to
> get their aircraft certificated.
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 2:53 PM, Bitterlich, Mark
G
> CIV NAVAIR, WD <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil> <mailto:mark.bitterlich@navy.mi
l>
> wrote:
>
>
> "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil> <mailto:
> mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>
>
> Actually Ernie, I believe the aircraft is
> grounded as soon as you purchased and moved it. Not that people really
do
> this that often, but you are supposed to have had a Ferry Flight permit t
o
> move it from where it was to where it now is. Once it gets to its new
> home, the old Op Limits that went along with the old AW Cert are null and
> void, the moment the new registration cert paperwork is dated.
>
> If the FAA has not officially been
> informed that the plane is sold, then you could probably fly it with the
> old paperwork but you're walking on thin ice. Also is the matter of
> insurance. Bet you dollars to donuts that they would not be real happy
> with that kind of situation should an accident occur.
>
> I am in NO WAY a Legal Eagle on this
> matter. The EAA Govt. Branch is very supportive, they know EVERYTHING,
> and are your go-to folks. Listen to them, not me... I am merely
> "suggesting".
>
> Mark
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ernest Martinez
>
> Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2014 2:42 PM
> To: yak-list
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: AW Certificate
>
> I have the original Ops limitations in
> hand. Do I also mail in the AW cert that I have? That will ground the
> airplane for as long as they wish to hold this up.
>
> Ernie
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 2:35 PM,
> Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil> <mailto:
> mark.bitterlich@navy.mil> wrote:
>
>
> "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil> <mailto:
> mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>
> Ernie,
>
> Hopefully you have the set of
> operating limitations that the previous owner had from the previous base
of
> operations.
>
> Here is a note about that.
>
> It is against regulations for the
> FAA to make any changes to Operating Limitations already established for
> your aircraft that presently exist for a simple owner change. If you do
> not hold those op limits in hand, then a call to the FSDO of the previous
> owner will produce them. They .. .the FAA.... are required to keep them
on
> file.
>
> You simply take the old Operating
> Limitations, and send them in along with everything else needed to get th
e
> new Special Airworthiness Cert. as both must have the same date.
>
> If the guy at your FSDO does not
> want to listen to this, do not debate it. I assume you are already an E
AA
> member. Call the EAA's Govt. branch and tell them about your issue. Th
ey
> will give you every single rule and regulation that you need to know, and
> you then PROVIDE that to the FAA and tell them that IAW such and such, yo
u
> need them to perform said actions. Never ask the FAA what YOU need to do
.
> Tell them what THEY need to do, and have in advance a copy of the rules
> and regs accordingly.
>
> Now on the other hand.... if you
> desire to CHANGE any of your Operating Limitations, that opens up a bag o
f
> worms that you have to be very careful of, because then is when a DAR wil
l
> come in, and then is when the FAA can add all sorts of bad things.
>
> Be careful.
>
> Mark
>
> p.s. This is the short version.
> Others on here know much more, but that is how I recommend handling it.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From:
> owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:
> owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ernest Martinez
> Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2014
> 2:20 PM
> To: yak-list
> Subject: Yak-List: AW Certificate
>
> I just spoke with the FSDO this
> morning about getting a new set of Op's limitations for the CJ I just
> bought. He started talking about phase 1 flight and such, and I had to st
op
> him to explain that I just need the home base and the pilot changed, and
> that the plane has already gone through all it's flight tests.
>
> He said to mail in the info or ge
t
> a DAR.
>
> Can I get any suggestions on the
> the most painless way, I can't remember the process from my previous
> airplanes.
>
> Ernie
>
>
> ==========
> target="_blank">
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
> ==========
> MS -
> k">http://forums.matronics.com
> ==========
> e -
> -Matt Dralle, List Admin
.
> t="_blank">
> http://www.matronics.com/contribution
> ==========
>
>
> ==========
> target="_blank">
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
> ==========
> MS -
> k">http://forums.matronics.com
> ==========
> e -
> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
> t="_blank">
> http://www.matronics.com/contribution
> ==========
>
>
> ==========
> target="_blank">
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
> ==========
> MS -
> k">http://forums.matronics.com
> ==========
> e -
> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
> t="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contributio
n
> ==========
>
>
> et="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
> tp://forums.matronics.com
> _blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
===========
===========
===========
===========
>
>
Message 27
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Yak18T air leak |
Thanks for the info Rob, I can see the logic in your explanation.
I'll let you know what I find
Michael Wikstrom
La Colle sur Loup (06)
France
Tel : +33 607 44 40 11
email: michael@wikstrom.cc
Yak 18T - F-HYAC
Yak 3U - F-AZZV
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Rob Rowe
Sent: 06 August 2014 11:51
Subject: Yak-List: Re: Yak18T air leak
Michael,
Looks like it's the 562300 protection valve (#12 bleeding down valve in
attached PDF schematic - machine translated from Russian so make allowances
for phrasing!).
This valve vents to atmosphere below 5 bar pressure and is used primarily to
bleed down the emergency air system after use.
However it's secondary function is to vent small air leaks entering the
emergency system from defective seals on either the gear up-locks or the
adjacent non-return valve (NRV) emergency feed to the brakes (and flaps in
the case of the -18T) .
If these get large enough (>5 bar) it shuts and the pressure build up will
release the up-locks and slowly blows the gear down, which tends to get your
attention!
In your case it appears whatever is leaking has yet to get to 5 bar so the
protection valve is just venting it to the exterior (which you can hear).
Off the top of my head the easiest way to diagnose on the ground whether
it's the adjacent NRV or an up-lock seal (#13 or #22 x 2 on diagram) is to
(with CAUTION) select the gear lever to neutral to vent the gear air lines.
If the leak persists then it's probably the NRV. If the leak stops then it's
probably one of the up-locks and that will be more difficult to isolate
other than by carefully listening to each up-lock in turn (adjacent to
actuator) for air flowing through it. A stethoscope might be useful!
Hope this helps.
Rob R
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=428080#428080
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/yak_18t_air_system_194.pdf
Message 28
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Ernie,
You might have missed the quote you posted earlier where it also said this:
"All previously issued airworthiness certificates and operating limitations will
remain valid unless changes are requested by the applicant or reexamined by
the FAA in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 44709."
Dennis said:
" If requesting the removal of the 300 NM proficiency area, which means the OL's
were written prior to Sept. 2007 when the 300 NM proficiency area was deleted,
the FSDO's only choice is to rewrite your OL's to comply with the latest version
of 8130.2x."
That is true.. and I have had it done myself on BOTH of my aircraft. And if you
do not want the 300 NM proficiency area restriction... you have to have your
OL's re-written.
However......
When the FAA rewrites the Operating Limitations in accordance with the new 8130
document, only the exact wording has to be in conformance with 8130.2x as Dennis
said. HOWEVER THE FAA CANNOT ADD NEW OPERATING LIMITATIONS IN ANY WAY WHAT-SO-EVER.
They tried that move with me, and I once again called in help from
the EAA, and stopped them dead in their tracks.
Mark
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ernest Martinez
Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2014 4:52 PM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: AW Certificate
Here it is:
If the aircraft changes owners or its home base airport, owners need to submit
a new Program Letter to the geographically responsible FSDO, but its not necessary
to re-issue the airworthiness certificate & operating limitations.
On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 4:47 PM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
wrote:
Be careful of assuming that common sense applies when dealing with the
FAA.
Mark
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ernest Martinez
Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2014 4:41 PM
To: yak-list
Subject: Re: Yak-List: AW Certificate
I don't know if it even matters anymore, since the new rule states that
new OL's aren't required with the change of ownership even if the home base has
changed. In my case I'm 1800 miles away from the home base listed in my OL's,
not to mention it has the previous owners name on it.
Ernie
On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 4:33 PM, A. Dennis Savarese <dsavarese0812@bellsouth.net>
wrote:
If requesting the removal of the 300 NM proficiency area, which
means the OL's were written prior to Sept. 2007 when the 300 NM proficiency area
was deleted, the FSDO's only choice is to rewrite your OL's to comply with
the latest version of 8130.2x.
Dennis
A. Dennis Savarese
334-285-6263
334-546-8182 (mobile)
www.yak-52.com
Skype - Yakguy1
On 8/6/2014 2:31 PM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD wrote:
One last thing on the topic of operating limitations for
EE aircraft. If your old Op Limits have the 300 NM flight limitation rule,
and the "must send in an amendment every time you fly to an airport not listed
in your Program Letter".... those can be removed, but you have to be careful
when requesting it. Again, see EAA.
Mark
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ernest Martinez
Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2014 3:22 PM
To: yak-list
Subject: Re: Yak-List: AW Certificate
As an added precaution I printed out the order, and will
keep it in the airplane along with the program letter and the original ops limitations.
Ernie
On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 3:15 PM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil> <mailto:mark.bitterlich@navy.mil> wrote:
Well see? I was totally wrong... or more nicely
put.... out of touch with the present requirements.
Thanks for teaching me the right gouge!
You got the best answer possible.... and you can
ignore the FAA guy that SHOULD have told you that. The part where I said "Tell
the FAA what THEY need to do" remains accurate. :-)
So does contacting the EAA. Those folks have been
ACES for everything I have ever needed.
Mark
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ernest Martinez
Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2014 3:02 PM
To: yak-list
Subject: Re: Yak-List: AW Certificate
Mark,
Thanks for your advice on checking with EAA. With
a few clicks I found this. Turns out, when an EE aircraft changes hands all
that one needs to do is send a program letter to the local FSDO, no need for
new AW cert or Ops Limitations. Yaaa!
FAA Clarifies Guidance for Experimental
Exhibition and Air Racing Airworthiness Certificates
By Bill Fischer, Executive Director, EAA
Warbirds of America
January 20, 2012 - The Federal Aviation
Administration has issued a memorandum providing clarification to FAA Order 8130.2G,
Airworthiness Certification of Aircraft and Related Products, chapter
4, section 10. The memorandum authorizes deviation to the Order, clarifying operating
limitations placed on experimental airworthiness certificates issued for
the purpose of exhibition or air racing.
This is welcomed news for EAA Warbirds
of America and other industry groups, who have advocated for years to simplify
the Order, yet maintain the highest levels of aviation safety. Going back as
far as 2005, EAA Warbirds of America, along with the Commemorative Air Force,
Classic Jet Aircraft Association, Army Aviation Heritage Foundation, Aircraft
Owners and Pilots Association, Courtesy Aircraft, and others have worked collaboratively
with the FAA to identify areas in the Order which needed clarification
both for the owner/operator and the FAA Inspectors in the field. Meetings
were held at EAA Headquarters in Oshkosh, WI and FAA Headquarters in Washington
D.C.
All parties agreed to review existing operating
limitations based on four safety and operational qualifiers:
Aircraft fleet and individual aircraft
flight safety records;
Proven aircraft maintenance programs;
Pilot training and proficiency programs;
Eliminating duplication of 14 CFR Part
91 requirements.
What does this mean for owners who operate
aircraft certificated in the experimental exhibition or air racing category?
Here are several key points:
If the aircraft changes owners or its home base airport, owners need to
submit a new Program Letter to the geographically responsible FSDO, but its not
necessary to re-issue the airworthiness certificate & operating limitations
If the aircraft changes owners or its home
base airport, owners need to submit a new Program Letter to the geographically
responsible FSDO, but its not necessary to re-issue the airworthiness certificate
& operating limitations.
Pilots operating aircraft and passengers
of aircraft equipped with an ejection propellant system installed, whether armed
or not armed, must satisfactorily complete and FAA accepted ejection seat
training program for the pilot and passenger.
Provisions have been made for consideration
of Pioneer Era (prior to 1914) Aircraft replica, reproduction, restoration,
or similar aircraft for certification.
Aircraft are now divided into six (6) groups,
based on the aircraft weight, power plant, or other operational considerations.
These aircraft groupings help establish standardized operating limitations
and inspection requirements.
Aircraft powered by electric or rocket
motors are allowed to be certificated within Group 6. While this is would tend
not to apply to Warbird type aircraft (unless someone plans to restore and fly
a ME-163!), it does provide an avenue for innovative aviators to get their aircraft
certificated.
On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 2:53 PM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil> <mailto:mark.bitterlich@navy.mil> wrote:
Actually Ernie, I believe the aircraft
is grounded as soon as you purchased and moved it. Not that people really do
this that often, but you are supposed to have had a Ferry Flight permit to move
it from where it was to where it now is. Once it gets to its new home, the
old Op Limits that went along with the old AW Cert are null and void, the moment
the new registration cert paperwork is dated.
If the FAA has not officially been informed
that the plane is sold, then you could probably fly it with the old paperwork
but you're walking on thin ice. Also is the matter of insurance. Bet you
dollars to donuts that they would not be real happy with that kind of situation
should an accident occur.
I am in NO WAY a Legal Eagle on this matter.
The EAA Govt. Branch is very supportive, they know EVERYTHING, and are
your go-to folks. Listen to them, not me... I am merely "suggesting".
Mark
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ernest Martinez
Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2014 2:42 PM
To: yak-list
Subject: Re: Yak-List: AW Certificate
I have the original Ops limitations in
hand. Do I also mail in the AW cert that I have? That will ground the airplane
for as long as they wish to hold this up.
Ernie
On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 2:35 PM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil> <mailto:mark.bitterlich@navy.mil> wrote:
Ernie,
Hopefully you have the set of operating
limitations that the previous owner had from the previous base of operations.
Here is a note about that.
It is against regulations for the
FAA to make any changes to Operating Limitations already established for your
aircraft that presently exist for a simple owner change. If you do not hold
those op limits in hand, then a call to the FSDO of the previous owner will
produce them. They .. .the FAA.... are required to keep them on file.
You simply take the old Operating
Limitations, and send them in along with everything else needed to get the
new Special Airworthiness Cert. as both must have the same date.
If the guy at your FSDO does not
want to listen to this, do not debate it. I assume you are already an EAA
member. Call the EAA's Govt. branch and tell them about your issue. They will
give you every single rule and regulation that you need to know, and you then
PROVIDE that to the FAA and tell them that IAW such and such, you need them
to perform said actions. Never ask the FAA what YOU need to do. Tell them what
THEY need to do, and have in advance a copy of the rules and regs accordingly.
Now on the other hand.... if you
desire to CHANGE any of your Operating Limitations, that opens up a bag of worms
that you have to be very careful of, because then is when a DAR will come
in, and then is when the FAA can add all sorts of bad things.
Be careful.
Mark
p.s. This is the short version.
Others on here know much more, but that is how I recommend handling it.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ernest Martinez
Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2014
2:20 PM
To: yak-list
Subject: Yak-List: AW Certificate
I just spoke with the FSDO this
morning about getting a new set of Op's limitations for the CJ I just bought.
He started talking about phase 1 flight and such, and I had to stop him to explain
that I just need the home base and the pilot changed, and that the plane
has already gone through all it's flight tests.
He said to mail in the info or
get a DAR.
Can I get any suggestions on the
the most painless way, I can't remember the process from my previous airplanes.
Ernie
==========
target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
==========
MS -
k">http://forums.matronics.com
==========
e -
-Matt Dralle, List Admin.
t="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
==========
==========
target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
==========
MS -
k">http://forums.matronics.com
==========
e -
-Matt Dralle, List Admin.
t="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
==========
==========
target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
==========
MS -
k">http://forums.matronics.com
==========
e -
-Matt Dralle, List Admin.
t="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
==========
et="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
tp://forums.matronics.com
_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
==========
target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
==========
MS -
k">http://forums.matronics.com
==========
e -
-Matt Dralle, List Admin.
t="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
==========
Message 29
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | AW Certificate Mods |
I recently had an encounter with my local FSDO because he interpreted a prop change
as a major mod which under the operating limits require a phase I fly off
which I hadn't done. He cited 14 CFR 21.93 which is as follows:
" 21.93 Classification of changes in type design.
(a) In addition to changes in type design specified in paragraph (b) of this section,
changes in type design are classified as minor and major. A minor change
is one that has no appreciable effect on the weight, balance, structural strength,
reliability, operational characteristics, or other characteristics affecting
the airworthiness of the product. All other changes are major changes (except
as provided in paragraph (b) of this section)."
He wanted to focus on the words "appreciable effect" without considering the words
"affecting airworthiness". He wanted me to sign an acknowledgement of a violation
which I refused. I had installed a prop from Jill manufactured by Whirlwind
to her specs. I made the case that at least three reasonable people had
reasonably determined that the prop was not an appreciable effect and had no
affect on the airworthiness of the aircraft and my log book contained the appropriate
entries showing the installation. Today, my take away from this is
that I would had less of issue if the log book entry had stated that the change
was determined to be minor per Part 21.93. The FSDO accepted my position.
Although, my issue was related to a prop it seems like any mod including camera
mounts could be a major change requiring a phase I fly off, depending on how
your FSDO wants interpret his regs unless you are prepared to challenge him.
I sat down with him at his office prepared with a complete understanding of what
he was thinking. I believe that the FAA definition gives us a lot of latitude
with our CJs and YAKs.
Gill
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD
Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2014 2:17 PM
Subject: RE: Yak-List: AW Certificate
--> <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
Ernie,
You might have missed the quote you posted earlier where it also said this:
"All previously issued airworthiness certificates and operating limitations will
remain valid unless changes are requested by the applicant or reexamined by
the FAA in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 44709."
Dennis said:
" If requesting the removal of the 300 NM proficiency area, which means the OL's
were written prior to Sept. 2007 when the 300 NM proficiency area was deleted,
the FSDO's only choice is to rewrite your OL's to comply with the latest version
of 8130.2x."
That is true.. and I have had it done myself on BOTH of my aircraft. And if you
do not want the 300 NM proficiency area restriction... you have to have your
OL's re-written.
However......
When the FAA rewrites the Operating Limitations in accordance with the new 8130
document, only the exact wording has to be in conformance with 8130.2x as Dennis
said. HOWEVER THE FAA CANNOT ADD NEW OPERATING LIMITATIONS IN ANY WAY WHAT-SO-EVER.
They tried that move with me, and I once again called in help from
the EAA, and stopped them dead in their tracks.
Mark
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ernest Martinez
Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2014 4:52 PM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: AW Certificate
Here it is:
If the aircraft changes owners or its home base airport, owners need to submit
a new Program Letter to the geographically responsible FSDO, but its not necessary
to re-issue the airworthiness certificate & operating limitations.
On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 4:47 PM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
wrote:
Be careful of assuming that common sense applies when dealing with the
FAA.
Mark
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ernest Martinez
Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2014 4:41 PM
To: yak-list
Subject: Re: Yak-List: AW Certificate
I don't know if it even matters anymore, since the new rule states that
new OL's aren't required with the change of ownership even if the home base has
changed. In my case I'm 1800 miles away from the home base listed in my OL's,
not to mention it has the previous owners name on it.
Ernie
On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 4:33 PM, A. Dennis Savarese <dsavarese0812@bellsouth.net>
wrote:
If requesting the removal of the 300 NM proficiency area, which
means the OL's were written prior to Sept. 2007 when the 300 NM proficiency area
was deleted, the FSDO's only choice is to rewrite your OL's to comply with
the latest version of 8130.2x.
Dennis
A. Dennis Savarese
334-285-6263
334-546-8182 (mobile)
www.yak-52.com
Skype - Yakguy1
On 8/6/2014 2:31 PM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD wrote:
One last thing on the topic of operating limitations for
EE aircraft. If your old Op Limits have the 300 NM flight limitation rule,
and the "must send in an amendment every time you fly to an airport not listed
in your Program Letter".... those can be removed, but you have to be careful
when requesting it. Again, see EAA.
Mark
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ernest Martinez
Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2014 3:22 PM
To: yak-list
Subject: Re: Yak-List: AW Certificate
As an added precaution I printed out the order, and will
keep it in the airplane along with the program letter and the original ops limitations.
Ernie
On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 3:15 PM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil> <mailto:mark.bitterlich@navy.mil> wrote:
Well see? I was totally wrong... or more nicely
put.... out of touch with the present requirements.
Thanks for teaching me the right gouge!
You got the best answer possible.... and you can
ignore the FAA guy that SHOULD have told you that. The part where I said "Tell
the FAA what THEY need to do" remains accurate. :-)
So does contacting the EAA. Those folks have been
ACES for everything I have ever needed.
Mark
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ernest Martinez
Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2014 3:02 PM
To: yak-list
Subject: Re: Yak-List: AW Certificate
Mark,
Thanks for your advice on checking with EAA. With
a few clicks I found this. Turns out, when an EE aircraft changes hands all
that one needs to do is send a program letter to the local FSDO, no need for
new AW cert or Ops Limitations. Yaaa!
FAA Clarifies Guidance for Experimental
Exhibition and Air Racing Airworthiness Certificates
By Bill Fischer, Executive Director, EAA
Warbirds of America
January 20, 2012 - The Federal Aviation
Administration has issued a memorandum providing clarification to FAA Order 8130.2G,
Airworthiness Certification of Aircraft and Related Products, chapter
4, section 10. The memorandum authorizes deviation to the Order, clarifying operating
limitations placed on experimental airworthiness certificates issued for
the purpose of exhibition or air racing.
This is welcomed news for EAA Warbirds
of America and other industry groups, who have advocated for years to simplify
the Order, yet maintain the highest levels of aviation safety. Going back as
far as 2005, EAA Warbirds of America, along with the Commemorative Air Force,
Classic Jet Aircraft Association, Army Aviation Heritage Foundation, Aircraft
Owners and Pilots Association, Courtesy Aircraft, and others have worked collaboratively
with the FAA to identify areas in the Order which needed clarification
both for the owner/operator and the FAA Inspectors in the field. Meetings
were held at EAA Headquarters in Oshkosh, WI and FAA Headquarters in Washington
D.C.
All parties agreed to review existing operating
limitations based on four safety and operational qualifiers:
Aircraft fleet and individual aircraft
flight safety records;
Proven aircraft maintenance programs;
Pilot training and proficiency programs;
Eliminating duplication of 14 CFR Part
91 requirements.
What does this mean for owners who operate
aircraft certificated in the experimental exhibition or air racing category?
Here are several key points:
If the aircraft changes owners or its home base airport, owners need to
submit a new Program Letter to the geographically responsible FSDO, but its not
necessary to re-issue the airworthiness certificate & operating limitations
If the aircraft changes owners or its home
base airport, owners need to submit a new Program Letter to the geographically
responsible FSDO, but its not necessary to re-issue the airworthiness certificate
& operating limitations.
Pilots operating aircraft and passengers
of aircraft equipped with an ejection propellant system installed, whether armed
or not armed, must satisfactorily complete and FAA accepted ejection seat
training program for the pilot and passenger.
Provisions have been made for consideration
of Pioneer Era (prior to 1914) Aircraft replica, reproduction, restoration,
or similar aircraft for certification.
Aircraft are now divided into six (6) groups,
based on the aircraft weight, power plant, or other operational considerations.
These aircraft groupings help establish standardized operating limitations
and inspection requirements.
Aircraft powered by electric or rocket
motors are allowed to be certificated within Group 6. While this is would tend
not to apply to Warbird type aircraft (unless someone plans to restore and fly
a ME-163!), it does provide an avenue for innovative aviators to get their aircraft
certificated.
On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 2:53 PM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil> <mailto:mark.bitterlich@navy.mil> wrote:
Actually Ernie, I believe the aircraft
is grounded as soon as you purchased and moved it. Not that people really do
this that often, but you are supposed to have had a Ferry Flight permit to move
it from where it was to where it now is. Once it gets to its new home, the
old Op Limits that went along with the old AW Cert are null and void, the moment
the new registration cert paperwork is dated.
If the FAA has not officially been informed
that the plane is sold, then you could probably fly it with the old paperwork
but you're walking on thin ice. Also is the matter of insurance. Bet you
dollars to donuts that they would not be real happy with that kind of situation
should an accident occur.
I am in NO WAY a Legal Eagle on this matter.
The EAA Govt. Branch is very supportive, they know EVERYTHING, and are
your go-to folks. Listen to them, not me... I am merely "suggesting".
Mark
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ernest Martinez
Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2014 2:42 PM
To: yak-list
Subject: Re: Yak-List: AW Certificate
I have the original Ops limitations in
hand. Do I also mail in the AW cert that I have? That will ground the airplane
for as long as they wish to hold this up.
Ernie
On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 2:35 PM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil> <mailto:mark.bitterlich@navy.mil> wrote:
Ernie,
Hopefully you have the set of operating
limitations that the previous owner had from the previous base of operations.
Here is a note about that.
It is against regulations for the
FAA to make any changes to Operating Limitations already established for your
aircraft that presently exist for a simple owner change. If you do not hold
those op limits in hand, then a call to the FSDO of the previous owner will
produce them. They .. .the FAA.... are required to keep them on file.
You simply take the old Operating
Limitations, and send them in along with everything else needed to get the
new Special Airworthiness Cert. as both must have the same date.
If the guy at your FSDO does not
want to listen to this, do not debate it. I assume you are already an EAA
member. Call the EAA's Govt. branch and tell them about your issue. They will
give you every single rule and regulation that you need to know, and you then
PROVIDE that to the FAA and tell them that IAW such and such, you need them
to perform said actions. Never ask the FAA what YOU need to do. Tell them what
THEY need to do, and have in advance a copy of the rules and regs accordingly.
Now on the other hand.... if you
desire to CHANGE any of your Operating Limitations, that opens up a bag of worms
that you have to be very careful of, because then is when a DAR will come
in, and then is when the FAA can add all sorts of bad things.
Be careful.
Mark
p.s. This is the short version.
Others on here know much more, but that is how I recommend handling it.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ernest Martinez
Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2014
2:20 PM
To: yak-list
Subject: Yak-List: AW Certificate
I just spoke with the FSDO this
morning about getting a new set of Op's limitations for the CJ I just bought.
He started talking about phase 1 flight and such, and I had to stop him to explain
that I just need the home base and the pilot changed, and that the plane
has already gone through all it's flight tests.
He said to mail in the info or
get a DAR.
Can I get any suggestions on the
the most painless way, I can't remember the process from my previous airplanes.
Ernie
==========
target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
==========
MS -
k">http://forums.matronics.com
==========
e -
-Matt Dralle, List Admin.
t="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
==========
==========
target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
==========
MS -
k">http://forums.matronics.com
==========
e -
-Matt Dralle, List Admin.
t="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
==========
==========
target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
==========
MS -
k">http://forums.matronics.com
==========
e -
-Matt Dralle, List Admin.
t="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
==========
et="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
tp://forums.matronics.com
_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
==========
target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
==========
MS -
k">http://forums.matronics.com
==========
e -
-Matt Dralle, List Admin.
t="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
==========
Message 30
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: AW Certificate |
Ehh, at the end of the day, I've never been asked for it, and I don't
intend to fly beyond 300 miles any time soon.
Ernie
On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 5:16 PM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD <
mark.bitterlich@navy.mil> wrote:
> mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>
> Ernie,
>
> You might have missed the quote you posted earlier where it also said this:
>
> "All previously issued airworthiness certificates and operating
> limitations will remain valid unless changes are requested by the applicant
> or reexamined by the FAA in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 44709."
>
>
Other Matronics Email List Services
These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.
-- Please support this service by making your Contribution today! --
|