 |
Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
jesse(at)saintaviation.co
Guest
|
 Posted: Tue Feb 13, 2007 6:40 am Post subject: unbelievable!!! |
 |
|
To add to the mix, I have a friend who is retired and he had built 6 or 7 RV-6 and -7’s because he enjoys doing it and needs something to do. He doesn’t make much on them, but he keeps building because he enjoys it. He builds planes because he can, but I don’t think he is abusing the rules. He is doing it as recreation, which definitely fits within the intent and letter of the law. The litmus test that you mention would obviously cause him unjust problems.
I know some of you are pointing your finger at me without knowing what we really are doing. That’s fine.
Do not archive.
Jesse Saint
Saint Aviation, Inc.
jesse(at)saintaviation.com (jesse(at)saintaviation.com)
www.saintaviation.com
Cell: 352-427-0285
Fax: 815-377-3694
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of RV Builder (Michael Sausen)
Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2007 9:05 AM
To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: RE: RV10-List: unbelievable!!!
You forgot Florida. As far as how many should someone be allowed to build, there shouldn’t be a limit as long as they are sticking to the intent of the rule which clearly is against any type of productionizing of a experimental aircraft. You want to produce the RV-10 as a aircraft for profit, no problem. Take it through the same processes that every other production aircraft company does. While you are at it develop your own manufacturing facilities because there isn’t a chance Van will sell kit’s to you at that point, even under the guise of “raw materials”.
Unfortunately there is no litmus test for determining what a builders intent is. This is what the FAA has to struggle with. Sometimes they get it right, sometimes they get it wrong. There are some limits that make it pretty clear like building and selling an aircraft once a year, especially the same model. The 51% rule requires some philosophical debate and a little too much Carnac the Magnificent to determine who is following the rule and who isn’t. Some guys are just flat out breaking the rule no matter how they rationalize it. Some are legitimate in their pursuits. I think to things that would go a long way are to reduce this problem are; make the builder sit on the aircraft for at least 2 years and look at the builders employment history. If they have been unemployed for several years but have built 5 aircraft it’s a good bet they are in it for the money.
I enjoy the building aspects as much as I enjoy flying. There is a good chance I will build one or more aircraft in the future because I enjoy that aspect. I sure don’t need more than 2 or 3 aircraft  so I will probably end up selling at least one or two. The difference is I have absolutely no problem in keeping the aircraft for a few years after I complete it.
Soap box off.
Michael
Do not archive
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of John W. Cox
Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2007 2:48 AM
To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: RE: RV10-List: unbelievable!!!
Thank you for respectfully withdrawing your observation. The RV-10 is being mass produced in South Africa, Russian, the P.I., Central America and yes in Oklahoma. The loophole has a truck running through it and the FAA has convened a committee to close the door or give approval on those current actions. Your answer will be forthcoming quite soon.
Just a rhetorical question for the masses. Just how many RV-10s beyond ONE should a builder be allowed to complete before the group yells “Foul”? I guess the silence is a compelling answer.
The “For hire” boys are alive and well buying RV-10 kits.
Here is the final question. Who finds it inappropriate for a manufacturer to ship a second, third, fourth or fifth kit to those repeat builders?
Bill, you should be hearing soon from a few of those builders (predators) about their product offering.
John Cox
#40600
Do not Archive
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of William Condon
Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2007 12:00 AM
To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: RE: RV10-List: unbelievable!!!
Given that the below is all true, one cannot have any sympathy for the two doctors involved or the former owner of the company. Not only did were the doctors displaying an unbelievable level of foolishness (by giving away huge sums of money to a possible crook), but they were directly threatening the experimental building community, as a whole.
I say that because this apparently involved the ‘for-hire’ building of an experimental aircraft – since the doctors didn’t know anything about the scam, they obviously hadn’t invested any of their own labor in the building of the aircraft. Of course, to get an airworthiness certificate for this aircraft, the people would have to defraud the FAA. And, when people are out there defrauding the FAA, this will eventual lead to them (the FAA) eating away at the public’s right to build its own airplanes.
Unless, of course, there is a loophole that I don’t know about (where one can pay to have kit airplanes professionally built) – if that is the case, I respectfully withdraw my comments (except for the foolishness / crook part, which still stands).
Bill C.
Dream – 100%, everything else – 0%
US military stationed overseas until 2009
| Quote: | | http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List |
| Quote: | | http://forums.matronics.com |
[quote] [b]
| | - The Matronics RV10-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
LloydDR(at)wernerco.com
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 13, 2007 6:42 am Post subject: unbelievable!!! |
|
|
SO here is a thought on this, how can the FAA be expected to review the employment condition of every person that applies for an airworthiness certificate? We all complain about how much oversight they have now, and the associated costs. You want to see fee's go through the roof, add an additional administrative overhead to the process and see how much more money it costs us, and how much additional time will be added to the review/paperwork process?
Not saying the system does not need to be re-worked, but we need to figure out how to fix it, and I personally do not think that by having vendors on the committee, we the builders are being looked out for.
I would like to ask John Cox who else is on the panel, and who is representing "all of us?" those with the money who vote?
Dan
N289DT
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of RV Builder (Michael Sausen)
Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2007 9:05 AM
To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: RE: RV10-List: unbelievable!!!
You forgot Florida. As far as how many should someone be allowed to build, there shouldn’t be a limit as long as they are sticking to the intent of the rule which clearly is against any type of productionizing of a experimental aircraft. You want to produce the RV-10 as a aircraft for profit, no problem. Take it through the same processes that every other production aircraft company does. While you are at it develop your own manufacturing facilities because there isn’t a chance Van will sell kit’s to you at that point, even under the guise of “raw materials”.
Unfortunately there is no litmus test for determining what a builders intent is. This is what the FAA has to struggle with. Sometimes they get it right, sometimes they get it wrong. There are some limits that make it pretty clear like building and selling an aircraft once a year, especially the same model. The 51% rule requires some philosophical debate and a little too much Carnac the Magnificent to determine who is following the rule and who isn’t. Some guys are just flat out breaking the rule no matter how they rationalize it. Some are legitimate in their pursuits. I think to things that would go a long way are to reduce this problem are; make the builder sit on the aircraft for at least 2 years and look at the builders employment history. If they have been unemployed for several years but have built 5 aircraft it’s a good bet they are in it for the money.
I enjoy the building aspects as much as I enjoy flying. There is a good chance I will build one or more aircraft in the future because I enjoy that aspect. I sure don’t need more than 2 or 3 aircraft so I will probably end up selling at least one or two. The difference is I have absolutely no problem in keeping the aircraft for a few years after I complete it.
Soap box off.
Michael
Do not archive
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of John W. Cox
Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2007 2:48 AM
To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: RE: RV10-List: unbelievable!!!
Thank you for respectfully withdrawing your observation. The RV-10 is being mass produced in South Africa, Russian, the P.I., Central America and yes in Oklahoma. The loophole has a truck running through it and the FAA has convened a committee to close the door or give approval on those current actions. Your answer will be forthcoming quite soon.
Just a rhetorical question for the masses. Just how many RV-10s beyond ONE should a builder be allowed to complete before the group yells “Foul”? I guess the silence is a compelling answer.
The “For hire” boys are alive and well buying RV-10 kits.
Here is the final question. Who finds it inappropriate for a manufacturer to ship a second, third, fourth or fifth kit to those repeat builders?
Bill, you should be hearing soon from a few of those builders (predators) about their product offering.
John Cox
#40600
Do not Archive
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of William Condon
Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2007 12:00 AM
To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: RE: RV10-List: unbelievable!!!
Given that the below is all true, one cannot have any sympathy for the two doctors involved or the former owner of the company. Not only did were the doctors displaying an unbelievable level of foolishness (by giving away huge sums of money to a possible crook), but they were directly threatening the experimental building community, as a whole.
I say that because this apparently involved the ‘for-hire’ building of an experimental aircraft – since the doctors didn’t know anything about the scam, they obviously hadn’t invested any of their own labor in the building of the aircraft. Of course, to get an airworthiness certificate for this aircraft, the people would have to defraud the FAA. And, when people are out there defrauding the FAA, this will eventual lead to them (the FAA) eating away at the public’s right to build its own airplanes.
Unless, of course, there is a loophole that I don’t know about (where one can pay to have kit airplanes professionally built) – if that is the case, I respectfully withdraw my comments (except for the foolishness / crook part, which still stands).
Bill C.
Dream – 100%, everything else – 0%
US military stationed overseas until 2009
| Quote: | | http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List |
01234
5 [quote][b]
| | - The Matronics RV10-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
GRANSCOTT(at)aol.com
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 13, 2007 7:29 am Post subject: unbelievable!!! |
|
|
In a message dated 2/13/07 9:44:19 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, jesse(at)saintaviation.com writes:
| Quote: |
To add to the mix, I have a friend who is retired and he had built 6 or 7 RV-6 and -7’s because he enjoys doing it and needs something to do. He doesn’t make much on them, but he keeps building because he enjoys it. He builds planes because he can, but I don’t think he is abusing the rules. He is doing it as recreation, which definitely fits within the intent and letter of the law. The litmus test that you mention would obviously cause him unjust problems. |
I'm guessing, the FAA may want to target peoples or companies that have set up to "pretend" that individual builders have completed the project when they may only have just "supervised" the builder...yet the pretend builder files for a repairman's certificate; not having truly completed the 51% rule. Let's say, there is a kit in Europe that one can go on vacation for 2 weeks, in which time you go to the factory, wave a magic wand then you do vacation seeing the highlights in town; they then pack up your plane in a crate; ship it to you with a certificate saying you completed the 51% rule; and it's a European Experimental, you bolt on the wings, install the battery, and you file the paperwork requesting a repairman's certificate...is that bending the 51% rule?
Should the FAA give you a repairman's certificate?
And this may be happening all over the place...it can happen anywhere. Is this fair to the true builders...remember these folks who may be skirting the 51% rule, will be in your insurance pool no matter how you slice the pool; there are only so many members in the Experimental category and that's who you'll share your risk with, and the insurances' company's profits with.
I can't imagine the insurance payments that Cirrus folks are paying.
Up to now, RV's have a very good record but with in a few years and bogus builders and maintenance that record could get skewed quickly by a few. And this could include some death's and injuries. Accident rates are generally lower for most VFR flying compared to heavy IFR flights by low time pilots. The RV 10 is being built by many builders to be a solid IFR machine; if any corners are cut, it could lead to unwanted results. Does the concept of a 600 hp RV 10 being built for folks that don't have any knowledge about the machine make any sense in your insurance pool?
Sooooo, let's all be careful for what's going on and what the FAA is targeting. As we know, the FAA generally swings too far one way before logic sets in. If you have the opportunity, and the FAA begins to have a comment period be sure to log in your opinion...all this is MHO...
Can't wait to get back to IL to begin the building phase.
By the way, I've been in contact with the Western PA RV Builders for the past couple of years--thanks to Dan Checkaway's web site...I'd planned to go to their facility and do their workshop...apparently they have changed directions.
Now they are basically working to help people begin and complete their RV project. Originally it was my impression they were a workshop to try tools and for one to begin the process of the Rear Stab...apparently they are now more of a building shop and are booked through 2008...FYI.
Patrick
do not archive
[quote][b]
| | - The Matronics RV10-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rvbuilder(at)sausen.net
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 13, 2007 7:58 am Post subject: unbelievable!!! |
|
|
I don’t think they should be reviewing everyone that applies for a certificate. Something like that would need to be triggered as a second level based on a concern, hunch, report or whatever they currently use to root out models that are in production. I certainly don’t think it should be a first level item that is attached to everyone. They have more than enough info in their existing registration database for them to mine and find models that are being built as a production run. Any DAR or FAA rep in a given area certainly knows who is doing what as this is a fairly closed community. I blame them more than anyone for allowing it to happen.
Michael
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Lloyd, Daniel R.
Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2007 8:42 AM
To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: RE: unbelievable!!!
SO here is a thought on this, how can the FAA be expected to review the employment condition of every person that applies for an airworthiness certificate? We all complain about how much oversight they have now, and the associated costs. You want to see fee's go through the roof, add an additional administrative overhead to the process and see how much more money it costs us, and how much additional time will be added to the review/paperwork process?
Not saying the system does not need to be re-worked, but we need to figure out how to fix it, and I personally do not think that by having vendors on the committee, we the builders are being looked out for.
I would like to ask John Cox who else is on the panel, and who is representing "all of us?" those with the money who vote?
Dan
N289DT
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of RV Builder (Michael Sausen)
Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2007 9:05 AM
To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: RE: unbelievable!!!
You forgot Florida. As far as how many should someone be allowed to build, there shouldn’t be a limit as long as they are sticking to the intent of the rule which clearly is against any type of productionizing of a experimental aircraft. You want to produce the RV-10 as a aircraft for profit, no problem. Take it through the same processes that every other production aircraft company does. While you are at it develop your own manufacturing facilities because there isn’t a chance Van will sell kit’s to you at that point, even under the guise of “raw materials”.
Unfortunately there is no litmus test for determining what a builders intent is. This is what the FAA has to struggle with. Sometimes they get it right, sometimes they get it wrong. There are some limits that make it pretty clear like building and selling an aircraft once a year, especially the same model. The 51% rule requires some philosophical debate and a little too much Carnac the Magnificent to determine who is following the rule and who isn’t. Some guys are just flat out breaking the rule no matter how they rationalize it. Some are legitimate in their pursuits. I think to things that would go a long way are to reduce this problem are; make the builder sit on the aircraft for at least 2 years and look at the builders employment history. If they have been unemployed for several years but have built 5 aircraft it’s a good bet they are in it for the money.
I enjoy the building aspects as much as I enjoy flying. There is a good chance I will build one or more aircraft in the future because I enjoy that aspect. I sure don’t need more than 2 or 3 aircraft so I will probably end up selling at least one or two. The difference is I have absolutely no problem in keeping the aircraft for a few years after I complete it.
Soap box off.
Michael
Do not archive
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of John W. Cox
Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2007 2:48 AM
To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: RE: unbelievable!!!
Thank you for respectfully withdrawing your observation. The RV-10 is being mass produced in South Africa, Russian, the P.I., Central America and yes in Oklahoma. The loophole has a truck running through it and the FAA has convened a committee to close the door or give approval on those current actions. Your answer will be forthcoming quite soon.
Just a rhetorical question for the masses. Just how many RV-10s beyond ONE should a builder be allowed to complete before the group yells “Foul”? I guess the silence is a compelling answer.
The “For hire” boys are alive and well buying RV-10 kits.
Here is the final question. Who finds it inappropriate for a manufacturer to ship a second, third, fourth or fifth kit to those repeat builders?
Bill, you should be hearing soon from a few of those builders (predators) about their product offering.
John Cox
#40600
Do not Archive
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of William Condon
Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2007 12:00 AM
To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: RE: unbelievable!!!
Given that the below is all true, one cannot have any sympathy for the two doctors involved or the former owner of the company. Not only did were the doctors displaying an unbelievable level of foolishness (by giving away huge sums of money to a possible crook), but they were directly threatening the experimental building community, as a whole.
I say that because this apparently involved the ‘for-hire’ building of an experimental aircraft – since the doctors didn’t know anything about the scam, they obviously hadn’t invested any of their own labor in the building of the aircraft. Of course, to get an airworthiness certificate for this aircraft, the people would have to defraud the FAA. And, when people are out there defrauding the FAA, this will eventual lead to them (the FAA) eating away at the public’s right to build its own airplanes.
Unless, of course, there is a loophole that I don’t know about (where one can pay to have kit airplanes professionally built) – if that is the case, I respectfully withdraw my comments (except for the foolishness / crook part, which still stands).
Bill C.
Dream – 100%, everything else – 0%
US military stationed overseas until 2009
| Quote: | | http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-Listhttp://forums.matronics.com href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-Listhref="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com |
0123456789 | Quote: | | http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List |
0 | Quote: | | http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List |
1 | Quote: | | http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List |
2 | Quote: | | http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List |
3 | Quote: | | http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List |
4
[quote][b]
| | - The Matronics RV10-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LloydDR(at)wernerco.com
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 13, 2007 8:03 am Post subject: unbelievable!!! |
|
|
Knowing everyone from down there, this could not be farther from the truth. The NWPA shop is there to give new builders an introduction to metal kit plane building, specifically the RV series. They are great people, and do not bend the rules, they help the new builder complete the emp, and give the builder a solid foundation in correct building practices and the builder gets to try multiple tools while under instruction. But to make it clear, it is the builder that does the construction, the shop will HELP, not do, with the priming and deburring but the builder is doing the majority of the work. This shop is well organized and highly recommended by other builders in the area. This is a great way to complete an emp in 7 days and get a solid footing to finish your project.
Remember, I do not have an affiliation with them, just know them from being in the area, and highly respecting their efforts for the building community.
Dan
N289DT
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of GRANSCOTT(at)aol.com
Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2007 10:29 AM
To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: Re: RV10-List: unbelievable!!!
In a message dated 2/13/07 9:44:19 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, jesse(at)saintaviation.com writes:
| Quote: |
To add to the mix, I have a friend who is retired and he had built 6 or 7 RV-6 and -7’s because he enjoys doing it and needs something to do. He doesn’t make much on them, but he keeps building because he enjoys it. He builds planes because he can, but I don’t think he is abusing the rules. He is doing it as recreation, which definitely fits within the intent and letter of the law. The litmus test that you mention would obviously cause him unjust problems. |
I'm guessing, the FAA may want to target peoples or companies that have set up to "pretend" that individual builders have completed the project when they may only have just "supervised" the builder...yet the pretend builder files for a repairman's certificate; not having truly completed the 51% rule. Let's say, there is a kit in Europe that one can go on vacation for 2 weeks, in which time you go to the factory, wave a magic wand then you do vacation seeing the highlights in town; they then pack up your plane in a crate; ship it to you with a certificate saying you completed the 51% rule; and it's a European Experimental, you bolt on the wings, install the battery, and you file the paperwork requesting a repairman's certificate...is that bending the 51% rule?
Should the FAA give you a repairman's certificate?
And this may be happening all over the place...it can happen anywhere. Is this fair to the true builders...remember these folks who may be skirting the 51% rule, will be in your insurance pool no matter how you slice the pool; there are only so many members in the Experimental category and that's who you'll share your risk with, and the insurances' company's profits with.
I can't imagine the insurance payments that Cirrus folks are paying.
Up to now, RV's have a very good record but with in a few years and bogus builders and maintenance that record could get skewed quickly by a few. And this could include some death's and injuries. Accident rates are generally lower for most VFR flying compared to heavy IFR flights by low time pilots. The RV 10 is being built by many builders to be a solid IFR machine; if any corners are cut, it could lead to unwanted results. Does the concept of a 600 hp RV 10 being built for folks that don't have any knowledge about the machine make any sense in your insurance pool?
Sooooo, let's all be careful for what's going on and what the FAA is targeting. As we know, the FAA generally swings too far one way before logic sets in. If you have the opportunity, and the FAA begins to have a comment period be sure to log in your opinion...all this is MHO...
Can't wait to get back to IL to begin the building phase.
By the way, I've been in contact with the Western PA RV Builders for the past couple of years--thanks to Dan Checkaway's web site...I'd planned to go to their facility and do their workshop...apparently they have changed directions.
Now they are basically working to help people begin and complete their RV project. Originally it was my impression they were a workshop to try tools and for one to begin the process of the Rear Stab...apparently they are now more of a building shop and are booked through 2008...FYI.
Patrick
do not archive
[quote]
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
[b]
| | - The Matronics RV10-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
GRANSCOTT(at)aol.com
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 13, 2007 8:22 am Post subject: unbelievable!!! |
|
|
Dan,
Please don't misconstrue what I meant...they have made some changes and are not offering the same concept as they began, that's all I meant to say...I'm sure they are ethical in their approach to helping the RV builder and other builders...as assistance. It seems to me they are now offering total assistance as compared to a "start" assistance before.
[quote][b]
| | - The Matronics RV10-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rleffler
Joined: 05 Nov 2006
Posts: 680
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 13, 2007 8:30 am Post subject: unbelievable!!! |
|
|
Patrick,
Since you are in IL, you may want to try Grov-Air in Indy. I ran into the same issues. I wanted to go to Western PA RV Builders too and was disappointed that he stopped conducting the basic class. I attended a session at Grov-Air in December. Troy has built a RV6 and is just finishing the wings on his RV-10. He’s also assisting several other builders in his shop as well. He is also a former United A&P.
Bob
do not archive
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of GRANSCOTT(at)aol.com
Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2007 10:29 AM
To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: Re: RV10-List: unbelievable!!!
In a message dated 2/13/07 9:44:19 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, jesse(at)saintaviation.com writes:
<<edited>>>
By the way, I've been in contact with the Western PA RV Builders for the past couple of years--thanks to Dan Checkaway's web site...I'd planned to go to their facility and do their workshop...apparently they have changed directions.
Now they are basically working to help people begin and complete their RV project. Originally it was my impression they were a workshop to try tools and for one to begin the process of the Rear Stab...apparently they are now more of a building shop and are booked through 2008...FYI.
Patrick
do not archive
| Quote: | | http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List |
01234
[quote][b]
| | - The Matronics RV10-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List |
|
_________________
Bob Leffler
N410BL - Phase I
http://mykitlog.com/rleffler |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LloydDR(at)wernerco.com
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 13, 2007 8:40 am Post subject: unbelievable!!! |
|
|
Not true, as a builder I have access to many different FSDO's and DAR's, and if I was doing this for profit, I could contact a different one each time and none would be the wiser about how many I had built. As for that what is the magic number that would trip it? further what if I build it, but let the new owner fill out the paperwork, how would you track that?
My argument is that it is not as easy as all of that, there are many loop holes and that is why they are addressing it. For that matter, even if they only will sell one kit to one household, I could get various people in the area to buy the kits for me, so it gets more and more complex.
Dan
N289DT
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of RV Builder (Michael Sausen)
Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2007 10:58 AM
To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: RE: RV10-List: unbelievable!!!
I don’t think they should be reviewing everyone that applies for a certificate. Something like that would need to be triggered as a second level based on a concern, hunch, report or whatever they currently use to root out models that are in production. I certainly don’t think it should be a first level item that is attached to everyone. They have more than enough info in their existing registration database for them to mine and find models that are being built as a production run. Any DAR or FAA rep in a given area certainly knows who is doing what as this is a fairly closed community. I blame them more than anyone for allowing it to happen.
Michael
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Lloyd, Daniel R.
Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2007 8:42 AM
To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: RE: RV10-List: unbelievable!!!
SO here is a thought on this, how can the FAA be expected to review the employment condition of every person that applies for an airworthiness certificate? We all complain about how much oversight they have now, and the associated costs. You want to see fee's go through the roof, add an additional administrative overhead to the process and see how much more money it costs us, and how much additional time will be added to the review/paperwork process?
Not saying the system does not need to be re-worked, but we need to figure out how to fix it, and I personally do not think that by having vendors on the committee, we the builders are being looked out for.
I would like to ask John Cox who else is on the panel, and who is representing "all of us?" those with the money who vote?
Dan
N289DT
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of RV Builder (Michael Sausen)
Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2007 9:05 AM
To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: RE: RV10-List: unbelievable!!!
You forgot Florida. As far as how many should someone be allowed to build, there shouldn’t be a limit as long as they are sticking to the intent of the rule which clearly is against any type of productionizing of a experimental aircraft. You want to produce the RV-10 as a aircraft for profit, no problem. Take it through the same processes that every other production aircraft company does. While you are at it develop your own manufacturing facilities because there isn’t a chance Van will sell kit’s to you at that point, even under the guise of “raw materials”.
Unfortunately there is no litmus test for determining what a builders intent is. This is what the FAA has to struggle with. Sometimes they get it right, sometimes they get it wrong. There are some limits that make it pretty clear like building and selling an aircraft once a year, especially the same model. The 51% rule requires some philosophical debate and a little too much Carnac the Magnificent to determine who is following the rule and who isn’t. Some guys are just flat out breaking the rule no matter how they rationalize it. Some are legitimate in their pursuits. I think to things that would go a long way are to reduce this problem are; make the builder sit on the aircraft for at least 2 years and look at the builders employment history. If they have been unemployed for several years but have built 5 aircraft it’s a good bet they are in it for the money.
I enjoy the building aspects as much as I enjoy flying. There is a good chance I will build one or more aircraft in the future because I enjoy that aspect. I sure don’t need more than 2 or 3 aircraft so I will probably end up selling at least one or two. The difference is I have absolutely no problem in keeping the aircraft for a few years after I complete it.
Soap box off.
Michael
Do not archive
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of John W. Cox
Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2007 2:48 AM
To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: RE: RV10-List: unbelievable!!!
Thank you for respectfully withdrawing your observation. The RV-10 is being mass produced in South Africa, Russian, the P.I., Central America and yes in Oklahoma. The loophole has a truck running through it and the FAA has convened a committee to close the door or give approval on those current actions. Your answer will be forthcoming quite soon.
Just a rhetorical question for the masses. Just how many RV-10s beyond ONE should a builder be allowed to complete before the group yells “Foul”? I guess the silence is a compelling answer.
The “For hire” boys are alive and well buying RV-10 kits.
Here is the final question. Who finds it inappropriate for a manufacturer to ship a second, third, fourth or fifth kit to those repeat builders?
Bill, you should be hearing soon from a few of those builders (predators) about their product offering.
John Cox
#40600
Do not Archive
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of William Condon
Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2007 12:00 AM
To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: RE: RV10-List: unbelievable!!!
Given that the below is all true, one cannot have any sympathy for the two doctors involved or the former owner of the company. Not only did were the doctors displaying an unbelievable level of foolishness (by giving away huge sums of money to a possible crook), but they were directly threatening the experimental building community, as a whole.
I say that because this apparently involved the ‘for-hire’ building of an experimental aircraft – since the doctors didn’t know anything about the scam, they obviously hadn’t invested any of their own labor in the building of the aircraft. Of course, to get an airworthiness certificate for this aircraft, the people would have to defraud the FAA. And, when people are out there defrauding the FAA, this will eventual lead to them (the FAA) eating away at the public’s right to build its own airplanes.
Unless, of course, there is a loophole that I don’t know about (where one can pay to have kit airplanes professionally built) – if that is the case, I respectfully withdraw my comments (except for the foolishness / crook part, which still stands).
Bill C.
Dream – 100%, everything else – 0%
US military stationed overseas until 2009
| Quote: | | http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-Listhttp://forums.matronics.com href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-Listhref="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com |
0123456789 | Quote: | | http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List |
0 | Quote: | | http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List |
1 | Quote: | | http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List |
2 | Quote: | | http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List |
3 | Quote: | | http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List |
4
| Quote: | | http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List |
5 [quote][b]
| | - The Matronics RV10-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dave(at)AirCraftersLLC.co
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 13, 2007 9:27 am Post subject: unbelievable!!! |
|
|
Dan,
>> how can the FAA be expected to review the employment condition of every person that applies for an airworthiness certificate? <<
They probably can't, and I don't think they want to.
>>and how much additional time will be added to the review/paperwork process? <<
Well, somebody needs to be looking closer. That will take more time but hopefully not much more.
>>... I personally do not think that by having vendors on the committee, we the builders are being looked out for. <<
The committee co-chairs, Frank Paskiewicz (FAA), Van, and EAA's Earl Lawrence are tremendous builder's advocates. I hope I am too. There is a great respect for the tradition of homebuilding and the consequences of continuing the present course of action are not lost on us.
>> who else is on the panel <<
Kim Barnette, FAA Flight Standards Service, AFS-300
Joe Bartels, Lancair
Mike Brown, FAA Flight Standards Service, AFS-800
Stephen Buczynski, FAA Aircraft Certification, Van Nuys MIDO
Paul Fiduccia, Small Aircraft Manufacturers Association (SAMA)
Joe Gauthier, Manufacturing DAR
Paul Greer, Airworthiness Law Branch, AGC-210
Donald Lausman, FAA Airworthiness Certification Branch, AIR-230
Dave Saylor, AirCrafters LLC
Rick Schramek, Epic Aircraft
Matt Tomsheck, FAA Aircraft Certification, Cleveland MIDO
Mikael Via, Glasair
Brian Whitehead, Transport Canada Civil Aviation
Jeremy Monnett, Sonex Aircraft
I welcome any input and will take it all in as we develop our recomendations. Of course we all have a stake in the game but I think this is a very well assembled group, well suited for the task at hand. We are meeting for the third time next week in Bend, OR.
Dave Saylor
AirCrafters LLC
140 Aviation Way
Watsonville, CA
831-722-9141
831-750-0284 CL
www.AirCraftersLLC.com
[quote][b]
| | - The Matronics RV10-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rvbuilder(at)sausen.net
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 13, 2007 9:28 am Post subject: unbelievable!!! |
|
|
There will always be ways to hide activities. Hell you could easily buy the kit, have it delivered, throw it back on another truck, and take it to someone else to build. Fill out all the paperwork saying you built it and no one would no. Of course you start getting into falsifying documents to the federal government at that point which is a whole different can of worms. I know of at least one operation that is doing it that way, but I still found them in the FAA database once I had heard about it and had some reference points. No easy answer that’s for sure.
Michael
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Lloyd, Daniel R.
Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2007 10:40 AM
To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: RE: unbelievable!!!
Not true, as a builder I have access to many different FSDO's and DAR's, and if I was doing this for profit, I could contact a different one each time and none would be the wiser about how many I had built. As for that what is the magic number that would trip it? further what if I build it, but let the new owner fill out the paperwork, how would you track that?
My argument is that it is not as easy as all of that, there are many loop holes and that is why they are addressing it. For that matter, even if they only will sell one kit to one household, I could get various people in the area to buy the kits for me, so it gets more and more complex.
Dan
N289DT
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of RV Builder (Michael Sausen)
Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2007 10:58 AM
To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: RE: unbelievable!!!
I don’t think they should be reviewing everyone that applies for a certificate. Something like that would need to be triggered as a second level based on a concern, hunch, report or whatever they currently use to root out models that are in production. I certainly don’t think it should be a first level item that is attached to everyone. They have more than enough info in their existing registration database for them to mine and find models that are being built as a production run. Any DAR or FAA rep in a given area certainly knows who is doing what as this is a fairly closed community. I blame them more than anyone for allowing it to happen.
Michael
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Lloyd, Daniel R.
Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2007 8:42 AM
To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: RE: unbelievable!!!
SO here is a thought on this, how can the FAA be expected to review the employment condition of every person that applies for an airworthiness certificate? We all complain about how much oversight they have now, and the associated costs. You want to see fee's go through the roof, add an additional administrative overhead to the process and see how much more money it costs us, and how much additional time will be added to the review/paperwork process?
Not saying the system does not need to be re-worked, but we need to figure out how to fix it, and I personally do not think that by having vendors on the committee, we the builders are being looked out for.
I would like to ask John Cox who else is on the panel, and who is representing "all of us?" those with the money who vote?
Dan
N289DT
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of RV Builder (Michael Sausen)
Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2007 9:05 AM
To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: RE: unbelievable!!!
You forgot Florida. As far as how many should someone be allowed to build, there shouldn’t be a limit as long as they are sticking to the intent of the rule which clearly is against any type of productionizing of a experimental aircraft. You want to produce the RV-10 as a aircraft for profit, no problem. Take it through the same processes that every other production aircraft company does. While you are at it develop your own manufacturing facilities because there isn’t a chance Van will sell kit’s to you at that point, even under the guise of “raw materials”.
Unfortunately there is no litmus test for determining what a builders intent is. This is what the FAA has to struggle with. Sometimes they get it right, sometimes they get it wrong. There are some limits that make it pretty clear like building and selling an aircraft once a year, especially the same model. The 51% rule requires some philosophical debate and a little too much Carnac the Magnificent to determine who is following the rule and who isn’t. Some guys are just flat out breaking the rule no matter how they rationalize it. Some are legitimate in their pursuits. I think to things that would go a long way are to reduce this problem are; make the builder sit on the aircraft for at least 2 years and look at the builders employment history. If they have been unemployed for several years but have built 5 aircraft it’s a good bet they are in it for the money.
I enjoy the building aspects as much as I enjoy flying. There is a good chance I will build one or more aircraft in the future because I enjoy that aspect. I sure don’t need more than 2 or 3 aircraft so I will probably end up selling at least one or two. The difference is I have absolutely no problem in keeping the aircraft for a few years after I complete it.
Soap box off.
Michael
Do not archive
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of John W. Cox
Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2007 2:48 AM
To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: RE: unbelievable!!!
Thank you for respectfully withdrawing your observation. The RV-10 is being mass produced in South Africa, Russian, the P.I., Central America and yes in Oklahoma. The loophole has a truck running through it and the FAA has convened a committee to close the door or give approval on those current actions. Your answer will be forthcoming quite soon.
Just a rhetorical question for the masses. Just how many RV-10s beyond ONE should a builder be allowed to complete before the group yells “Foul”? I guess the silence is a compelling answer.
The “For hire” boys are alive and well buying RV-10 kits.
Here is the final question. Who finds it inappropriate for a manufacturer to ship a second, third, fourth or fifth kit to those repeat builders?
Bill, you should be hearing soon from a few of those builders (predators) about their product offering.
John Cox
#40600
Do not Archive
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of William Condon
Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2007 12:00 AM
To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: RE: unbelievable!!!
Given that the below is all true, one cannot have any sympathy for the two doctors involved or the former owner of the company. Not only did were the doctors displaying an unbelievable level of foolishness (by giving away huge sums of money to a possible crook), but they were directly threatening the experimental building community, as a whole.
I say that because this apparently involved the ‘for-hire’ building of an experimental aircraft – since the doctors didn’t know anything about the scam, they obviously hadn’t invested any of their own labor in the building of the aircraft. Of course, to get an airworthiness certificate for this aircraft, the people would have to defraud the FAA. And, when people are out there defrauding the FAA, this will eventual lead to them (the FAA) eating away at the public’s right to build its own airplanes.
Unless, of course, there is a loophole that I don’t know about (where one can pay to have kit airplanes professionally built) – if that is the case, I respectfully withdraw my comments (except for the foolishness / crook part, which still stands).
Bill C.
Dream – 100%, everything else – 0%
US military stationed overseas until 2009
| Quote: | | http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-Listhttp://forums.matronics.com href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-Listhref="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com |
0123456789 | Quote: | | http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List |
0 | Quote: | | http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List |
1 | Quote: | | http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List |
2 | Quote: | | http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List |
3 | Quote: | | http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List |
4 | Quote: | | http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List |
5 | Quote: | | http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List |
6 | Quote: | | http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List |
7 | Quote: | | http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List |
8 | Quote: | | http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List |
9 | Quote: | | http://forums.matronics.com |
0 | Quote: | | http://forums.matronics.com |
1 | Quote: | | http://forums.matronics.com |
2 | Quote: | | http://forums.matronics.com |
3 | Quote: | | http://forums.matronics.com |
4
[quote][b]
| | - The Matronics RV10-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jhstarn(at)verizon.net
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 13, 2007 9:33 am Post subject: unbelievable!!! |
|
|
Being an ex-cop I can offer a suggestion to track who doing what for whom: FOLLOW THE MONEY and it's not that hard to backtrack. IRS does it all the time.
KABONG Do Not Archive
NOTE: I did trim all of the previous posts & added Do Not Archive. Thanks John I did see your D-N-A.
[quote] ---
| | - The Matronics RV10-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rvbuilder(at)sausen.net
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 13, 2007 9:53 am Post subject: unbelievable!!! |
|
|
Nice trim job! Following the money is probably the quickest solution for the true manufacturers and turnkey operations.
Michael
DNA below (yes I check everytime:-))
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of JOHN STARN
Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2007 11:28 AM
To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: Re: unbelievable!!!
Being an ex-cop I can offer a suggestion to track who doing what for whom: FOLLOW THE MONEY and it's not that hard to backtrack. IRS does it all the time.
KABONG Do Not Archive
NOTE: I did trim all of the previous posts & added Do Not Archive. Thanks John I did see your D-N-A.
[quote] [b]
| | - The Matronics RV10-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rvbuilder(at)sausen.net
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 13, 2007 9:55 am Post subject: unbelievable!!! |
|
|
Dave,
Can you share the groups progress? Any impending recommendations or timelines for implementation.
Michael
Do not archive
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dave Saylor
Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2007 11:26 AM
To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: RE: unbelievable!!!
Dan,
>> how can the FAA be expected to review the employment condition of every person that applies for an airworthiness certificate? <<
They probably can't, and I don't think they want to.
| Quote: | >and how much additional time will be added to the review/paperwork process? <<
|
Well, somebody needs to be looking closer. That will take more time but hopefully not much more.
>>... I personally do not think that by having vendors on the committee, we the builders are being looked out for. <<
The committee co-chairs, Frank Paskiewicz (FAA), Van, and EAA's Earl Lawrence are tremendous builder's advocates. I hope I am too. There is a great respect for the tradition of homebuilding and the consequences of continuing the present course of action are not lost on us.
| Quote: | > who else is on the panel <<
|
Kim Barnette, FAA Flight Standards Service, AFS-300
Joe Bartels, Lancair
Mike Brown, FAA Flight Standards Service, AFS-800
Stephen Buczynski, FAA Aircraft Certification, Van Nuys MIDO
Paul Fiduccia, Small Aircraft Manufacturers Association (SAMA)
Joe Gauthier, Manufacturing DAR
Paul Greer, Airworthiness Law Branch, AGC-210
Donald Lausman, FAA Airworthiness Certification Branch, AIR-230
Dave Saylor, AirCrafters LLC
Rick Schramek, Epic Aircraft
Matt Tomsheck, FAA Aircraft Certification, Cleveland MIDO
Mikael Via, Glasair
Brian Whitehead, Transport Canada Civil Aviation
Jeremy Monnett, Sonex Aircraft
I welcome any input and will take it all in as we develop our recomendations. Of course we all have a stake in the game but I think this is a very well assembled group, well suited for the task at hand. We are meeting for the third time next week in Bend, OR.
Dave Saylor
AirCrafters LLC
140 Aviation Way
Watsonville, CA
831-722-9141
831-750-0284 CL
www.AirCraftersLLC.com
| Quote: | | http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List |
01234
[quote][b]
| | - The Matronics RV10-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rv10builder(at)verizon.ne
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 13, 2007 10:10 am Post subject: unbelievable!!! |
|
|
Seems this topic comes up every month or so. Yes, we point our fingers at lousy worksmanship at Oshkosh than we point our fingers at RV-10 rockets on E-bay and each time it brings up the commitee on ending the building for profit.
Most of us agree that having people build this strictly for profit was never the intention of the EAA 50 years ago, when they fought for the privilege to allow a person to build a plane as a hobby, my guess that "for profit" never was even conceived in the minds of any of those involved.
Now, about pointing fingers at those in Florida, specifically Jesse and his "for profit", I did a survey with many of my friends, mostly all did missionary work out of the US sometime in their lives and asked- if it is against the rules to build something for profit, yet some organization does it for profit with the intent of buildiong skills of Equadorian laborers and the profits go to support and finance a missionary ministry- does that make it right? Before I respond with the answer I'll remind many of the goals of some organizations to get kits and bring them to schools to teach students the skills involved in building a plane. Last I heard the planes were sold and the proceeds went to support the school to continue the program.. hmm that goes against the rules and should be stopped!! or should it?
Well to answer the question, Jesse and Saint Aviation are doing the right thing, they are not doing this for self profit but for a charity and the benefit of others. Yes there is a gray in the black and white of the rules and just as I would consider going through a red light (looking both ways first of course) and speeding to get my pregnant wife who is about to have a baby, to the hospital, there are those exceptions to the rules- even if someone thought there wasn't, until they themselves are in that situation.
Now for my personal selfishness- I loath the "for profits" out there. They are not only doing it for their own benefit, like the 2bums group and the unethical builders and companies taking money and having no morals for anyone but themselves, they are killing my hopes to afford a plane. Why? 225K for a plane? that means registration in California on this aircraft goes up (value is not based on my costs but the going rate on trade-a-plane), there is the insurance issues of course and the reasons we all are upset about.
Let's point our fingers at the unethical builders and leave the rare builders that participate in this forum and add value in the form of positive comments(ie Jesse) alone. I agree that "for profit" will ultimately hurt those who want it as a hobby, as it was initially designed for, but stopping the few will ultimately result in rules that will harm the rest.
Let Van's and the commitee figure out how they will do this and hope the way is to penalize those who are building for profit without a good reason for it (retired and like building, charity, schools, etc) in the form of fines that goes to paying for improving the experimental category so those who are honestly doing it can benefit from those are aren't!
tide box off
Do not archive
Pascal
[quote] ---
| | - The Matronics RV10-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dave(at)AirCraftersLLC.co
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 13, 2007 1:25 pm Post subject: unbelievable!!! |
|
|
Michael,
Most of the work that we think we can do should be finished by this summer. Implementation will take another year or so after we submit our recommendations.
One point that has been accepted by the committee is that it is much more practical to change orders and guidance than it is to change FARs. So 21.191(g) probably won't change.
Another point is that much of the problem exists because FAA inpsectors and DARs don't have the ability to deny an application without overwhelming evidence. A project can look pretty fishy and still be within the rules as written. Everyone knows it stinks but the orders don't say what to do about it. That's an area that will most likely change: authority for those issuing the certificates to use the judgement and experience that allowed them to become inspectors in the first place.
As we've just witnessed in this short exchange, as soon as a rule is adopted or even proposed, those with ill will find a way around it. The inspectors need to be able to adapt just as quickly, which historically is difficult for governments to do. It seems to me that a clever and concise solution is possible, but it hasn't shown itself yet.
Dave Saylor
AirCrafters LLC
140 Aviation Way
Watsonville, CA
831-722-9141
831-750-0284 CL
www.AirCraftersLLC.com
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of RV Builder (Michael Sausen)
Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2007 9:55 AM
To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: RE: RV10-List: unbelievable!!!
Dave,
Can you share the groups progress? Any impending recommendations or timelines for implementation.
Michael
Do not archive
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dave Saylor
Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2007 11:26 AM
To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: RE: RV10-List: unbelievable!!!
Dan,
>> how can the FAA be expected to review the employment condition of every person that applies for an airworthiness certificate? <<
They probably can't, and I don't think they want to.
| Quote: | >and how much additional time will be added to the review/paperwork process? <<
|
Well, somebody needs to be looking closer. That will take more time but hopefully not much more.
>>... I personally do not think that by having vendors on the committee, we the builders are being looked out for. <<
The committee co-chairs, Frank Paskiewicz (FAA), Van, and EAA's Earl Lawrence are tremendous builder's advocates. I hope I am too. There is a great respect for the tradition of homebuilding and the consequences of continuing the present course of action are not lost on us.
| Quote: | > who else is on the panel <<
|
Kim Barnette, FAA Flight Standards Service, AFS-300
Joe Bartels, Lancair
Mike Brown, FAA Flight Standards Service, AFS-800
Stephen Buczynski, FAA Aircraft Certification, Van Nuys MIDO
Paul Fiduccia, Small Aircraft Manufacturers Association (SAMA)
Joe Gauthier, Manufacturing DAR
Paul Greer, Airworthiness Law Branch, AGC-210
Donald Lausman, FAA Airworthiness Certification Branch, AIR-230
Dave Saylor, AirCrafters LLC
Rick Schramek, Epic Aircraft
Matt Tomsheck, FAA Aircraft Certification, Cleveland MIDO
Mikael Via, Glasair
Brian Whitehead, Transport Canada Civil Aviation
Jeremy Monnett, Sonex Aircraft
I welcome any input and will take it all in as we develop our recomendations. Of course we all have a stake in the game but I think this is a very well assembled group, well suited for the task at hand. We are meeting for the third time next week in Bend, OR.
Dave Saylor
AirCrafters LLC
140 Aviation Way
Watsonville, CA
831-722-9141
831-750-0284 CL
www.AirCraftersLLC.com
| Quote: | | http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List |
01234
5 [quote][b]
| | - The Matronics RV10-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
n8vim(at)arrl.net
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 13, 2007 2:22 pm Post subject: unbelievable!!! |
|
|
>authority for those issuing the certificates to use the judgement and
experience that allowed them to become inspectors in the first place.
Use common sense? Are you mad?! You are talking about the U.S.
Government, right? Run for the hills!
sheesh.. common sense... what's this world coming to?
-Jim 40384 ,who is about to get a whole crapload of snow dumped on him.
do not archive (This entire message was written in a humorous tone;
Please read it as the same)
(Penguins rule!)
Dave Saylor wrote:
| Quote: | Michael,
Most of the work that we think we can do should be finished by this
summer. Implementation will take another year or so after we submit
our recommendations.
One point that has been accepted by the committee is that it is much
more practical to change orders and guidance than it is to change
FARs. So 21.191(g) probably won't change.
Another point is that much of the problem exists because FAA
inpsectors and DARs don't have the ability to deny an application
without overwhelming evidence. A project can look pretty fishy and
still be within the rules as written. Everyone knows it stinks but
the orders don't say what to do about it. That's an area that will
most likely change: authority for those issuing the certificates to
use the judgement and experience that allowed them to become
inspectors in the first place.
As we've just witnessed in this short exchange, as soon as a rule is
adopted or even proposed, those with ill will find a way around it.
The inspectors need to be able to adapt just as quickly, which
historically is difficult for governments to do. It seems to me that
a clever and concise solution is possible, but it hasn't shown itself yet.
Dave Saylor
AirCrafters LLC
140 Aviation Way
Watsonville, CA
831-722-9141
831-750-0284 CL
www.AirCraftersLLC.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From:* owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] *On Behalf Of *RV
Builder (Michael Sausen)
*Sent:* Tuesday, February 13, 2007 9:55 AM
*To:* rv10-list(at)matronics.com
*Subject:* RE: unbelievable!!!
Dave,
Can you share the groups progress? Any impending recommendations or
timelines for implementation.
Michael
Do not archive
*From:* owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] *On Behalf Of *Dave Saylor
*Sent:* Tuesday, February 13, 2007 11:26 AM
*To:* rv10-list(at)matronics.com
*Subject:* RE: unbelievable!!!
Dan,
>> how can the FAA be expected to review the employment condition of
every person that applies for an airworthiness certificate? <<
They probably can't, and I don't think they want to.
>>and how much additional time will be added to the review/paperwork
process? <<
Well, somebody needs to be looking closer. That will take more time
but hopefully not much more.
>>... I personally do not think that by having vendors on the
committee, we the builders are being looked out for. <<
The committee co-chairs, Frank Paskiewicz (FAA), Van, and EAA's Earl
Lawrence are tremendous builder's advocates. I hope I am too. There
is a great respect for the tradition of homebuilding and the
consequences of continuing the present course of action are not lost
on us.
>> who else is on the panel <<
Kim Barnette, FAA Flight Standards Service, AFS-300
Joe Bartels, Lancair
Mike Brown, FAA Flight Standards Service, AFS-800
Stephen Buczynski, FAA Aircraft Certification, Van Nuys MIDO
Paul Fiduccia, Small Aircraft Manufacturers Association (SAMA)
Joe Gauthier, Manufacturing DAR
Paul Greer, Airworthiness Law Branch, AGC-210
Donald Lausman, FAA Airworthiness Certification Branch, AIR-230
Dave Saylor, AirCrafters LLC
Rick Schramek, Epic Aircraft
Matt Tomsheck, FAA Aircraft Certification, Cleveland MIDO
Mikael Via, Glasair
Brian Whitehead, Transport Canada Civil Aviation
Jeremy Monnett, Sonex Aircraft
I welcome any input and will take it all in as we develop our
recomendations. Of course we all have a stake in the game but I think
this is a very well assembled group, well suited for the task at
hand. We are meeting for the third time next week in Bend, OR.
Dave Saylor
AirCrafters LLC
140 Aviation Way
Watsonville, CA
831-722-9141
831-750-0284 CL
www.AirCraftersLLC.com
* *
* *
**
**
**
**
**
**
*http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List*
**
**
**
*http://forums.matronics.com*
**
* *
*
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
*
*
*
|
| | - The Matronics RV10-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
AV8ORJWC
Joined: 13 Jul 2006
Posts: 1149
Location: Aurora, Oregon "Home of VANS"
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 13, 2007 2:35 pm Post subject: unbelievable!!! |
|
|
Other than an EAA rep, and several FAA reps, there is Dave Saylor who is one of the few true builders, (non kit manufacturers). Dave has asked on this list for your opinions and posted his address so you could keep informed. At least the wolves only go after the weakest hens when guarding the roost. Now when was the last time VAN, or Joe or Rick asked what builders wanted to protect the builder’s interests with this unique pursuit. I think they just might already know what is in their own self-interests and they believe that is in ours as well.
FAA Order 1110.143 dated 07/26/2006 National ARC Policy – Amateur-Built initiated by AIR-230
Frank Paskiewicz FAA Manager
Earl Lawrence, EAA Vice President of Industry – (Co Chairman)
Richard Van Grunsven – VANS Aircraft (Co-Chairman) engineering2(at)vansaircraft.com (engineering2(at)vansaircraft.com)
Rick Schrameck – Epic LT rickschrameck(at)cox.net (rickschrameck(at)cox.net)
David Saylor – AirCrafters Dave(at)airCraftersLLC.com (Dave(at)airCraftersLLC.com)
Joe Bartels – Lancair International JoeB(at)lancair.com (JoeB(at)lancair.com)
The condition of the kit manufacturers is quite healthy, Thank you for asking. Sales are brisk.
Each of you should already know who is on the panel, what is being discussed and what they are proposing. Or just sleep tight tonight cause the roost is well guarded.
Wouldn’t it be cute to have a custom EAA dash plate which read “The majority of construction of this aircraft you are about to fly in has been built by individuals I have no knowledge of from an unidentified country other than the US of A.”
John Cox
#40600
Do not archive
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Lloyd, Daniel R.
Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2007 6:42 AM
To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: RE: RV10-List: unbelievable!!!
SO here is a thought on this, how can the FAA be expected to review the employment condition of every person that applies for an airworthiness certificate? We all complain about how much oversight they have now, and the associated costs. You want to see fee's go through the roof, add an additional administrative overhead to the process and see how much more money it costs us, and how much additional time will be added to the review/paperwork process?
Not saying the system does not need to be re-worked, but we need to figure out how to fix it, and I personally do not think that by having vendors on the committee, we the builders are being looked out for.
I would like to ask John Cox who else is on the panel, and who is representing "all of us?" those with the money who vote?
Dan
N289DT
[quote][b]
| | - The Matronics RV10-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
AV8ORJWC
Joined: 13 Jul 2006
Posts: 1149
Location: Aurora, Oregon "Home of VANS"
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 13, 2007 2:48 pm Post subject: unbelievable!!! |
|
|
Jesse, you and several have read more into the text. I was referencing, two-three-nine-twenty five replicated RV-10s build not for personal education, not for personal recreation but built for Revenue RESALE by the same abuser. The unjust problems will become self evident when the drivers of the semi tractor crash through the brick wall like in a scene from “Terminator” and say “I am Back!”. It is the manufacturing scope that should be the focus. Even Rolls Royce used to be hand built one by one for Revenue. It was not for recreation, education or for individual fulfillment.
This unique facet should be Solely for the Education, and Recreation of the builder(s) who completes the project. Not third party purchasers. Thank goodness when they are sold they are more difficult to maintain. Wait a minute…. That sounds like a formula for disaster. Dozens and dozens of knock off production RV-10s built for revenue, sold for revenue and maintained by whom?
We just saw an Ebay ad which confirms PT Barnum may have been 100 years ago (a fool is born every minute) but the human spirit leaves the repetition of poor judgment for every future generation to stumble upon. I would hope our legacy is to a higher calling. Keep your Situational Awareness High.
Let’s close the Loop Hole and promote safe flying.
John Cox
the Turbanator #40600
Do not Archive
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jesse Saint
Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2007 6:40 AM
To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: RE: RV10-List: unbelievable!!!
To add to the mix, I have a friend who is retired and he had built 6 or 7 RV-6 and -7’s because he enjoys doing it and needs something to do. He doesn’t make much on them, but he keeps building because he enjoys it. He builds planes because he can, but I don’t think he is abusing the rules. He is doing it as recreation, which definitely fits within the intent and letter of the law. The litmus test that you mention would obviously cause him unjust problems.
I know some of you are pointing your finger at me without knowing what we really are doing. That’s fine.
Do not archive.
Jesse Saint
Saint Aviation, Inc.
jesse(at)saintaviation.com (jesse(at)saintaviation.com)
www.saintaviation.com
Cell: 352-427-0285
Fax: 815-377-3694
[quote][b]
| | - The Matronics RV10-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
AV8ORJWC
Joined: 13 Jul 2006
Posts: 1149
Location: Aurora, Oregon "Home of VANS"
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 13, 2007 3:02 pm Post subject: unbelievable!!! |
|
|
To anyone that is interested. Drop me a line. After 23 years and now retired as an FAA Pilot Examiner, I would be happy to share the written process known as “Congressionalising” a member of the Executive Branch of government and the path, process and outcomes which result from being the recipient. All employees of the government work for some various branch of the Executive, the Legislative (elected officials and their aides) just loves to pull chains when “an agent of the Administrator” fails to do the work of the People. The President selects his Cabinet (DOT) then they select the Administrator (FAA) then they have employees (the FSDO) who work for YOU. By the way, many well intentioned and hard working Federal Employees have never encountered the process.
Like Sausage production it is not pretty. Those in the sausage production know what is happening. They are hoping you don’t want an actual tour but that you do continue to buy the packaged product.
John Cox
the Turbanator
Do not Archive
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of RV Builder (Michael Sausen)
Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2007 7:58 AM
To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: RE: RV10-List: unbelievable!!!
I don’t think they should be reviewing everyone that applies for a certificate. Something like that would need to be triggered as a second level based on a concern, hunch, report or whatever they currently use to root out models that are in production. I certainly don’t think it should be a first level item that is attached to everyone. They have more than enough info in their existing registration database for them to mine and find models that are being built as a production run. Any DAR or FAA rep in a given area certainly knows who is doing what as this is a fairly closed community. I blame them more than anyone for allowing it to happen.
Michael [quote] [b]
| | - The Matronics RV10-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
AV8ORJWC
Joined: 13 Jul 2006
Posts: 1149
Location: Aurora, Oregon "Home of VANS"
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 13, 2007 3:12 pm Post subject: unbelievable!!! |
|
|
Dan, you are right there are great shops. But respectfully, you have not seen the Build Assists which allow the owner to drink coffee (hour after hour, days on end, week after week) and watch while the paid staff does the work. Then at the end of the day, they prep the “Builder” in how to explain what was done.
I don’t consider you naïve, I just think you are a bit Wide Eyed and innocent in the ways of 51% violations in today’s lucrative market.
By the way, I have every intention of setting up shop just as soon as the rules are clarified. I do have a dog in this hunt and would be just as happy if the Build Assist required FAA monitoring for violation and financial penalties. When going into a street fight, you don’t bring a knife when the other guy has a knife you bring a shotgun – Sean Connery.
John
Do not Archive
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Lloyd, Daniel R.
Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2007 8:03 AM
To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: RE: RV10-List: unbelievable!!!
Knowing everyone from down there, this could not be farther from the truth. The NWPA shop is there to give new builders an introduction to metal kit plane building, specifically the RV series. They are great people, and do not bend the rules, they help the new builder complete the emp, and give the builder a solid foundation in correct building practices and the builder gets to try multiple tools while under instruction. But to make it clear, it is the builder that does the construction, the shop will HELP, not do, with the priming and deburring but the builder is doing the majority of the work. This shop is well organized and highly recommended by other builders in the area. This is a great way to complete an emp in 7 days and get a solid footing to finish your project.
Remember, I do not have an affiliation with them, just know them from being in the area, and highly respecting their efforts for the building community.
Dan
N289DT
[quote][b]
| | - The Matronics RV10-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
Get Email Distribution Too!
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
