• If You Are Having Trouble Logging In with Your Old Username and Password, Please use this Forgot Your Password link to get re-established.
  • Hey! Be sure to login or register!

Fairbanks FAA Seminar Concerning Destroyed Aircraft

Sometimes we create the problem. Case 1, C170 cartwheeled on takeoff. Owner Flubb sold the wreck to 170 Expert who took 4 years repairing the airframe and engine but ignored the paperwork. After 3 1/2 years Flubb happened to look up his old airplane on the web and found it still registered to him. Fearing something wonky was going on and he might get dragged into a lawsuit, he wrote the FAA a letter and deregistered the aircraft as destroyed. If Flubb would have filled out the back of the registration and mailed it in like he was supposed to when he sold the plane or if the Expert would have taken care of the registration when he bought it there wouldn't have been a problem. Case 2, Freezerburn sold his experimental to Gotrocks who kept it in his garage for two years and didn't register it. Why he would have had to pay a few dollars personal property tax to his home state if he registered it. And he lost the bill of sale. But the chance came to make a few dollars so he sold it to Cheapo who put it in his garage for two more years. He didn't want to pay Personal Property tax either. In the meantime Freezerburn passed away so there won't be another bill of sale unless it's forged in a dead man's name. Now Cheapo wants to drag this thing out, get a condition inspection, pay his taxes, and fly. Cheap bastard, I'm not gonna help fix this mess. I got better things to do.

And that was the way aircraft transactions took place prior to 2010. Since the time limit on registrations was put in place, they’ve come up with all these new policies that don’t make a lot of sense.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
At some point it will take a class action suit against FAA to fix it. This all got started back in 2010 when registrations expired.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

How about a class action suite to force them to abide by the FAR's.

Web
 
Yeah, what about data plates? About half the J3s lose their baggage doors during restoration - dad dies, mama and the kids throw out the rotten wood and sell what is left.

An engine case goes to a rebuilder, who blasts the data plate beyond recognition - or, Divco says case is no good; get another. Data plate in the trash; logs all the way back to Mobile.

Twice in my short life I have gotten FSDO letters to reproduce data plates. I understand I have been very lucky; now no data plate means no aircraft.
 
Yeah, what about data plates? About half the J3s lose their baggage doors during restoration - dad dies, mama and the kids throw out the rotten wood and sell what is left.

Twice in my short life I have gotten FSDO letters to reproduce data plates. I understand I have been very lucky; now no data plate means no aircraft.
Mums the word!
https://www.wagaero.com/data-placards-replica-data-placard-kit-for-piper.html
h-812-200.png
 

Attachments

  • h-812-200.png
    h-812-200.png
    156 KB · Views: 266
That same tag can be had from Walmart for $19.95.

Found a gorgeous brass Continental repro for $75. Noel Allard's Cub tags are $75, but you need a letter from the FSDO for even a blank.

Interesting.
 
I wonder if the ACO office or DER will want engineering data with a repair plan? That could get really expensive.
How about I submit>
1) replace wing with serviceable wing.
2) Sandblast and inspect airframe, replace any corroded tubes, prime/paint.
3) Recover complete aircraft with ceconite process.
4) Replace engine/prop with serviceable.
5) weigh aircraft.
6) inspect IAW annual inspection procedure.
That's my plan.


https://www.eaa.org/en/eaa/news-and...larification-on-FAA-Destroyed-Aircraft-Policy

[h=1]Clarification on FAA Destroyed Aircraft Policy[/h]December 20, 2018 - EAA sought and received clarification on a recent FAA order that caused concern for some aviators, particularly in Alaska, that restorations of salvage airplanes and similar aircraft would be nearly impossible under the new agency policy.
EAA government advocacy team members talked directly with the authors of Order 8100.19, Destroyed and Scrapped Aircraft, which was issued without a public comment period this fall. The order was written because of FAA findings that some restorations of salvaged or destroyed aircraft did not meet type certification specifications and, as such, could not be registered as type-certificated aircraft. This caused concern that certain restorations that involve significant rebuilding of the aircraft would be impossible.
“True ‘data-plate restoration,’ where no part of the original aircraft is incorporated in a rebuilding project, has always run afoul of FAR 45.13, which states that a data plate may only be placed on the original aircraft, and FAR 47.41 states that registration is terminated when an aircraft is ‘completely destroyed,’” said Tom Charpentier, EAA government relations director. “However, the order’s authors do give a generous berth to the definition of completely destroyed, as any part of the primary structure — such as fuselage, wings, and tail — that is still salvageable can be defined as an aircraft that can be rebuilt. The intent is to prevent restoration only when there is truly nothing left of the original airframe other than the data plate.”
The FAA order potentially adds paperwork to the restoration/repair process, but prevents only those restorations that were already against FAR 45.13.
“We asked whether a restoration of a decades-old derelict aircraft, as is common in the vintage and warbird communities, would be allowed under the new order,” Charpentier said. “We were assured that these types of projects could be approved under this new policy, as long as some repairable parts of the previously airworthy structure survive.”
While EAA expressed disappointment that the order was issued without a public comment period, FAA officials noted that an advisory circular as a companion to the order will be open for public comment in the coming months.

EAA advocacy staff will continue to monitor this issue for any changes or necessary actions by EAA members.
 
I wonder how one would prove that, say, the tailfeathers are actually from that specific aircraft? I bought a trio of fuselages with paperwork in the early 1970s, and two of those fuselages are close to flying under one data plate. I have no idea which paperwork the tail feathers belong to.
 
Six months later, still fighting with FAA registry on my PA-16! Previous owner fought with them for 2 years before selling me the project. Mind you it is a complete project with an original data plate that was never tampered with, still attached to the fuselage. Registration was canceled back in the 1970s when the previous owner didn't send in the tri-ennial report due to not providing a current address. Airplane was stored in a garage since the early 1960s. Some FAA Inspector that has never seen the airplane decided that he doesn't believe it is the original data plate and says Piper has to confirm that it is the true and correct data plate. Piper says they have no way to confirm said data plate, so I'm stuck in the middle. My local FSDO inspector believes it is the correct data plate. FAA Registry still says they need confirmation from Piper (a company that never built a Clipper) that it is the correct data plate. I'm so frustrated!!!! I've provided pictures, all the drawings that show where it is supposed to be located, the original build sheet from Clyde showing that the original frame number fuselage is there, that the original engine serial number is there, the only thing I haven't done is pull the fabric from the wings to find the pencil marks with the wing numbers.

Talking with the Registry, their SOP is if a registration lapses, the aircraft is considered Scrapped or destroyed, and there is no appeal process. They won't give me a denial, only a "not recommended at this time", so still no appeal process. Nothing like being in legal limbo.
 
Yeah well... grab one of the local inspectors (you don’t mention where you are at!). The local inspector can verify that all the parts are there in the correct order! Send the thing in with the inspectors verification. Tell the SOB that you want the name of his supervisor, if that isn’t good enough.
 
Yeah well... grab one of the local inspectors (you don’t mention where you are at!). The local inspector can verify that all the parts are there in the correct order! Send the thing in with the inspectors verification. Tell the SOB that you want the name of his supervisor, if that isn’t good enough.

I'm working with one of the local inspectors, and he is in full agreement with me that it is the correct data plate. Trying to get something in writing from the office is a little harder, but I think that will come. Once I have that, then the real battle begins as I'll have two different offices within FAA against one another. I've already tried to go to the manager of the registry and even though I know him, I've gotten the cold shoulder. I've also got my Senators and Congressmen involved (not sure if that was a good idea or not). Waiting for a reply from them, don't really expect much there. Working with AOPA as well. I really don't want to hire a lawyer as the value of the project isn't that much, just the principal of the thing. It's such BS! I know I can sell the parts for more than what I have in the project, but I hate to break up a good airplane!
 
I'm working with one of the local inspectors, and he is in full agreement with me that it is the correct data plate. Trying to get something in writing from the office is a little harder, but I think that will come. Once I have that, then the real battle begins as I'll have two different offices within FAA against one another. I've already tried to go to the manager of the registry and even though I know him, I've gotten the cold shoulder. I've also got my Senators and Congressmen involved (not sure if that was a good idea or not). Waiting for a reply from them, don't really expect much there. Working with AOPA as well. I really don't want to hire a lawyer as the value of the project isn't that much, just the principal of the thing. It's such BS! I know I can sell the parts for more than what I have in the project, but I hate to break up a good airplane!

Yes indeed, it becomes a responsibility, when you adopt one of these projects. Don’t give up and sell out!
 
So these guys who deregister an aircraft to hide it from the wife they are divorcing are gonna shoot themselves in the foot.
 
Really? A triennial report was required in the 1970s? How come they never cancelled my registration - I never sent any reports to them. Some oufit is always trying to take a survey, but it says on the official looking form that it is voluntary.

I think, before triennial re-registration started, you had to ask to get de-registered.
 
Six months later, still fighting with FAA registry on my PA-16! Previous owner fought with them for 2 years before selling me the project.

Really? A triennial report was required in the 1970s? How come they never cancelled my registration - I never sent any reports to them. Some oufit is always trying to take a survey, but it says on the official looking form that it is voluntary.

I think, before triennial re-registration started, you had to ask to get de-registered.
Something is very fishy here. Granted my experience happened in the 80s but the airplane had been sunk in 1959. I bought it sight unseen from a second owner. There was a bill of sale from the person who sunk it. When I attempted to register it the FAA couldn't find the records claiming they had been sent to some vault somewhere (Texas I think). Eventually when the time period for the pink slip was expiring I sent them another letter and mysteriously two separate registrations arrived.

Another time I was (storing) a special N number on a wrecked airplane by maintaining it's registration. When I sold that wreck, cancel and transferring the N number to my Cub, registering the Cub, transfer another number to the wreck in order to maintain it's title trail, I made the requests all in one letter in a sequence which would make it happen smoothly. The Oke City FAA separated the different actions, assigning them to different employees resulting in a cluster f***. I kept receiving letters from different people asking for information which had been in my original letter but apparently not given to that employee. Finally after some phone calls I got one person who saw what was happening and she fixed it.

I think that dgapilot's paperwork ended up on the desk of the wrong person, who is unable to extricate itself from the hole it has dug. Sounds like the Registry of Motor Vehicles here in Mass. They have dug a hole so deep that they can't see the sunlight. If you have been following the news here, you will know of what I'm speaking.
 
Some how my aircraft became a target for the SEIT team. Special Enforcement Investigation Team! Back in the 1940’s, the CARs only required manufacturer, model, PC number, TC number and Serial number. Piper was still using the 85411 data plate that has a date Field. The date was a required item early in the ‘40s, but the requirement changed around 1945. The data plate is on a diagonal tube inside the tail of the fuselage on the Clipper, and was installed prior to covering and assembly of the aircraft, so the date of manufacture was unknown when installed and inaccessible to stamp the date when the aircraft is complete. Since the date field isn’t filled in, and due to parallax error when pictures were taken, the SEIT Inspector doesn’t believe that it is an original data plate, and says the current TC holder, Piper Aircraft Inc. in FL is the only entity that can confirm the authenticity of the data plate. Piper Aircraft Inc never made a PA-16, and isn’t even authorized to build one under their PC! The aircraft was built by Piper Aircraft Corp in Lock Haven PA, a totally different organization! Piper Aircraft Inc. says they have no ability to authenticate the data plate yet this inspector insists they are the only ones that can. So here I sit in a Catch 22. Talked to a lawyer yesterday and he said figure $30k to take them to court. I’ve contacted my senators and congress critter, and they have made inquiries to FAA, waiting for their feedback but not very hopeful given previous contacts with them. My next step will likely be to demand that the FAA charge me with violating Title 18 USC given that if the data plate is false, I committed Fraud when filling out the registration application. Given the preponderance of evidence that the subject data plate is the one placed by Piper Aircraft Corp back 70 years ago, they could never be successful in prosecuting the case and then there would be legal precedent that it is the correct data plate. It’s just so frustrating that one guy in the FAA that has never even seen the airplane can screw up something so bad, and not be man enough to say he made a mistake.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I have a similar issue with a 180 project I have. The question is about the airworthiness. The 180 has current registration and an n number but is still in large pieces. What is the process to obtain an airworthiness certificate? Thanks to the group!
 
I have a similar issue with a 180 project I have. The question is about the airworthiness. The 180 has current registration and an n number but is still in large pieces. What is the process to obtain an airworthiness certificate? Thanks to the group!

The airplane needs to be “airworthy” to get an airworthiness certificate. The real question here is do you need a replacement certificate or do you need a certificate issued because it doesn’t have a current certificate? If just a replacement, it’s a pretty easy process. If there isn’t a record for a current certificate, the application process is more involved.

For either, you start at the AWC portal and fill in the appropriate data, then select a designee or if FAA will issue it. For a replacement it is usually a log book check to see it has a current annual inspection and a quick walk around the airplane. For a “new” certificate, it will involve a full records review of ADs., STCs, W&B, a 100 hr inspection within the last 30 days, and an in-depth inspection by the Inspector or designee of the aircraft to verify it meets “type design”.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
Back
Top