Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 40 of 107

Thread: Fairbanks FAA Seminar Concerning Destroyed Aircraft

  1. #1
    SJ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Kansas City, USA
    Posts
    14,549
    Post Thanks / Like

    Fairbanks FAA Seminar Concerning Destroyed Aircraft

    Copied from Facebook

    Heads up to all mechanics, shops and backcountry pilots. We recieved word that the FAAST (FAA Safety Team) is hosting a seminar at UAF in Fairbanks on Friday, January 25th. One of the topics that will be covered is concerning a new piece of regulation that has just been released concerning “destroyed aircraft.” The details of these new rules are outlined in FAA order 8100.19, which I have included a link to at the bottom of this. It contains some phraseology and limitations on aircraft repair that could heavily affect operations and general aviation in Alaska. The author of this FAA order will be giving a presentation at the seminar, and I’m hoping this will give a little more clarity to how they plan to make these determinations, who will have final say, how the process will be initiated/followed through with, and who will be in charge of enforcement.

    The basic premise is that the FAA is trying to come up with (and essentially has already issued) a method for determining when an aircraft is damaged to a certain degree that the aircraft can no longer be “repaired” and the data tag must be surrendered to the FAA or sent back to the original manufacturer for “rebuild” (which in our case, most of these original manufacturer’s either no longer exist, or no longer support the models in question). In many cases for super-cub type aircraft, this would result in permanent deregistration of the aircraft in question. These permanent casualties to such a small pool of registered aircraft will no doubt have negative implications long-term in Alaska.
    The document can be found here:
    https://www.faa.gov/documentL…/…/Order/FAA_Order_8100.19.pdf


    "Often Mistaken, but Never in Doubt"
    ------------------------------------------

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    nd
    Posts
    3,211
    Post Thanks / Like
    i dont understand, what are they trying to accomplish??
    Thanks flyboyrv3 thanked for this post
    Likes mike mcs repair, Hardtailjohn liked this post

  3. #3

    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    459
    Post Thanks / Like
    It won’t only impact AK, but the entire antique fleet. It isn’t so much a new rule, but an expanded interpretation of 45.13(b). Typical FAA trying to find a solution for a problem that doesn’t exist.

    Having the FAA determine when an aircraft is destroyed is a “taking” of ones property. For older aircraft there is little rant can’t be fabricated to repair it. For many designs, there are enough PMA parts, you could replace every part damaged so how could it be considered “destroyed”.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Thanks Steve Pierce thanked for this post
    Likes GeeBee, mike mcs repair, Hardtailjohn liked this post

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    nd
    Posts
    3,211
    Post Thanks / Like
    this Ali Bahrami whats his itch?https://www.faa.gov/about/key_officials/bahrami_avs/ One thing i can see is hes never seen a general aircraft rebuild shop and dosent have a clue.
    Thanks JeffP thanked for this post

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Location
    Platinum
    Posts
    248
    Post Thanks / Like
    Read his bio....thinking...he may be the sort who thinks anyone without a four year degree is an idiot...or may have experience with crapsman...and puts everyone without a BA or BS degree into that category..
    I’m one of these people who doesn’t want anyone protecting me from myself...more and more now ah days though....there is an unbelievable number of idiots out there who need that....


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
    Thanks TurboBeaver thanked for this post

  6. #6
    aktango58's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    18AA
    Posts
    9,057
    Post Thanks / Like
    I remember visiting Ezell's in Texas and seeing what they would start with, and what they results would be.

    This looks bad.
    I don't know where you've been me lad, but I see you won first Prize!
    Likes flylowslow, mike mcs repair liked this post

  7. #7
    Steve Pierce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Graham, TX
    Posts
    18,649
    Post Thanks / Like
    I have sat here tonight and read this whole document. Looks like to me if you have at least one primary structure that is repairable and the rest has to be replaced you are good. They define a primary structure to be a structure that carries flight, ground or pressurization loads. Every wreck I have ever work could be rebuilt using this definition. Problem I see is some self proclaimed expert federal employee will try to interpret this differently.

    Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using SuperCub.Org mobile app
    Steve Pierce

    Everybody is ignorant, only on different subjects.
    Will Rogers

  8. #8
    BC12D-4-85's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Location
    Fairbanks, AK.
    Posts
    1,584
    Post Thanks / Like
    Comments should be forwarded via the following Appendix C

    10/15/18


    8100.19 Appendix C


    Appendix C. Directive Feedback Information
    Directive Feedback Information


    Please submit any written comments or recommendation for improving this directive, or suggest new items or subjects to be added to it. Also, if you find an error, please tell us about it.
    Subject: FAA Order 8100.19, Destroyed and Scrapped Aircraft To: 9-AWA-AVS-AIR-DMO@faa.gov or
    complete the form online at https://ksn2.faa.gov/avs/dfs/Pages/Home.aspx
    Please check all appropriate line items:
    An error (procedural or typographical) has been noted in paragraph _______ on page _______.
    Recommend paragraph _______ on page _______ be changed as follows:
    In a future change to this AC, please cover the following subject:
    (Briefly describe what you want added.)
    Other comments:
    I would like to discuss the above. Please contact me.
    Submitted by: __________________________________ Date: __________________ Telephone Number: __________________ Routing Symbol: _________________

    FAA Form 1320-19 (10-9 C-1


    Likes mike mcs repair, Steve Pierce liked this post

  9. #9

    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    6,735
    Post Thanks / Like
    I think Dave is on the right track. You own that data plate, and they cannot take it from you without notice and a hearing, and just compensation. Do not just give it to them.

  10. #10
    www.SkupTech.com mike mcs repair's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    chugiak AK
    Posts
    10,333
    Post Thanks / Like
    what's not repairable to one mechanic's view is EASILY repairable in another view... wing ripped of? OK, reattach it with a couple chances of angle iron(for ferry flight).... 4 bent spars = 4.5 hours a wing to swap out + parts(to the point the new spars are installed, more normal work to follow)... its all about if you know what's really hurt...

    c. 14 CFR § 47.41(b)(2) does not specify who makes the determination that an aircraft is destroyed or scrapped. Typically, a knowledgeable party makes such a determination with the concurrence of the registered owner. Whether an aircraft is destroyed or scrapped, however, is a function of the actual condition of the aircraft. The determination by an FAA or NTSB accidentinvestigator that an aircraft is “destroyed” is a determination based on that individual’sknowledge, expertise, and judgment. The determination that an aircraft is destroyed may be refuted by evidence submitted by an owner that the aircraft is repairable.

  11. #11
    RVBottomly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Location
    Asotin County Washington (KLWS)
    Posts
    531
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by mike mcs repair View Post
    what's not repairable to one mechanic's view is EASILY repairable in another view... wing ripped of? OK, reattach it with a couple chances of angle iron(for ferry flight).... 4 bent spars = 4.5 hours a wing to swap out + parts(to the point the new spars are installed, more normal work to follow)... its all about if you know what's really hurt...
    So, Mike, in your spare time you could be an expert witness refuting the less knowledgeable individuals sent out to who knows where. But make sure you get paid in advance if a lawyer is hiring .

  12. #12

    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    nd
    Posts
    3,211
    Post Thanks / Like
    but!!! what are they trying to do??? or accomplish???
    Likes mike mcs repair, Hardtailjohn liked this post

  13. #13
    www.SkupTech.com mike mcs repair's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    chugiak AK
    Posts
    10,333
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by RVBottomly View Post
    So, Mike, in your spare time you could be an expert witness refuting the less knowledgeable individuals sent out to who knows where. But make sure you get paid in advance if a lawyer is hiring .

    ????????????????

  14. #14

    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    nd
    Posts
    3,211
    Post Thanks / Like
    ??????????????????????????=If a lawyer is hiring you to argue if his plane is totaled or not with some FAAers get some cash in advance. There will be lawsuits.
    Last edited by tempdoug; 12-19-2018 at 12:12 AM.
    Likes mike mcs repair liked this post

  15. #15
    RVBottomly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Location
    Asotin County Washington (KLWS)
    Posts
    531
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by mike mcs repair View Post
    ????????????????
    Sorry....
    tempdoug has one scenario I was thinking of. Another is simply this: a guy has a treasured airplane that suffered a wreck. Along comes Mr. "FAA or NTSB accident investigator" who, based upon his "knowledge, expertise, and judgment" says this airplane is unrepairable.

    But this determination may be refuted by evidence submitted by an owner. Enter expert witness who repairs these things all the time....

    The lawyer part was sort of a joke. Whenever I had to hire an expert, they wanted a retainer in advance.

  16. #16
    www.SkupTech.com mike mcs repair's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    chugiak AK
    Posts
    10,333
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by RVBottomly View Post
    Sorry....
    tempdoug has one scenario I was thinking of. Another is simply this: a guy has a treasured airplane that suffered a wreck. Along comes Mr. "FAA or NTSB accident investigator" who, based upon his "knowledge, expertise, and judgment" says this airplane is unrepairable.

    But this determination may be refuted by evidence submitted by an owner. Enter expert witness who repairs these things all the time....

    The lawyer part was sort of a joke. Whenever I had to hire an expert, they wanted a retainer in advance.

    still ??????

  17. #17

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    1,663
    Post Thanks / Like
    Sooooooo I have seen half of the tubes of a fuselage replaced. Not cost effective but it can be done. Get a tail section and top deck, few other parts, some time in the jig and you can say the fuselage was not replaced. This is one of the things we need APOA and whoever wants to win the next election to get involved with. So start calling, texting, etc now!!
    DENNY
    Likes mike mcs repair, Hardtailjohn liked this post

  18. #18
    Jim 4WF's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    anchorage
    Posts
    55
    Post Thanks / Like
    Just hand your old data tags in with your bump stocks
    Likes KevinJ, dgapilot, RaisedByWolves liked this post

  19. #19
    nanook's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    northern alaska
    Posts
    1,643
    Post Thanks / Like
    This is the IA (renewal) Seminar in Fairbanks. The FAA is going after the “logbooks with a data plate” salesman... Some have built up aircraft and sold them to unsuspecting buyers. I don’t see this impacting the legitimate rebuilders. This is aimed at the shysters out there...
    Thanks JeffP, Steve Pierce thanked for this post
    Likes Steve Pierce liked this post

  20. #20
    skywagon8a's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    SE Mass
    Posts
    9,285
    Post Thanks / Like
    I'm in mike mcs's camp. Most every plane can be rebuilt. Both he and I have seen and participated in some extensively patched up "ferry" flights. One issue that I see here is that an insurance company usually makes it's decision based on the $$ cost to them of repairing or calling it "totaled". If the Ins. company "totals" it, they pay off the owner and sell the salvage which may be just to a scrap yard. The owner may be a person who is all thumbs when it comes to being at all mechanically inclined so in his mind it is totaled. Somewhere in this process someone "declares" that it is scrapped, informs the FAA, throws away the data plate and log books, leaving a perfectly good rebuildable wreck without a good paper trail. Then along comes mike licking his chops at an easy rebuild project with the exception that some uniformed person or groups of persons have thrown away the vital data plate and paper work. Mike then looses an opportunity to turn a few bucks and the aviation community looses out on a nice airplane. This is particularly important in these times when a new airplane usually starts in the high $200,000 price range.
    N1PA

  21. #21

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    4,551
    Post Thanks / Like
    Did any of you actually read the document? It doesn’t look like news to me. Just lots and lots of words that pretty much restate what we already knew. I saw more info about how to challenge a destroyed aircraft determination and return a plane to service than I expected.
    Thanks PA-22/20-160 thanked for this post
    Likes Steve Pierce, RVBottomly, Richgj3, bowenjo liked this post

  22. #22

    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    459
    Post Thanks / Like
    It seems to be one more step in the process of purging “old airplanes” out of the fleet. FAA started with the re-registration BS back around 2010. Next they come up with AC43-18 trying to make it sound like an A&P can’t fabricate parts for a repair. Various revisions of Order 8130.2 have tightened the reins on data plate replacements. Now this Order giving “guidance” on returning the registration that is not contained in the rule.

    All mechanics should be incensed over the words in paragraph 1(e) in that FAA is blatantly stating that we as A&Ps don’t do our jobs correctly!

    Paragraph 1(g) tasks FAA with “reviewing details of repair data to ensure that it produces a structurally and operational safe aircraft”. While I’ve known a number of very good, knowledgeable, and competent Inspectors, I’ve unfortunately seen many others that have no idea about general aviation aircraft. This has some serious implications.

    All that said, I think this has come about due to a few bad actors, combined with the proliferation of “replacement data plates” on eBay and other outlets. I’ve seen more than one fraudulent data plate on an airplane or engine, and we, as an industry need to police ourselves when it comes to the “bad actors”. FAA has caused much of this with their policies on replacement data plates, and I’ve made multiple suggestions via directive feedback to 8130.2, but it has constantly fallen on deaf ears.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Thanks skywagon8a, algonquin thanked for this post

  23. #23

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    4,551
    Post Thanks / Like
    Are we talking about Cubs? A model with a choice of approved STC-PMA replacement airframes and other essential parts? In reading the document all I see is opportunity and definitions of how to play the game. If you ‘re thinking metal airplanes? The rules may apply differently.

    Yep... loving the experimental category!
    Thanks flynlow thanked for this post
    Likes Steve Pierce liked this post

  24. #24

    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    459
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by stewartb View Post
    Are we talking about Cubs? A model with a choice of approved STC-PMA replacement airframes and other essential parts? In reading the document all I see is opportunity and definitions of how to play the game. If you ‘re thinking metal airplanes? The rules may apply differently.

    Yep... loving the experimental category!
    They are talking all airplanes.

    Be careful with your “Experimental” airplanes. There are different “Purposes” for Experimental airplanes and you are limited to operating that airplane ONLY for the purpose on the certificate.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Thanks flynlow thanked for this post

  25. #25

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    4,551
    Post Thanks / Like
    The clip in the original post-
    In many cases for super-cub type aircraft, this would result in permanent deregistration of the aircraft in question. These permanent casualties to such a small pool of registered aircraft will no doubt have negative implications long-term in Alaska.
    Now read the document. As long as the data tag wasn't destroyed by the FAA? The plane can be resurrected. The document tells us how. And that's only if the registration was officially classified as "destroyed". Not many of us would get to that point

    I'm pretty comfy with what my experimental's limitations are. I need to work on the pilot's limitations or the plane will get bored!
    Likes Steve Pierce, WanaBNACub liked this post

  26. #26
    hotrod180's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Port Townsend, WA
    Posts
    2,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by dgapilot View Post
    ….. Typical FAA trying to find a solution for a problem that doesn’t exist.....
    I think that is their new mandate.
    I see this every time we see another phase of the plans for the big runway project the FAA is pushing for my airport.
    A total reconstruction, to the tune of over $4M...when everyone who uses it thinks it's just fine, at least for now.
    The latest BS is that the midfield connector leading right onto the one-way "in" taxiway to the ramp doesn't meet the new FAA standard--
    "somebody might accidently taxi right out onto the runway and cause an accident".
    Options include simply off-setting the connector a bit, or leaving the connector as is and tearing up part of the in taxiway & rebuilding it with an offset, or leaving the connector and relocating the entire in taxiway.
    All are solutions in search of a problem, which actually cause bigger problems--
    they're all disasters waiting to happen with regards to negotiating your way on a dark night on these unlighted taxiways.
    We just sat through a big 2 hour meeting last night with the Port & their consultant,
    my tongue is just about bit clean through from trying to keep myself from calling them all a bunch of idiots.
    OK, sorry for the thread-jacking, back to your normal programming....
    Cessna Skywagon-- accept no substitute!
    Likes dgapilot, bob turner, Bill.Brine liked this post

  27. #27

    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    459
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by stewartb View Post
    The clip in the original post-

    Now read the document. As long as the data tag wasn't destroyed by the FAA? The plane can be resurrected. The document tells us how. And that's only if the registration was officially classified as "destroyed". Not many of us would get to that point

    I'm pretty comfy with what my experimental's limitations are. I need to work on the pilot's limitations or the plane will get bored!
    I’ve already seen a couple cases where the data plate is original and intact, but the registration expired and a new owner has the airplane. Before FAA would issue a registration, the owner had to prove that an actual “airworthy” airplane exists, not just the parts to restore the airplane, but the complete ready to fly airplane!


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  28. #28
    Steve Pierce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Graham, TX
    Posts
    18,649
    Post Thanks / Like
    Jim Richmond went around buying paperwork and data plates for years. Then he discovered the Spares and Surplus reg. Now the Feds shut that down. Airplanes are falling out of the skies because of any of this. Someone wants to justify their job? I have no idea. There are plenty of regs to hand someone on for a POS rebuild. The good thing is that this shows me a work around on this witch Hunt.
    Steve Pierce

    Everybody is ignorant, only on different subjects.
    Will Rogers
    Likes mike mcs repair liked this post

  29. #29

    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    nd
    Posts
    3,211
    Post Thanks / Like
    there is a positive though, hopefully it keeps alot of the citations, kingairs, lears, boeings etc from ever returning.

  30. #30

    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    6,735
    Post Thanks / Like
    Half as many of us and five times as many of them - they have to do something . . .

    Don't get me started on runway widths and taxiway realignments. Truly stupid stuff.

    We are spraying herbicide this week. Airport officials said it was FAA mandated, but the biologist told me it was to eradicate the invasive Gazanias.

  31. #31
    jnorris's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    804
    Post Thanks / Like
    FYI, here is EAA's response to several members (maybe some of y'all) who contacted EAA HQ directly on this subject....


    "EAA spoke to the author of the Order, who will be giving the Alaska presentation, today. Here is our understanding based on that conversation:

    True "data plate restorations" (i.e. new aircraft literally built around the data plate alone) do, and have always, violate FAR 45.13, which says that you can't put a data plate on any aircraft other than the one it came off of. Further, FAR 47.41 says that the registration is terminated when the aircraft is “completely destroyed.” This order lays out, in a practical sense, a generous definition of “completely destroyed.” Essentially, if any part of the primary structure (fuselage, wings, tail, etc…) is left salvageable, the aircraft can be rebuilt/restored. If there is disagreement over whether an aircraft is repairable or not, there is a resolution process using the FAA’s engineering offices. This would also apply to an experimental aircraft sold as scrap. If the buyer can show that the aircraft is intact and repairable, it can be returned to service through the proper documentation. The intent of this order is to prevent restorations only when there is truly nothing left of the aircraft other than the data plate.

    It is unfortunate that this Order potentially adds paperwork to the restoration/repair process, but it ultimately only makes impossible a small number of restorations that were technically not meeting the letter of FAR 47.41 in the first place. EAA did ask about a “glacier girl” style restoration of a decaying airframe, and the author said that these sorts of projects can be approved under this policy. It is also unfortunate that the Order was not put out for public comment in advance of publication (orders seldom are), as at minimum it would have allowed us to address some of these questions prior to publication. A companion AC will be put out for comment in the next few months.

    Please contact Tom Charpentier at tcharpe@eaa.org if you have feedback or questions. EAA will be closely watching the implementation of this policy, and ensuring that restoration of vintage aircraft will continue unfettered."
    Joe

    Fortis Fortuna Adiuvat
    Thanks stewartb, Dave Calkins, Steve Pierce, cubpilot2 thanked for this post
    Likes mike mcs repair liked this post

  32. #32
    Hardtailjohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Marion, MT
    Posts
    696
    Post Thanks / Like
    The way I see it, I have a Super Cub project that needs new fuselage and wings... 35+ years ago, this wasn't really worth rebuilding, so the registration and all was let expire. I've gone through all the steps and it now has current registration....but it's history says it was scrapped or lapsed in the past. Now it's well worth rebuilding, but it's going to have to go through an inspector, who chances are, has never seen a PA18 naked, and it's his/her choice to make a decision whether I get to rebuild MY airplane? At the least, this is going to cause me to build an inferior aircraft because it sounds like a huge PIA to replace both at the same time, like I had planned. We're allowed to replace ANY part with a PMA'd or STC'd part, but just not all at one time. What a crock!
    John

  33. #33
    Steve Pierce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Graham, TX
    Posts
    18,649
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Hardtailjohn View Post
    The way I see it, I have a Super Cub project that needs new fuselage and wings... 35+ years ago, this wasn't really worth rebuilding, so the registration and all was let expire. I've gone through all the steps and it now has current registration....but it's history says it was scrapped or lapsed in the past. Now it's well worth rebuilding, but it's going to have to go through an inspector, who chances are, has never seen a PA18 naked, and it's his/her choice to make a decision whether I get to rebuild MY airplane? At the least, this is going to cause me to build an inferior aircraft because it sounds like a huge PIA to replace both at the same time, like I had planned. We're allowed to replace ANY part with a PMA'd or STC'd part, but just not all at one time. What a crock!
    John
    As long as one structure is repairable you are good according to this document. I know you can repair something can't you. Throw a good stabilizer on the pile or something.
    Steve Pierce

    Everybody is ignorant, only on different subjects.
    Will Rogers

  34. #34

    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    nd
    Posts
    3,211
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Hardtailjohn View Post
    The way I see it, I have a Super Cub project that needs new fuselage and wings... 35+ years ago, this wasn't really worth rebuilding, so the registration and all was let expire. I've gone through all the steps and it now has current registration....but it's history says it was scrapped or lapsed in the past. Now it's well worth rebuilding, but it's going to have to go through an inspector, who chances are, has never seen a PA18 naked, and it's his/her choice to make a decision whether I get to rebuild MY airplane? At the least, this is going to cause me to build an inferior aircraft because it sounds like a huge PIA to replace both at the same time, like I had planned. We're allowed to replace ANY part with a PMA'd or STC'd part, but just not all at one time. What a crock!
    John
    Moral of the story-dont let em expire
    Likes mike mcs repair liked this post

  35. #35

    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    459
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Hardtailjohn View Post
    The way I see it, I have a Super Cub project that needs new fuselage and wings... 35+ years ago, this wasn't really worth rebuilding, so the registration and all was let expire. I've gone through all the steps and it now has current registration....but it's history says it was scrapped or lapsed in the past. Now it's well worth rebuilding, but it's going to have to go through an inspector, who chances are, has never seen a PA18 naked, and it's his/her choice to make a decision whether I get to rebuild MY airplane? At the least, this is going to cause me to build an inferior aircraft because it sounds like a huge PIA to replace both at the same time, like I had planned. We're allowed to replace ANY part with a PMA'd or STC'd part, but just not all at one time. What a crock!
    John
    If you have a registration, and an Airworthiness certificate, all you need is an A&P/IA to do the 337s and annual. If you don’t have the airworthiness certificate, a couple questions - did it have a permanent certificate (post July 17, 1956)? Do the FAA records indicate if it was surrendered or revoked? If not, once the airplane is finished, and has an annual simply request a replacement. If it expired, was suspended or revoked, you will need to make application for a new airworthiness certificate. Again, it will need an annual prior to this (within the preceding 30 days). Many FAA offices don’t issue certificates anymore. Most certificates are issued by DARs now, so find a DAR that knows old airplanes and work with him. There is a DAR directory on the FAA web site.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  36. #36

    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    nd
    Posts
    3,211
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Mark_Moyle View Post
    Read his bio....thinking...he may be the sort who thinks anyone without a four year degree is an idiot...or may have experience with crapsman...and puts everyone without a BA or BS degree into that category..
    I’m one of these people who doesn’t want anyone protecting me from myself...more and more now ah days though....there is an unbelievable number of idiots out there who need that....


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

    please protect me from myself.https://www.facebook.com/SportsIllus...00011671403561

  37. #37

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Elizabeth, WV
    Posts
    521
    Post Thanks / Like
    Remember all the fuss awhile back about IAs and being actively involved? Does anyone know anybody who lost his or her IA to a FAA action? I don't know of anybody who even stopped renewing. My neighbor who borrows tools 'cause he don't own any and never has and never did have anything to put on his activity sheet still gets his IA renewed on 8 hours of schooling. Actively involved for a total of 8 hours sitting through an IA renewal seminar. I expect this wrecked airplane deal wiil be greatly similar. I recall sitting through a seminar a few years ago where it was emphasized that it was not illegal for the crooks to sell dataplates and paperwork but it was illegal for someone to purchase them. Now that's just goofy.
    Last edited by N86250; 12-20-2018 at 06:00 PM.
    You can't get there from here. You have to go over yonder and start from there.

  38. #38

    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    459
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by N86250 View Post
    Remember all the fuss awhile back about IAs and being actively involved? Does anyone know anybody who lost his or her IA to a FAA action? I don't know of anybody who even stopped renewing. My neighbor who borrows tools 'cause he don't own any and never has and never did have anything to put on his activity sheet still gets his IA renewed on 8 hours of schooling. Actively involved for a total of 8 hours sitting through an IA renewal seminar. I expect this wrecked airplane deal wiil be greatly similar. I recall sitting through a seminar a few years ago where it was emphasized that it was not illegal for the crooks to sell dataplates and paperwork but it was illegal for someone to purchase them. Now that's just goofy.
    There were several IAs in the BAL FSDO that didn’t get renewed over the “actively engaged” stuff.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  39. #39
    S2D's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Montana
    Posts
    4,053
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by dgapilot View Post
    If it expired, was suspended or revoked, you will need to make application for a new airworthiness certificate. Again, it will need an annual prior to this (within the preceding 30 days).
    Proof that you don't have to have an airworthiness certificate to sign off an aircraft as airworthy-------but I digress, back to the cabin !!
    I may be wrong but that probably won't stop me from arguing about it.
    Likes mike mcs repair, Hardtailjohn liked this post

  40. #40
    Hardtailjohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Marion, MT
    Posts
    696
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Steve Pierce View Post
    As long as one structure is repairable you are good according to this document. I know you can repair something can't you. Throw a good stabilizer on the pile or something.
    That's about what I'm gonna have to try.......
    Likes mike mcs repair liked this post

Similar Threads

  1. The Almost Annual Supercub Seminar, Fairbanks Jan 24!
    By tamarack in forum Cafe Supercub
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 01-29-2015, 03:40 AM
  2. Fairbanks Supercub Seminar 2/23
    By tamarack in forum Cafe Supercub
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 02-25-2013, 10:20 AM

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •