ACRO E-mail Archive Thread: [IAC-L:1840] Re: AD's om Exp A/C was MT3 Prop AD
[International Aerobatic Club] [Communications] [Aerobatics Images]
Disclaimer: These aerobatics pages are developed by individual IAC members and do not represent official IAC policy or opinion.
Thread: [IAC-L:1840] Re: AD's om Exp A/C was MT3 Prop AD
Message: [IAC-L:1840] Re: AD's om Exp A/C was MT3 Prop AD
Follow-Up To: ACRO Email list (for List Members only)
From: Steve Pennypacker <spennypacker at odo.vicorp.com>
Date: Thu, 13 Nov 1997 14:25:31 UTC
How about certified engines/props on Experimental aircraft, *if* you ever have a desire to put the engine back on a certified aircraft at some later date, or merely want to keep it certified? >On Wed, 12 Nov 1997, KJKimball at aol.com wrote: > >>It is my understanding that ALL aircraft reguardless of certification >>catagory are required to comform to all the AD's issused to the airframe AND >>related appliances. A homebuilt Pitts S-1 or S-2 is subject to the rear spar >>fitting AD. Our Gee Bee Z replica is required to have all engine, prop, and >>accessories complied with. Read the regs. again and you will see. > >> Experimental Exhibition catagory aircraft, such as, Yaks, Sukois, etc. are >>required to conform to ALL the AD issued on all items on the plane. >> >>Kevin Kimball > > > >Not. This is absolutely not true. Your FSDO might be >misinformed, but check the regs yourself and you will >see. Please quote chapter and verse of the FAR's if you >find otherwise. I believe you will not be able to.