Acro Image

Aerobatics Server

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.

[Usage Statistics]


ACRO E-mail Archive Thread: [IAC-L:1840] Re: AD's om Exp A/C was MT3 Prop AD



                


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


Message:

 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.



                


© Dr. Günther Eichhorn
Retired
Email Guenther Eichhorn