KR> Fwd: [Q-LIST] Fw: CorvAircraft> Re: Interesting court decision
I got this from the QList. Must reading for ALL homebuilders! Change props, or even avionics that changes w/b, and this could hit you. >This was posted over on the Corvair list and thought I'd post it over here. >It got me to thinking about some of the things I've done and assumed they >were not considered major. Wander 'bout my auxilary fuel tank - that's >messin' with the fuel system. I suppose the electronic ignition I would like >to install someday is also considered major. Anybody else recertified their >airplanes for things like this? > >LF > > > >I think I posted this before, but it is worth reading. > > > > http://www.ellison-fluid-systems.com/homebuilt_court_decision.htm > > Larry Severson Fountain Valley, CA 92708 (714) 968-9852 lar...@socal.rr.com
KR> Fwd: [Q-LIST] Fw: CorvAircraft> Re: Interesting court decision
That's amazing, especially since he returned his system to the original set-up. I'd have thought that would be acceptable, but, according to the court, once he made the first change, he wasn't covered any longer. Amazing. Frank = Frank Ross, EAA Chapter 35, San Geronimo, TX RAF Lakenheath, Suffolk, England, UK Visit my photo album at: http://photos.yahoo.com/alamokr2 __ Do you Yahoo!? The all-new My Yahoo! - What will yours do? http://my.yahoo.com
KR> Fwd: [Q-LIST] Fw: CorvAircraft> Re: Interesting court decision
I always thought that these were things that you could certify yourself as long as you documented them properly and documented that the appropriate tests were conducted. See N64KR at http://KR-Builder.org - Then click on the pics There is a time for building and a time for FLYING and the time for building has expired. Daniel R. Heath - Columbia, SC See you in Mt. Vernon - 2005 - KR Gathering ---Original Message--- Change props, or even avionics that changes w/b, and this could hit you. I suppose the electronic ignition ... Anybody else recertified their airplanes for things like this?
KR> Fwd: [Q-LIST] Fw: CorvAircraft> Re: Interesting court decision
OK, This is the kind of stuff, that if you read the whole thing it makes you leary of doing anything to your airplane. I mean, if this guy in this story changed from a standardair filter to a high volume air filter, could this not be said to be a major modification and therefore would result in no insurance coverage. I meanan air filter change can have a direct effect in the air fuel mixture which can result in both short term results to long term engine fialure. Or at least it could be resonably argued in a court of law. ( my family is big in injury law, and no I have nothing to do with it) This just makes me think. At what point in time do these insurance companies ever say , "Well, we can't take your money" but they will certainly fight tokeep from paying a claim. Don't get me wrong, I can see both sides of the story here, but feel that the determining factor of the crash was not relevent to the argument from the insurance company as to their willingness to pay. I guess the bottom line on this makes me wonder.Was his accident a result of a fuel related failure, if so I guess I would say the insurance company had an argument, but if the accendent had nothing to do with a fuel related problem, then I think there pointis moot. But this case is based on contractual obligation, not right and wrong. I just wonder, " Does something like this make you stop and wonder and want to think twice about the next time you go flying. And how what you did on your last routine maintenance check on your airplanecould effect the finiancial stabilty of your family and the home they live in. It certainly makes me think of the risks I am taking to my childrens way of life each time I drive to the airport. Jeff York Lexington. KY. KR-2 N839BG http://web.qx.net/jeffyork40/ > --- Original Message --- >From : larry severson[mailto:lar...@socal.rr.com] >Sent : 2/21/2005 12:55:05 AM >To : kr...@mylist.net >Cc : >Subject : RE : KR> Fwd: [Q-LIST] Fw: CorvAircraft> Re: Interesting court >decision > >I got this from the QList. Must reading for ALL homebuilders! >Change props, or even avionics that changes w/b, and this could hit you. > >>This was posted over on the Corvair list and thought I'd post it over here. >>It got me to thinking about some of the things I've done and assumed they >>were not considered major. Wander 'bout my auxilary fuel tank - that's >>messin' with the fuel system. I suppose the electronic ignition I would like >>to install someday is also considered major. Anybody else recertified their >>airplanes for things like this? >> >>LF >> >> >> >I think I posted this before, but it is worth reading. >> > >> > http://www.ellison-fluid-systems.com/homebuilt_court_decision.htm >> > > >Larry Severson >Fountain Valley, CA 92708 >(714) 968-9852 >lar...@socal.rr.com > > >___ >Search the KRnet Archives at http://www.maddyhome.com/krsrch/index.jsp >to UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to krnet-le...@mylist.net >please see other KRnet info at http://www.krnet.org/info.html >
KR> Fwd: [Q-LIST] Fw: CorvAircraft> Re: Interesting court decision
Hello Net I apologize for continuing a thread that I think ultimately is a dead issue. As both a home builder and an FAA Authorized Inspector, I can see two sides to this issue. Delete at this point or read on if you wish. Firstly when working on any certified aircraft, changing anything on the aircraft requires at minimum a log book notation. The list of things that make an aircraft airworthy, are endless. Owners ( only have limited authority), A's, Repairman and Repair Stations are allowed to sign an entry for return to service on everything, with the exception of Annual inspections, and Major Repairs. These two items require the Signature of an Authorized Inspector and in the case of an Major Repairs and Alteration, requires Field Approval from the FAA. If done properly, at the conclusion of the work, the IA is only allowed 3 days to submit documentation to the local FSDO. Once the alteration is made, and the documents submitted and the Field Approval given, the certification records are permanently altered. The FAA at it's option can inspect the aircraft, have you employ a DAR to inspect the aircraft or review the paperwork sign off and process the paperwork. The only way to change back is to submit for another field approval after making another change. As an IA I have found on several occasions modifications that are made and there is no documentation. I can't sign off the aircraft unless the documentation is sent to the FAA and Field approval given. If a licensed mechanic gets caught side stepping the rules, the penalties are stiff. A $10,000 fine is not out of the question. Secondly, with an Experimental, there are some significant differences in the basis for initial certification. The biggest that's important here is that there is no list of manufactures parts which is required initially. The builder may use what ever he wishes, one can literally install a kitchen sink if you wish (Your DAR might not approve). Once the DAR or FAA rep signs off on the aircraft and issues it's certification, that is it. If you make an alteration, i.e. add a flap, add a light, add an extra pump, the basis for certification has changed and documentation is required.. As an AP with an inspection authorization I can perform, inspect and document alterations to the FAA. They only require that the documentation show that this change is accomplished in accordance a technical reference, consistent with the Methods and Practices in their publications and in a manner that insures airworthiness, We have built and fly aircraft that fall under a part of the FAR that requires that they be maintained in a certain manner. If we don't like that we could fly Ultra Lights. But alas, they have some regs too. Don't forget, that the corporate goal of any for profit company is to make money and if you give it away, you don't make as much. You can expect that they will always pull out the rule book before they pay money. In the case cited by Ellison, someone gave them a lot of information to use. Orma Southfield, MI N110LR Tweety, old enough to drink this year Flying and more flying, to the gathering or bust http://www.kr-2.aviation-mechanics.com/
