There's a new jet in town - N958PD, the Subsonex kit formerly known as "the project" received its airworthiness certificate today after a thorough inspection by Inspector Gerry Rose of the Reno FSDO, thereby officially becoming an airplane. It was a pleasure working with Gerry, who exemplifies an attitude of civil service that I wish would be copied by everyone that works for the public. He did not only a great inspection of the airframe for me (finding a couple of hardware nits that we all had missed), but his preparation of the paperwork was top notch. He worked hard to make sure that we had all of the possible permissions we could get in our Operating Limitations, and a test area large enough to give us numerous landing areas for the jet in our desolate part of the world. And although that test area includes the restricted areas servicing NAS Fallon, we think we'll stay well clear of the Top Gun students based there - we might be a jet, but we don't have the armament... Continue reading "It's a Plane!"
I am often amazed at just how big our margins can be in aviation. Engineering margins, that is - operational margins are as big (or as small) as pilots want to make them. Here is a good case in point. This is the right tank-to-selector fuel line off of a very early two-seat RV. It's been flying for probably well over 30 years. See that crimp? Look more closely - inside the crimp are three very sharp depressions that look like they were made with teeth from a tool of some sort. If you look inside the end of the tube with a bright light, you can actually see each individual tooth mark! Continue reading "Nope, no, no way... flying 30+ years!"
On July 31, in AeroShell Square, during the 2008 EAA AirVenture show, Acting FAA Administrator Bobby Sturgell allowed EAA President Tom Poberezny to award the 30,000th Experimental aircraft airworthiness certificate to Robert Noll and his daughter Katrina, of Yuma, Arizona, who have built an RV-9A together.
In fact, the RV-9A was one of several aircraft that applied for and were awarded experimental airworthiness certificates in the last six months. All of them were entered into a lottery to select the ceremonial 30,000th experimental aircraft. But the Nolls will tell you that it was certainly an honor worth flying to Oshkosh to receive.
"Mom designed the paint and the unique logo, and I helped Dad with the build," she says.
Sturgell noted that 10% of the certificated general aviation fleet are now Experimental/Amateur-Built aircraft, and that number is growing.
The dreaded letter. Every airplane owner (practically) has gotten one at some point. A problem has been detected with a particular part or piece of your aircraft, and the manufacturer is notifying you via a service bulletin, or the FAA is notifying you via an airworthiness directive, of both the problem and the solution.
The difference between the manufacturer's notice and the FAA's notice is that one is optional (don't do it at your own risk), and the other, bearing the FAA's seal, is mandatory (don't do it in the time allotted, and your airplane is legally grounded).
Kitbuilt and plansbuilt Experimental aircraft do not come under the FAA's Airworthiness Directives. However, the prudent manufacturers do issue the occasional service bulletin when a structural problem with the parts they manufacture or the aircraft they designed comes to light.
Van's Aircraft is particularly good about issuing service bulletins, which is good. And they just issued a major one for the RV-10, which is bad. To date Van's has issued few service bulletins on this generally well-designed machine. The nosewheel construction change (see earlier blog) is an excellent example of an optional fix, which left "unfixed" will eventually bite the flier. That change came about because of builder feedback to the manufacturer. This new service bulletin addresses damage in a tail F-1010 bulkhead, which is integral in the attachment of the forward spar of the horizontal and vertical stabilizers. Cracks have been found in the 500-hour-old factory demonstrator.
The fix? Two doublers for the suspect bulkhead must be installed within five hours of discovering any cracks. The choice? Owners can ignore the issue (not smart), or if upon inspecting their tail bulkheads they see no cracks, they can opt to re-inspect the area every 25 hours until the next scheduled condition inspection (typically done yearly and known as the Experimental's annual), at which time the factory recommends that the doublers be installed.
Doesn't sound too bad until you look at the diagrams in the how-to section. Inspecting the area requires disassembling the tail, removal of the tailcone and its electrical contents including any actuators for the elevator trim, and then drilling out key rivets--about nine steps in the bulletin. To perform the insertion of the doublers one must carefully disassemble the area obscuring the suspect bulkhead--18 steps in all. How long will it take? That's up to the builder, but an educated guess is a couple of days' work at a normal pace.
Our airplane is being shot with primer, prepping for its first coat of paint as I type. Oh well. Timing is everything. And, no, I don't wish we were just now building the tail section (the introductory kit in this airplane). I'll take a couple days of disassembly and repair time over three and a half years of building any day.