What's new
Van's Air Force

Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.

An Invitation to Talk to the FAA About Amateur-built Safety

TruTrakAndrew

TruTrakAndrew

Well Known Member
I just wanted to say a few words about what Mark is wanting to do with his rally at Osh this year.

I have personally had the opportunity to get to know him through a few different avenues. He cares deeply about the EAB community and is a participant as well. He is currently working feverishly to finish up a panel upgrade to his RV-6. In case you are wondering, he is installing a G3X and GX Pilot. We talked at length about his project just yesterday. Of course he might kill me for telling everyone, because he will have even more reason to finish it before Osh...what are friends for?!

Anyway...it seems everytime I get on the phone with him we talk about a handful of things, but the theme is always the same. We end up talking about what WE can do to improve safety in the EAB world. Not just the FAA, but everyone involved in the EAB world.

Personally I believe that there are a handful of ways that the EAB safety could be improved. Number one (in no particular order, but because this is VAF) follow Doug's safety advice. This is really great stuff guys. We have all lost friends to things that didn't have to take them. Nomex is cool stuff. Number two, get transition training. I don't care if it's for the first flight of your new RV or for an RV you just bought. I know lots of folks that can squeak on a 747, but still got transition training. Number three, I don't care who's EFIS or autopilot you have installed...don't forget who is PIC. Don't let technology convince you to continue into IMC when you shouldn't.

I would personally like to see this thread develop into some good talking points for folks at Mark's rally. For those who can't make it to Osh, this is your chance to be heard. I will personally be attending Mark's rally and his two other talks as well.
 
Perhaps I missed the details somewhere else.

Who, What, When, Where, Why?

I'd like to attend if I can get there.

Phil
 
Date, Time, Location

RVbySDI said:
On the front page of =VAF= Phil.
Click to expand...

Can't count on the front page for details since it changes...

EVENT INFO:

Wednesday, July 25, 2012
Time: 6:30PM-8PM
Location: Homebuilt Parking (rough location outlined in RED near the Ice Box)
VAF_046%20Jul.%2010,%202012%2015.37.03.jpg


Mark E. Giron
Aviation Safety Inspector, General Aviation and Commercial Division (AFS-800)
Washington, DC HQ
 
"Hi, I'm from the government and am here to help you ..." :D

I'm looking forward to hearing him, although I doubt I have much of value to contribute.

I'll bet if we could get this meeting to coincide with the Beerfest on Monday night, Mark would get an ear full! :eek:
 
N8RV said:
I'll bet if we could get this meeting to coincide with the Beerfest on Monday night, Mark would get an ear full! :eek:
Click to expand...

Considering the location is where they did the corn roast last year, maybe he could get full on a different kind of "ear" .:rolleyes:
 
Mark is my buddy and I'm working with him to get his RV6 flying so he can join my wing to OSH. We talk all the time about EAB safety stuff. Mark truly takes a practical perspective of where its been and where it can potentially go. Because of that he is our insider ally at the FAA. He actually is "here to help". Now if he could only stock his fridge with something other than weasel pee and play some decent music while we work he would earn top billing.Definately join him for this get together, it is a great opportunity to get real information outside the party line forums.
 
Last edited:
Okay, I won't be at OSH. I'm curious what your friend will say about transition training. I for one don't think it should be mandatory. OTOH I have read too many posts right here on VAF from pilots who publicly acknowledged that they had screwed up. In some cases the pilots still hadn't figured out where they went wrong. But there are way too many cases that should never happen to a properly transition trained pilot. There is a large segment that is too over confident. Sometimes these are high time pilots but with little experience in type. Just because you have F16 time doesn't mean you're prepared for an RV-12. Some of the posts I've read here scared the h... out of me, under slightly different circumstances they could have been fatal. Yet the pilots seem unrepentant and oblivious. Type training is expensive and inconvenient, which only serves to make pilots more resistant to it. I think if it was more widely available it would help some. Strangely, it is not the FAA. I had no trouble getting a LODA. But the insurance cost for a 'few pilots a year' operation were too high, as in about $100/hr for four pilots a year. I know other cfi's have experienced the same high quotes. I don't know that the FAA can do anything about this, but there' s a topic for you. Sorry for the rant.
 
Yep..

I echo Bob's sentiments as well. The extra insurance cost doesn't justify me spending the extra money, so I'm done with transition training.

I've done it without the extra rider on the policy but I could be denied a claim, should my airplane get bent. I was just extra careful to not let the guys get too far behind the airplane.

Sadly, we're leaving early Wednesday because that's one meeting that I'd really want to be attending.

Best,
 
Wow,
I learn something every day.

I had full intentions of transition training but the logistics of scarce transition training suppliers didn't work out. I wound up flying right seat in a local SBS RV until I got comfortable which did not take long since I was coming from a Piper Arrow into a 7A.

I won't make the WED nite event but was thinking that LODAs were the issue and wanted to put in my 'vote" for easier LODAs or other rulemaking to get transition training more accessible.

SO, here I learn that insurance is the issue, not the LODA. Hmm. Not sure what to do about that problem.
 
This was a great, great discussion tonight at Oshkosh. Unfortunately, very, very few people were there to hear it, which spoke ill of the homebuilding community. We waste no opportunity to complain, and here we had a great opportunity have some input to a response to NTSB recommendations on EAB.

I get it. It's the government. Government bad, yada yada yada. But we have a stake in safety. We have a stake in properly testing our airplanes, we have a stake in figuring out how to get the idiots among us to not be so stupid when it comes to first flights and Phase I, because in the end, it only takes one to wipe it all away.

I wish more people had come. I wrote more about it here.
 
I agree with Bob on all counts - this was an incredible missed opportunity for folks that didn't attend. Mark wants to help, and intend to do everything I can to help him do it.
 
Ironflight said:
I agree with Bob on all counts - this was an incredible missed opportunity for folks that didn't attend. Mark wants to help, and intend to do everything I can to help him do it.
Click to expand...

We (as a community) missed the largest opportunity that the homebuilt community has ever had to influence the future of regulation in the homebuilt community. We must stop any new regulation at all costs. We do need revisions to the present FAA Order 8130.2 G as they relate to the Operating Limitations of Amateur Built Aircraft and revisions to the test flying AC90-89A. I am opposed to having two people in the aircraft on test flights. IF the FAA can break Phase I up into sections where GOALS can be accomplished during sections of the test phase (test flew and logged that the aircraft is controllable) then I would be open to having a second person in the aircraft while performance data is collected. I very much would love to see someone be allowed to reimburse an amateur built aircraft owner for use of their aircraft for proficiency flights. What I would like to see, is a pilot that has received formal transition training be allowed to pay for the fuel of a friends homebulit aircraft to get some recent experience even if the friend is not a CFI.

We must all stand together and fight to make sure that additional regulations are not required harder than we are with User Fees. We MUST improve our education level, safety record, and get everyone in our community to be good citizens who do what the regulations, processes, and procedures require of us and NOT cheat. I do not believe that we can get to a ZERO accident rate and still fly but we should be able to get close to what the rest of GA rate is. We should always TRY to get to the zero rate but unfortunately we are all human and make mistakes.
 
Bob, I understand your sense of urgency and sentiment of disappointment surrounding this informal meeting but... I think Mark's assessment that the homebuilt community doesn't care couldn't be further from the truth. I had the opportunity to speak with the Hombuilt Aircraft Council (HAC) about this very topic and they are working hard addressing the NTSB report. They also speak to the FAA regularly (Rick Weiss, HAC chair, is retired from FAA), build and fly homebuilts and are passionate about improving safety yet preserving our rights. Mark should speak to the HAC.
 
A lot of the RV community long ago scheduled their departure for Wednesday morning.
 
DanH said:
A lot of the RV community long ago scheduled their departure for Wednesday morning.
Click to expand...

I certainly fell into the same category as Dan, since I had to be back in the office on Thursday.

I wouldn't stereotype us as not caring by not attending the meeting on Wednesday afternoon.

The real opportunity is to figure out how to establish bi-directional dialogue with Mark and his peers on a continual basis. Mark may not have the bandwidth to actively particpate on all the various type forums. I would love to see him actively particpate here on VAF.

bob
 
Maybe I'm not the brightest of the lot, but isn't this a forum? Where could you have better input and participation than right here? And it doesn't cost me hundreds of my "getting the airplane done money" to get to Osh Kosh to make my comments.
 
I addressed that in my blog post and on the radio. It was a brilliant idea-- have a conversation with friends as opposed to a big hairy deal. Sure there are other acronyms he could talk to. He wanted to kick it around with us. You can still write to him at [email protected]
 
Mark Giron may need to schedule sometime earlier in the
week to have any luck with attendance at his 'forum'.
I don't agree that a low turnout speaks ill of us.
I also realize Monday and Tuesday night were booked up.
All the homebuilder's I know from central Ohio flew home
Tuesday or Wednesday except for one and he didn't arrive
until about airport closing Wednesday evening.
I'm guessing the HBP & HBC areas had some holes in it
from departed planes Wednesday evening and hope Mark
doesn't give up on us yet.

I plan to listen to Mark's interview on EAA Radio.
(I have not listened to any of Bob's interviews yet.)


I also feel Bob makes some good points in his blog,
Tom
 
tomwebster said:
Mark Giron may need to schedule sometime earlier in the
week to have any luck with attendance at his 'forum'.
I don't agree that a low turnout speaks ill of us.
I also realize Monday and Tuesday night were booked up.
All the homebuilder's I know from central Ohio flew home
Tuesday or Wednesday except for one and he didn't arrive
until about airport closing Wednesday evening.
I'm guessing the HBP & HBC areas had some holes in it
from departed planes Wednesday evening and hope Mark
doesn't give up on us yet.
Click to expand...

Sure, there were plenty of holes - there were probably only three or four hundred RV's left on the field by that time.....so that's not much of an excuse for a twenty-person turn-out. Of course, it was only announced here, and not everyone knew about it.
 
Since I flew with Tom, I wasn't able to attend the meeting. I did however send Mark a personal email offering any assistance I can and invited him to a chapter meeting if he was ever in the central Ohio area.

I also suggested getting actively involved in some forums, if the FAA will allow him to do so.

Bob
 
LettersFromFlyoverCountry said:
This was a great, great discussion tonight at Oshkosh. Unfortunately, very, very few people were there to hear it, which spoke ill of the homebuilding community. We waste no opportunity to complain, and here we had a great opportunity have some input to a response to NTSB recommendations on EAB.
Click to expand...

On my behalf (as someone who walked up late), I'd suggest that the low turnout was simply a function of limited advertising. The event wasn't in the forum schedule, and essentially wasn't publicized anywhere except this thread. It was on my radar before the hustle and bustle to get to Oshkosh began, but completely slipped my mind when I started looking at what I wanted to do, starting Wednesday morning. Hmm, this forum at 9, that one at 11, airshow at 3, dinner at 6...

In hindsight, a sign or two near the HBC showers and porta-potties would have probably resulted in exponentially better attendance.
 
Kyle Boatright said:
On my behalf (as someone who walked up late), I'd suggest that the low turnout was simply a function of limited advertising. The event wasn't in the forum schedule, and essentially wasn't publicized anywhere except this thread. It was on my radar before the hustle and bustle to get to Oshkosh began, but completely slipped my mind when I started looking at what I wanted to do, starting Wednesday morning. Hmm, this forum at 9, that one at 11, airshow at 3, dinner at 6...

In hindsight, a sign or two near the HBC showers and porta-potties would have probably resulted in exponentially better attendance.
Click to expand...

Ditto what Kyle said. I, too, showed up late but enjoyed what little I heard and kept my yap shut. I think Mark has a lot to offer the homebuilding community -- if he doesn't succumb to the lure of Washington power politics.

While I knew of the meeting beforehand, it wasn't on my mind on Wednesday nearly as much as the bad weather forecast for the afternoon (a prediction that indeed came to fruition a mere 20 hours later). A couple of signs by the showers might have been a great idea.

I can't speak for anyone else, but when I go to Oshkosh I am NOT on a schedule. I plan nothing. If I catch a forum presentation, great. If not, the world keeps turning. This is my vacation. My job is scheduled all day long, day after day. The last thing I want on my vacation is to have an itinerary to abide by, sorry.

From what I saw, it was a good meeting, a beginning. Having had scores of attendees would probably not have done more than just demonstrate interest. I think a lot of valuable time would have been wasted entertaining stupid questions (yes, there ARE stupid questions :D).
 
DanH said:
A lot of the RV community long ago scheduled their departure for Wednesday morning.
Click to expand...

yep time is precious.

We were planning on leaving Tuesday evening to get part way home. But having such a good time we delayed to Wednesday morn...And we paid for it in Eastern Montana heat and bumps and 50kt headwinds the afternoon.
 
While returning back to HBC, I just happened to walk by a group of people standing in the field with Paul leading a discussion. When I see Paul leading a discussion, I gotta listen in and was I grateful I stayed.

I believe Mark will be a valuable resource to us in helping improve safety. He certainly didn't appear to be for more regulation, although I was shocked to hear from one VAF member that they were.:eek: I think that even caught Mark off guard.

One item discussed that I really liked was possibly having the manufacturers provide the initial test flight plans such as what is provided by Van's for the RV-12. Although some go through the trouble to create their own test cards and actually stick to the test plan, others do not and just bore holes in the sky for their 40hrs. If something reasonable was provided by Van's, maybe there is a better chance that they would use it and have a safer and more complete test flight experience.

Also discussed was the 25-40hrs Phase I. It was unclear to Mark the origins of those numbers, however I believe it was Mark who threw out the possibility of a shorter Phase I if a Test Plan was used and the numbers collected during those tests were provided to the FAA for documentation purposes and NOT for their approval. Just look at the RV-12 for example. They simply run through the test plan and their done when all the blanks are filled in. This would be great for those who are seeking someone else to test fly their aircraft and than get transition training in their own plane. Test phase could last a few hours and once complete, maybe a log book endorsement might be made that the aircraft was controllable, etc, and than you would be free to go up and get your transition training without having to wait the 40hrs. Interesting idea and certainly worth more discussion.

Again, I really liked how Mark & Paul lead the discussion and I believe everyone there enjoyed it. I think it would be great if Mark could participate in further discussions on this forum, dr permitting of course.
 
kbehrent said:
shocked to hear from one VAF member that they were.:eek:
Click to expand...

That was me and I'm pretty sure you missed the small input I had into the discussion. Maybe your conclusion is based on Paul's gesture to me everytime he said "regulation" :eek:.

So let me be accurate here. I'm for cleaning up the regulations regarding the word REQUIRED when taking a second person on a first flight. As I pointed out, people are basically using the vague definition to contort an excuse that they can claim it to be legal. Personally, I think it's stupid.

I don't agree, as I indicated, with the AOPA representative (I'm a member, but I'm not a big fan) who basically said "no" to all regulations, not because it might not make sense, but because it opens the slippery slope to more regulation. His position is education works. My position is I didn't hear one single smart person say to the guy flying into Oshkosh on Phase I, "you know, that wasn't very smart."

But I get the whole "no regulations" thing. I do. I understand people don't like that and as I've indicated before, I get that AirVenture and a Tea Party convention can look an awful lot alike, and I respect the difference of opinion.

But I also know there are some REALLY stupid pilots. I know people who went to Oshkosh on Phase I. I know builders who are dead because they pencil-whipped their 40 hours.

I do like the idea I heard at the "meeting" to have a Phase I and a Phase I-A, which would recognize that people are using Phase I as a training ground for the pilot, when it's supposed to be a test of the airplane. A transition instructor AND a pilot making a first flight together has some appeal to me on a logical scale.

Regulations? Education? Whatever. I want the stupid people out of the sky just as fast as they can be removed because it's only going to take one going down to make me the proud owner of an 1118 pound paperweight.

But, yeah, you're right. The reaction to my opinion was pretty unanimous, which is why I won't be stating it at any future similar gatherings. I have written the FAA with a complete endorsement of required transition training for experimental pilots.
 
Last edited:
RV8R999 said:
LettersFromFlyoverCountry said:
because it's only going to take one going down to make me the proud owner of an 1118 pound paperweight.QUOTE]

several hundred downed every year for many, many years and we are still flying.....
Click to expand...

Let's take a little trip down memory lane.

A lot of people at my small airport -- KSGS -- scoff at the no-first-flight rules in which the DAR gives them a corridor to Airlake Airport. But there's a little loophole: If you have a problem while leaving, you can return to the airport. The number of people who seemed to have a "problem" on every flight --- to the point where they did their 40 hour Phase I entirely at this airport -- is quite staggering and, for the most part, few said a peep.

Yes, I'm for tightening up the regulations because I'm not convinced education works. There just aren't enough people willing to say, "that's wrong."
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
In regard to Phase I, by the way, one of the good pieces of news out of the meeting was a redesign of AC90-89a. As Paul pointed out at the meeting, it fairly leaves the test pilot hanging after the first, say, 10 hours of testing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top