DE-certified RV

Currently looking at a damaged and de-certified RV -6 with no paper work. We are new to experimental and RV aircraft. Have just completed a Tripacer project. What trouble/hoops will we have to jump through to get an RV registered and certified once it is de-certified and no paper work is available.
Trying to decide if buying this wreck is a good idea and if we could get it certified again. Looking for your input.

The Albatross Rule

It is my understanding that only the builder can apply for a reissuance of an airworthiness certificate once the original has been surrendered. However, I am no expert and cannot refer you to a particular FAR. My guess is that this 'decertification' was done in an attempt to limit liability on the part of the builder. I would be concerned that this collection of damaged airplane parts cannot be granted a new experimental airworthiness certificate unless the original builder (ie: the manufacturer) applies for it. If this is so, I propose that it be called the Albatross Rule.

Steve is right. Once an amateur-built has been "de-certified", it's over. To get an amateur-built certified, someone has to sign form 8130-12 swearing that "he/she built the aircraft for his/her own education or recreation." Falsification of this statement is punishable by fines up to $10,000, imprisonment of up to 5 years, or both.

Steve and Mel, thanks for the quick reply. Looks like we need to find another way to get into RV-ing.

What about just starting all over, after all you will have to put a lot of time into it, rebuilding it. Put it in as a plans built aircraft. Call it a ___ special.

How about---------

Buy a set of plans from Vans, get a builder #, buy parts as needed, use the good parts from the wrecked airplane.

You will be creating an entirely new aircraft, using some old parts. O.K., lots of old parts.

Folks do it all the time, you are only using a larger amount of "recycled" parts that someone who uses a FWF or used gauges or used radios ETC.

Consider the concept here, seems to me to be a "point of view" issue.

Mel???

Parts is Parts

Mike,

I tend to agree with your viewpoint, and am curious as to Mel's take on your comments.

Dave certainly can't re-certify it as that is out of the question, but creating a "new" aircraft with the "parts" he bought - after all - that is ALL he bought if we are getting into technicalities. He couldn't have bought an aircraft because it is no longer an aircraft in the FAA's eyes. It's a pile of parts and if it was damaged in a crash, well, a pile of messy parts at that.

IMHO, I would think that it would be legal to rebuild the aircraft with new parts under a new builder number (not that the builder/plans number really matters much...) and then certify it under the Amateur built category under Dave's name as the primary builder. Not RE-certify it, but certify it as a new homebuilt. After all, what about a Breezy builder who uses Piper Cub wings and tail from a wrecked Cub.

If it can be certified legally and ethically, then the next question is whether or not Dave did 51% of the work. If not, then he wouldn't qualify for the Repairman certificate. That's a question that only Dave can answer himself after doing the work and looking at the FAA 51% form and answering honestly.

As I write this I am still wrestling with the concept of "primary builder" even for the purposes of certifying it, let alone repairman. Was Dave really the primary builder? I suppose if his rebuild of this wreck was 51% of the work as defined by the FAA's form, then he could be a primary builder as far as the new plane is concerned and it wouldn't be much different than if a partnership of builders is building - only one can be listed as the builder.

Look at me, I'm waffling like a politician in November.

Either way, Mel knows more than all of us, but just offering the perspective as Mike did because often FAA guidelines and rules are as clear as mud. Sometimes you just gotta ask the right question. Re-certify it - no, certify as new?

Mel - are we totally out of line here?

Rob

FAR 21.191

Hi Rob,
The reg reads that it must have been built by persons (plural) for their education, etc. Many partially built airplanes are sold with not a lot left to finish. They obviously have not been built by someone in a small aircraft factory. If it is built from parts, which many RV owners have done, the FAA will accept that. Here's a pasted copy of the reg.

g) Operating amateur built aircraft. Operating an aircraft the major portion of which has been fabricated and assembled by persons who undertook the construction project solely for their own education or recreation.


Regards,
Pierre

FAR Reference-8130.2F CHG 3

(2) In some cases, amateur-built aircraft are sold with an expired airworthiness certificate
or foreign airworthiness certificate. In such cases, an applicant may request and receive a special
airworthiness certificate for the purpose of operating amateur-built aircraft, only if the aircraft
previously was certificated in this category. In this case, a new Form 8130-7 would be issued along with
new operating limitations, but without the eligibility to obtain a repairman certificate for that aircraft.
The new certificate should only be issued after the FAA has verified airworthiness by following the
appropriate procedures in paragraph 88 of this order.

http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgOrders.nsf/0/1ba6ee60e8779bd7862572c90063c0ac/$FILE/Order%208130.2f%20incorp%20with%20chg%203.pdf

Good Posts Pierre and Vern,

Sounds like my suspicions are correct - Dave could use the parts he has and build a new aircraft and certifiy it as a new experimental, but the 51% rule may be in question with regards to a repairman certificate. At least he wouldn't have an airworthiness issue.

But Dave, I'd encourage you to go to your local DAR early and discuss this with them so that you won't have any issues crop up later. ultimately they are the ones signing off the aircraft for its Special Airworthiness certificate.

Rob

parts built

Yup ? Dave can use the parts to build a new aircraft? To some extend I did? Built the wings and emp from a kit purchased from someone who did not want them. Bought the fuselage from an aircraft being parted out. Now the tricky part was convincing the FAA that it was parts built, ( there is a check box on the form parts build or kit built) otherwise they want a bill of sale from the kit manufacture. It took three tries but after I sent about 20 pages of receipt copies for parts from Vans, ACS, and others they conceded that it was parts built. Just a note I would not do it again, the fuselage workmanship was so bad (Down right dangerous and it flew for 7 years like this) I most likely spent an extra year over what a purchased kit would have taken, fixing someone else?s mistakes. Its got 150 hrs on it now, it?s a good solid plane but it wont win any awards.


Just a note... boy did I learn a lot though!!!

Vern said:

(2) In some cases, amateur-built aircraft are sold with an expired airworthiness certificate
or foreign airworthiness certificate. In such cases, an applicant may request and receive a special
airworthiness certificate for the purpose of operating amateur-built aircraft, only if the aircraft
previously was certificated in this category. In this case, a new Form 8130-7 would be issued along with
new operating limitations, but without the eligibility to obtain a repairman certificate for that aircraft.
The new certificate should only be issued after the FAA has verified airworthiness by following the
appropriate procedures in paragraph 88 of this order.

http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgOrders.nsf/0/1ba6ee60e8779bd7862572c90063c0ac/$FILE/Order%208130.2f%20incorp%20with%20chg%203.pdf

Click to expand...

This is all about re-certifying an existing aircraft, not a "new" one. The "builder" would not change.
It would still be the original builder. You can never "re-certify" with a "new" builder.