What's new
Van's Air Force

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

Amateur Built vs ELSA

C

Carol Carpenter

I'm New Here
I attend a Van's forum while at Sun N Fun. Very few Van's RV 12 builders at the show realized the huge advantage of certifying the RV 12 as ELSA over Amateur built. There is a 30-30% high resale value when a plane is certified as ELSA. After resale the new owner can take a short two day course and will be able to complete the yearly condition inspection. With amateur built he would need an A & P.
While you must build the aircraft exactly as the S-LSA model- after certification you can modify the aircraft. The operating limits on both are exactly the same.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Carol -

I don't understand your statement: "There is a 30-30% high resale value when a plane is certifed as ELSA."

Also, if the builder builds exactly like the S-LSA model and certifies it as E-LSA does he have to take the short two day course to be able and/or certified to complete the annual condition inspection on his own aircraft? I think it would probably be a godd idea, though.

Gary -
 
YES!

If built as E-LSA, the owner must take the 16 hr. course to do the condition inspection regardless of who built it. E-AB just requires that you show that you built a major portion of the aircraft to obtain the repairman certificate.

Not sure how you can come up with a resale value on an aircraft that hasn't been built or certificated either as E-AB or E-LSA yet.
 
Last edited:
Not quite!

Carol Carpenter said:
The operating limits on both are exactly the same.
Click to expand...
The E-LSA operating limitations have a paragraph stating that anyone with less than a recreational pilot certificate must have a class/category/make/model privilege endorsement. (ref. 8130.2F section 144, paragraph 16).

E-AB op lims have no such requirement.
 
Last edited:
Can we have some specific examples of the difference in ACTUAL sale prices of similar Ex-AB vs ELSA airplanes?

I have heard this argument before, and when you drill down, a big part of the assumption seems to be that getting an Ex-AB airplane through an annual condition inspection is a big deal for anyone but the builder. Therefore, an ELSA will have markedly lower inspection costs for subsequent owners.

This assumption doesn't jibe with my experience.
 
Carol Carpenter said:
I attend a Van's forum while at Sun N Fun. Very few Van's RV 12 builders at the show realized the huge advantage of certifying the RV 12 as ELSA over Amateur built. There is a 30-30% high resale value when a plane is certified as ELSA. After resale the new owner can take a short two day course and will be able to complete the yearly condition inspection. With amateur built he would need an A & P.
While you must build the aircraft exactly as the S-LSA model- after certification you can modify the aircraft. The operating limits on both are exactly the same.
Click to expand...


It was my understanding that if you build your own plane under the amateur/experimental rule (NOT ESLSA), you get a repairman certificate which allows you to do the condition inspection and or fix any issues on your aircraft.

I also thought there were two course for the ESLA issue, one for doing the inspection, and a longer one for actually getting to fix any issues you find.

If you build just a straight experimental, you have tons more leeway if you built 51% of it.

The above is my understanding of the rules, if I am off, someone correct me please :)
 
wickedsprint said:
It was my understanding that if you build your own plane under the amateur/experimental rule (NOT ESLSA), you get a repairman certificate which allows you to do the condition inspection and or fix any issues on your aircraft.

I also thought there were two course for the ESLA issue, one for doing the inspection, and a longer one for actually getting to fix any issues you find.

If you build just a straight experimental, you have tons more leeway if you built 51% of it.

The above is my understanding of the rules, if I am off, someone correct me please :)
Click to expand...
First, you can do any and all maintenance on any experimental aircraft yourself. For the E-AB, you must show that you built a major portion of the aircraft to qualify for the repairman certificate allowing you to do the annual condition inspection.

For E-LSA you must attend a 16 hr. course to qualify for the LSA repairman certificate/inspection rating. This will allow you to do the annual condition inspection on any E-LSA (of the same category) that you own.

The LSA repairman certificate/maintenance rating is for S-LSAs. It will also allow you to do the 100 hr. inspection required for S-LSAs when used for flight training.

The maintenance rating will also allow you to inspect other people's aircraft and charge for it.
 
Last edited:
Carol DEFINATELY knows more about Light Sport maintanence than I do (or probably ever will), but her 30%-35% premium numbers seem WAY too high. Perhaps if we were comparing ExABs to factory made SLSAs I could by it, but otherwise not.

Lets assume that a used ExAB RV-12 will sell for $50K-$60K. Comparing that with ExAB zodiacs 601XLs for sale now, I consider this a very conservative number. If Carol's 30%-35% premium numbers are true, that would mean that a buyer would be willing to pay $15K-$20K MORE for the ELSA version.

Why in the world would a buyer pay a $15K-$20K premium to allow him to perform his own annuals, when a condition inspection by an agreeable A&P will probably only cost maybe $500 (sometimes MUCH LESS) a year. It would take the buyer 30-40 years to recoupe his premium. Even if it was $1,000 per year (which seems pretty high), it would still take 15-20 years to recoup that money.

There are enough RV non-builder owners on this site to get a realistic idea of how much such a condition inspection would cost. I have trouble believing that the average is high enough to justify such a premium.
 
Mel said:
First, you can do any and all maintenance on any experimental aircraft yourself. For the E-AB, you must show that you built a major portion of the aircraft to qualify for the repairman certificate allowing you to do the annual condition inspection.

For E-LSA you must attend a 16 hr. course to qualify for the LSA repairman certificate/inspection rating. This will allow you to do the annual condition inspection on any E-LSA (of the same category) that you own.

The LSA repairman certificate/maintenance rating is for S-LSAs. It will also allow you to do the 100 hr. inspection required for S-LSAs when used for flight training.

The maintenance rating will also allow you to inspect other people's aircraft and charge for it.
Click to expand...

So if I understand you correctly, I can buy a used RV, and do whatever I want to it maint/fix wise..but since I didn't build it I have to have it inspected by an A&P, or the actual person who did build it, provided they have the repairman cert.

If I build an RV, I can fix anything and sign off on its annual.

I'm also interested in the ELSA aspect cause I like ultralights, but some of them get pretty heavy so you have to build em as ELSA..which brings diff factors into maint etc.
 
wickedsprint said:
So if I understand you correctly, I can buy a used RV, and do whatever I want to it maint/fix wise..but since I didn't build it I have to have it inspected by an A&P, or the actual person who did build it, provided they have the repairman cert.
Click to expand...

Correct. :D
 
Carol Carpenter said:
I attend a Van's forum while at Sun N Fun. Very few Van's RV 12 builders at the show realized the huge advantage of certifying the RV 12 as ELSA over Amateur built. There is a 30-30% high resale value when a plane is certified as ELSA. After resale the new owner can take a short two day course and will be able to complete the yearly condition inspection. With amateur built he would need an A & P.
While you must build the aircraft exactly as the S-LSA model- after certification you can modify the aircraft. The operating limits on both are exactly the same.
Click to expand...

Carol,

THe reason no one understands the advantages of ELSA is because no one else offers them besides Vans. Other than the ex-ultralights, where else can you buy a kit ELSA? And to make matters even better, you won't pay $120,000. I know the paperwork and testing regimen is apparently amazing but wow. And its not like Van's doesn't have any orders. Why isn't their approach recognized as the future of the LSA business. Soon you will see more 12's flying than CT's.
 
Peterk said:
Carol,

THe reason no one understands the advantages of ELSA is because no one else offers them besides Vans. Other than the ex-ultralights, where else can you buy a kit ELSA? And to make matters even better, you won't pay $120,000. I know the paperwork and testing regimen is apparently amazing but wow. And its not like Van's doesn't have any orders. Why isn't their approach recognized as the future of the LSA business. Soon you will see more 12's flying than CT's.
Click to expand...


You are making the case for buying a RV-12 versus a factory built, but I don't see how your post demonstrates the advantages of E-LSA. I do understand the advantages of ELSA and they are minor. If you weigh in the fact that you can build the EAB in a much tighter budget, the advantage swings the other way. Whether builders go EAB or ELSA will make no difference in Van's sales and I am confident that soon we will see more 12's flying than CT's.
 
E-LSA vs E-AB

I suspect that Carol is basing the 30 percent higher resale value on her experience with fat ultralights. There are some home-built airplanes that were registered as E-LSA before the January 31, 2008 deadline. I doubt that enough of those have been sold to be statistically meaningful. Any fat ultralight that is not registered as E-LSA is illegal and therefore is worth a lot less.
But we are concerned with how to register the RV-12.
See http://www.kitplanes.com/sportplanes/0505-3740.pdf
Advantages to E-LSA:
You can pay for professional builder's assistance, if desired.
You do not have to prove that you did 51 percent of the work.
Build time will be reduced because all parts are provided. All you have to do is follow the step by step directions. Even the electronics are plug and play.
Test flying time is only 5 hours. After that you can go on trips and carry passengers.
When sold, an E-LSA will be worth more because it was built exactly according to plans with new quality parts. And the new owner can do his own annual inspections (after taking a 16hr course).
Disadvantages to E-LSA:
During construction, NO modifications are allowed. After flying 5 hours, you may modify at will, provided it still meets the LSA definition.
You MUST take a 16 hour course to do the annual inspections yourself.
Your plane might cost more because you have to buy everything new from Vans.
The prop can not be adjustable in flight.
You can not fly faster than 120 knots. (Who would know if you did?)
I intend to register my RV-12 as E-LSA.
If your RV-12 is not built exactly as Vans specifies, you probably can register it as E-AB, although there is no guarantee that you will be able to.
Joe
 
16hr course vs 2 week course

I also thought there were two course for the ESLA issue, one for doing the inspection, and a longer one for actually getting to fix any issues you find.
Click to expand...
The owner of an E-LSA is allowed to repair his airplane without taking any course. But she must take the 16 hour course to do the annual inspection. The two-week course if for those who want to charge for inspecting other LSAs.
 
This is an interesting thread...that shows each persons perception of "value" depends exactly on each persons perception. For a variety of reasons, different people perceive different things as more or less valuable. It's folly and impossible at this point to argue about the exact outcome E-AB vs. ELSA when exactly ZERO of them have been registered either way. I've seen some assumptions made that are possibly somewhat correct, but also possibly somewhat incorrect.

Anyway, I guess in the end we'll have to wait and see. In general my gut feel is that the ELSA's would be a bit more valuable on the market over the EAB's all things being equal, but time will ultimately tell so I refuse to make an actual prediction on #'s until we see because I just don't know. I will agree that it's certainly true that the RV12 will quickly be one of the more populous LSA's out there whether ELSA or EAB - so that's a good thing - I like the RV12 and am excited they are being built! What I do know first hand is that Van's has put and is putting a tremendous amount of work (probably more than any other kit they've made) into the RV12.

BTW, I don't see the huge negative in the 16 hr course. There are lots of things builders still can learn about the prop, engine, avionics, systems, etc.. that when building a kit like this you don't necessarily learn. I know if I had a rotax on the front of my plane, I'd like to learn a little bit more about it. I know lots about Lycos, but not nearly as much about the Rotax. I just don't see it being a big deal, but that's my personal opinion. Heck, I've sat through longer classes just to learn how to wire up one single piece of avionics (Garmin G900X).

My 2 cents as usual..

Cheers,
Stein
 
Mich48041 said:
I suspect that Carol is basing the 30 percent higher resale value on her experience with fat ultralights. There are some home-built airplanes that were registered as E-LSA before the January 31, 2008 deadline. I doubt that enough of those have been sold to be statistically meaningful. Any fat ultralight that is not registered as E-LSA is illegal and therefore is worth a lot less.
But we are concerned with how to register the RV-12.
See http://www.kitplanes.com/sportplanes/0505-3740.pdf
Advantages to E-LSA:
You can pay for professional builder's assistance, if desired.
You do not have to prove that you did 51 percent of the work.
Build time will be reduced because all parts are provided. All you have to do is follow the step by step directions. Even the electronics are plug and play.
Test flying time is only 5 hours. After that you can go on trips and carry passengers.
When sold, an E-LSA will be worth more because it was built exactly according to plans with new quality parts. And the new owner can do his own annual inspections (after taking a 16hr course).
Disadvantages to E-LSA:
During construction, NO modifications are allowed. After flying 5 hours, you may modify at will, provided it still meets the LSA definition.
You MUST take a 16 hour course to do the annual inspections yourself.
Your plane might cost more because you have to buy everything new from Vans.
The prop can not be adjustable in flight.
You can not fly faster than 120 knots. (Who would know if you did?)
I intend to register my RV-12 as E-LSA.
If your RV-12 is not built exactly as Vans specifies, you probably can register it as E-AB, although there is no guarantee that you will be able to.
Joe
Click to expand...

Not a bad comparison, but the last one needs a little coment. The EAB rules are not changing, so if you built most of it, EAB is a real viable option. As of right now E-LSA in not an option until the red one gets it S-LSA approval. I am sure that will happen, but for right now the more guranteed route is EAB.
 
I agree...I don't think the EAB rules will change. But what may change is the direction they give to DAR's. The FAR's won't change, but Advisory Circulars sure can. Having now reached the finishing kit stage, I am convinced this is definitely not a quick build by comparison to others in that group. EAB should not be a problem for those that wish to do so. I just happen to like all the things they have done with the ELSA...it is all the things I would have put in myself. This tells me how to do it...and maintain it. It is an interesting thread as someone said...and my 2 cents now makes it 4 cents.
 
Not sure I agree

Fl Mac said:
Not a bad comparison, but the last one needs a little coment. The EAB rules are not changing, so if you built most of it, EAB is a real viable option. As of right now E-LSA in not an option until the red one gets it S-LSA approval. I am sure that will happen, but for right now the more guranteed route is EAB.
Click to expand...

I don't think it is safe to assume the EAB rules are not changing (unless you have heard something from the FAA that I have not). It is hard for me to imagine that they would spend more than 2 years of time and effort looking into what they saw were issues with the current rule to come out on the back end with no changes. Now, I would agree that the changes are likely to be less significant that what was proposed last year. There will certainly be changes to the checklist that is used to evaluate aircraft so even that is a change. The definition of fabrication is also a continuing topic of discussion based on the last update I read. This does not mean I doubt the ability of someone to register the 12 as an EAB- either now or after the final rule changes are released. And while I agree that E-LSA is not an option until the S-LSA approval of the prototype, I am not sure it is fair to characterize EAB as the "more guaranteed route". Van's has basically entered into a contract with all who have elected to build it as an E-LSA that essentially commits them to S-LSA approval of the prototype and entitles builders to obtain E-LSA registration if they purchase all subkits and build it to spec. Essentially, the cover that Van's has as part of the order form does just the opposite in that it "guarantees" ability to register as an E-LSA but does not guarantee ability to register as an EAB (they have stated the same since the kit was first released last April).

There is one other advantage to E-LSA that I don't think has been highlighted yet in this thread- if you sell an E-LSA you built, the buyer can take the 16 hour course and perform the inspections on it despite the fact they were not the initial builder. Basically, with the 16 hour course, you can perform inspections on any E-LSA you own.

In any event, as others have said, this remains an interesting thread.

My 2 cents now gets it to 6 cents!!!
 
jte65 said:
Basically, with the 16 hour course, you can perform inspections on any E-LSA you own.
Click to expand...

Not true. If you build or buy an RV-12 and take the course you may do the inspections ONLY for that airplane. If you build or buy another RV-12 you must retake the course.

More loveliness from the LS/LSA rules. :rolleyes:
 
JYE is correct.

Jamie said:
Not true. If you build or buy an RV-12 and take the course you may do the inspections ONLY for that airplane. If you build or buy another RV-12 you must retake the course.
Click to expand...

The LSA repairman certificate/inspection IS good for any E-SLA that you own of the same class. If you sell and buy another aircraft, you do have to have the new aircraft added to your certificate, but you don't have to retake the course. ref; part 65.207(b).
 
Last edited:
SteinAir said:
This is an interesting thread...that shows each persons perception of "value" depends exactly on each persons perception. For a variety of reasons, different people perceive different things as more or less valuable. It's folly and impossible at this point to argue about the exact outcome E-AB vs. ELSA when exactly ZERO of them have been registered either way. I've seen some assumptions made that are possibly somewhat correct, but also possibly somewhat incorrect.

Anyway, I guess in the end we'll have to wait and see. In general my gut feel is that the ELSA's would be a bit more valuable on the market over the EAB's all things being equal, but time will ultimately tell so I refuse to make an actual prediction on #'s until we see because I just don't know. <snip>

Cheers,
Stein
Click to expand...

I started to write a response last night... but was interrupted by the "Twins Chorus".:eek: Stein mirrored many of my initial notes.

I have a theory (note the choice of words) that there MAY be some added value to many second or later purchasers (of E-LSA's) who like the added "security" of knowing that it was built exactly "per-plans" using supplied parts and that in theory - there should be no surprises. I also theorize that these same specifics MAY also lead to a slightly lessor insurance cost vs. an E-AB. Lastly - for the many that have opined here on the board about the potential liabilities of selling your E-AB - I also theorize that your exposure MAY be somewhat less with an E-LSA. Ultimately this all MAY result in an increased value of an E-LSA over an E-AB. Will it be 30%? I don't think so... but I could easily see 10% to 15%.

Being that my crystal ball is as hazy as everyone else's... those are my two cents worth... and worth every cent! ;)

DJ
 
Last edited:
I'm unconvinced that you can pin an actual number on the benefit, but you might do some good by increasing the pool of likely buyers. Same effect as two RV-6As, one with a Lycoming and one with an alternative engine. They MIGHT sell for the same amount, but the number of people interested in the conventionally equipped airplane is going to be a lot larger. (However, history also suggests that the alternative-engine aircraft will also sell for less, all else equal.)

Still waiting for Carol to resurface with a few facts to support the claim.
 
KPmarc said:
I'm unconvinced that you can pin an actual number on the benefit, but you might do some good by increasing the pool of likely buyers. Same effect as two RV-6As, one with a Lycoming and one with an alternative engine. They MIGHT sell for the same amount, but the number of people interested in the conventionally equipped airplane is going to be a lot larger. (However, history also suggests that the alternative-engine aircraft will also sell for less, all else equal.)

Still waiting for Carol to resurface with a few facts to support the claim.
Click to expand...

Marc,

What is your opinion as to why Van is the ONLY one to stick his toe in the ELSA water? Is it just his view of the future? Like Cirrus hanging their hat on the jet and forsaking the LSA? Obviously Van is watching baby boomers (and potential newcomers). Duluth appears to be counting on a repeat of their success taking over the GA recip market...if there is one left. My money is on Van.
 
I fly a CGS Hawk Arrow Plus, heavy fast UL, so I empathize with your position. My question is this: Is there any way to get an ELSA cert for an RV-3B? With the right small motor it would seem to be a natural.

The advantage is the avoidance of the medical testing associated with the private ticket. For many of us old folks, this is a big deal.
 
toolted said:
My question is this: Is there any way to get an ELSA cert for an RV-3B? With the right small motor it would seem to be a natural.
Click to expand...

Only 2 ways to get an E-LSA. 1/ An E-LSA kit provided by a kit manufacturer who has certificated an S-LSA of the same exact model. and 2/ a down grade of an S-LSA. The RV-3 qualifies on neither count.

Now having said that, if you can show that your RV-3 meets LSA parameters, then you can fly it as a sport pilot. The aircraft does not have to be registered as light sport, it just has to meet the parameters of light sport.
Basically; 1320 lbs. max gross weight, Not over 120 kts. at max rated power, and clean stall speed of not more than 45 kts.
 
toolted

Is there any way to get an ELSA cert for an RV-3B?
Click to expand...
No, not unless it was previously registered as an E-LSA before the January 31, 2008 deadline. However with a driver's license in lieu of a medical, you can fly any airplane that meets the definition of LSA no matter how it is registered. It can be type certificated or experimental or whatever. As long as it stalls at a slow speed and does not go too fast and does not have a prop that changes pitch in the air and the gear does not retract and does not weigh too much, then you do not need a medical to fly it. Check out the EAA's website for the definition of LSA to get all of the facts. http://www.sportpilot.org/learn/aircraft_index.html
Joe
 
toolted said:
I fly a CGS Hawk Arrow Plus, heavy fast UL, so I empathize with your position. My question is this: Is there any way to get an ELSA cert for an RV-3B? With the right small motor it would seem to be a natural.

The advantage is the avoidance of the medical testing associated with the private ticket. For many of us old folks, this is a big deal.
Click to expand...


Why put a "small" motor in it? Do what CubCrafters is doing with their new "SUPER Sport Club". http://cubcrafters.com/supersportcub/engine.aspx
It is an S-LSA with an ECI CC340 - 180HP engine that the manufacturer only rates at 80 hp CONTINUOUS! :eek: Uh-huh... nobody will exceed that 80 hp. continuous...

Sounds like having your cake and eating it too...:p But then we are getting a bit OT...

DJ
 
Last edited:
hydroguy2 said:
Not the ONLY one. Rans has 3 nice E-LSA models. I'm sure there are others.
Click to expand...

Brian,

They are very nice but I believe they are kit planes under the 51 percent rule built as EAB's. They are allowed to be flown as sport planes because of their parameters. And then again, I could be wrong...it has happened.
 
one must have a certificate from the manufacturer

Not the ONLY one. Rans has 3 nice E-LSA models. I'm sure there are others.
Click to expand...
At present, there are NO airplanes that can be registered as E-LSA. In order to do so, one must have a certificate from the manufacturer. Van's Aircraft is the only manufacturer that has agreed to provide that certificate. At least that is their intent after they get their S-LSA paperwork in order. An aircraft does not need to be registered as an E-LSA to be flown by a pilot using a driver's license in lieu of a medical. All that is required is that the aircraft meet the definition of LSA. There are some type certificated and some experimental and all S-LSA that meet that definition.
Joe
 
Peterk said:
Brian,

They are very nice but I believe they are kit planes under the 51 percent rule built as EAB's. They are allowed to be flown as sport planes because of their parameters. And then again, I could be wrong...it has happened.
Click to expand...

and that is why I posted...Because I thought differently.

I am certain Rans has S-LSA models of the S-7 and the S-19 (and possibly the S-6). This allows people to build E-LSA models per factory guidelines. new info suggests I am wrong


Here's a link to Rans first S-LSA , a S-7.
http://www.rans.com/_KITS/NewsPages/FirstS-7LS.htm

I've got some memorable hours in this plane.
av08002.jpg


Next is a pic of the S-19 S-LSA, I took of my friend, Neil after our demo flights in Utah.
utahrans018.jpg


And finally here's me on first taxi test of a S-6es E-LSA. (although built under the exemption rules). I think Rans has a S-LSA version now
1dc15ad1.jpg


YMMV

just to keep this RV related. While helping build the S-6, I had my first ride in a RV-6 which got me dreaming. A month later I got my first loops & rolls in Neil's RV-4. This 170hp IO-320 C/S propped beauty was the final straw. I ordered my tailkit as soon as I had the cash.:)
 
Last edited:
I am certain Rans has S-LSA models of the S-7 and the S-19 (and possibly the S-6). This allows people to build E-LSA models per factory guidelines.
Click to expand...
Although Ran's has S-LSA, a builder can NOT register his Ran's home-built plane as an E-LSA unless Ran's gives the builder a certificate. When I talked with Randy at Sebring FL, he said that Ran's would not provide a certificate because of liability concerns. Unless he changed his mind, Van's RV-12 is the only manufacturer that intends to provide that certificate to kit builders that allows registering as E-LSA. A person could buy a Ran's factory made S-19, then convert the registration to E-LSA if desired.
Joe
 
Mel said:
The LSA repairman certificate/inspection IS good for any E-SLA that you own of the same class. If you sell and buy another aircraft, you do have to have the new aircraft added to your certificate, but you don't have to retake the course. ref; part 65.207(b).
Click to expand...

Ok, Mel...I looked it up and stand corrected. We were told explicitly by one of the LS/LSA committee members (the ones that drafted the rule) who spoke to our EAA chapter that what I said was true, but apparently either a) the rule changed, or b) he had no idea what we was talking about.
 
Mich48041 said:
........I talked with Randy at Sebring FL, he said that Ran's would not provide a certificate because of liability concerns. Unless he changed his mind, Van's RV-12 is the only manufacturer that intends to provide that certificate to kit builders that allows registering as E-LSA.....
Joe
Click to expand...

Well ok then, I must have old info. I'll edit my post
 
Jamie said:
Ok, Mel...I looked it up and stand corrected. We were told explicitly by one of the LS/LSA committee members (the ones that drafted the rule) who spoke to our EAA chapter that what I said was true, but apparently either a) the rule changed, or b) he had no idea what we was talking about.
Click to expand...

I wood vote for (b). The rulemaking has not changed. It was like this from the beginning. Unfortunately there are many people who don't understand the rules, including some who definitely SHOULD!
 
Last edited:
Peterk said:
no big deal....I wish more would go the ELSA route.
Click to expand...

I've worked with several S-LSA manufacturers and the reason most of them shy away from the E-LSA kits is due to the fact that the kit manufacturer's name goes on the Airworthiness Certificate as builder. And that never changes even though the kit builder can modify the aircraft after certification.
 
Mel said:
I've worked with several S-LSA manufacturers and the reason most of them shy away from the E-LSA kits is due to the fact that the kit manufacturer's name goes on the Airworthiness Certificate as builder. And that never changes even though the kit builder can modify the aircraft after certification.
Click to expand...
This is part of what causes me to think that there may potentially be lessor liability and higher value for E-LSA's. In theory...

Time will tell...

DJ
 
Current problem

We need not worry about the future value, as of right now we have no value as we can not get a DAR to sign his name to an EAB and Van's is not getting the SLSA done so that we can register our aircraft with the FAA. All we have is a pile of parts, some of us need right now to get the aircraft registered so that we can pay our state tax and we have no way to do that that is safe to go forward with.

It would be nice if Van's could get there work done as there are many who have paid a lot of money (about all that Van's will make out of these aircraft as he will not get a lot from the last two kits in his pocket) and we are holding the bag.

Best regards,
Vern
 
vernhendershott said:
We need not worry about the future value, as of right now we have no value as we can not get a DAR to sign his name to an EAB and Van's is not getting the SLSA done so that we can register our aircraft with the FAA. All we have is a pile of parts, some of us need right now to get the aircraft registered so that we can pay our state tax and we have no way to do that that is safe to go forward with.

It would be nice if Van's could get there work done as there are many who have paid a lot of money (about all that Van's will make out of these aircraft as he will not get a lot from the last two kits in his pocket) and we are holding the bag.

Best regards,
Vern
Click to expand...
There is no reason to dis pare. Van WILL have the prototype certificated as S-LSA by the time anyone is ready for airworthiness inspection. He has way too much invested to do otherwise. Also, why do you think no DAR will sign off on the -12 as E-AB? I have been through the plans and the current 8000-38 list, and have also conferred with Van's. Although I can't guaranty it, it looks as though the -12 SHOULD meet the major portion rule.
As long as it meets this list, I would have no problem signing off on the RV-12 as experimental amateur-built.
 
Mel said:
There is no reason to dis pare. Van WILL have the prototype certificated as S-LSA by the time anyone is ready for airworthiness inspection. He has way too much invested to do otherwise. Also, why do you think no DAR will sign off on the -12 as E-AB? I have been through the plans and the current 8000-38 list, and have also conferred with Van's. Although I can't guaranty it, it looks as though the -12 SHOULD meet the major portion rule.
As long as it meets this list, I would have no problem signing off on the RV-12 as experimental amateur-built.
Click to expand...

To back up Mel, not that he needs it.

Our local DAR has built several r/v's. He is familiar with the 12. He has told me that the way things are, and it does not look like they will change, he will sign off on the 12 as EAB.
 
Mel I mean no disrespect to you and greatly respect the fine information you have provided to this list, but to make my point of concern you did not just say you would do an EAB RV-12 with no problem, you felt the need to qualify your support. I have seen this concern in other DAR's, they will do any approved list aircraft and any plans built aircraft but get very concerned about any kit that is new and that is not FAA approved because the FAA is refusing to do the job they are paid to do and as "DAR" they fear retaliation if they do something that is not in "current policy" and there is no policy for new kit aircraft.

I do agree that Van is an honorable man and I expect him to some day get the SLSA done, and yes it will be before I am ready for certification as he will not issue the last kit until he is ready.

Now we can not register the parts as an aircraft so that we can be ready for certification because we are in a "Catch 22". This means we can not offer the aircraft a collateral for a loan to buy the last kit and we can not pay the state tax on it before the rules change or the rates go up.

It would be very nice if the FAA could get back to work, but they will not any time soon and so we must wait in the hope that Van's will get on with something one day soon. The last kit with its long list of problems and back ordered parts does not inspire the confidence we have come to have in Van's.

Best regards,
Vern
 
vernhendershott said:
you did not just say you would do an EAB RV-12 with no problem, you felt the need to qualify your support. I have seen this concern in other DAR's, they will do any approved list aircraft and any plans built aircraft but get very concerned about any kit that is new and that is not FAA approved because the FAA is refusing to do the job they are paid to do and as "DAR" they fear retaliation if they do something that is not in "current policy" and there is no policy for new kit aircraft.
Click to expand...
Vern, I'm very sorry that you feel that we must "qualify" our support, but that is our job. A kit does not have to be on the "approved list" to obtain E-AB certification. But, if it not on the list, we must use the 8000.38 list to "qualify" our decision. Until the entire kit is complete, we cannot say with no uncertainty that it will meet the "major portion" rule. Like I said, if everything goes as it is planned there should be no problem with the E-AB status.
What you seem to be wanting me to say is; "Whatever Van puts out, I'll buy." I can't do that!
Everyone that has started building an RV-12 was given this information from the beginning. I don't think that Van has mislead anyone. He made it very public that if anyone wanted to build the -12 as amateur-built that it would be up to them to show it's qualification.
BTW, It's not FAA's job to inspect kits and put them on an approved list. They do that as a courtesy.
 
Hi Mel,

I know that you must dance to the FAA tune, that is your job.

The FAA established a kit approval program to benefit the Inspectors and DAR's, it also serves the kit manufactures and perhaps the kit buyer. The FAA got their shorts in a twist about a year ago and said that they were not going to do anything until they fix a "Big" problem with kits so they stopped doing the very thing that gave them control of the situation and that produced a rational program for you good men who have to make it work. So now it is a major project with big risk for all involved to get an EAB certified if it is not on the old list. The builder risks not being able to get his aircraft approved, the DAR risks his authority if he is viewed as not in line with policy, even if he does it exactly by the book, and FAA Inspectors just will not look at new kits because it may cost them their job. As for the RV-12 you have seen the whole kit, the last two kits are just engines, prop and avionics to be bolted on I should not think that these would change the yes or no. But I do under stand that neither you or I can change the mess at FAA so for now (today) EAB is not a sure thing and over a year later we still do not have a SLSA RV-12 approved from Van's and we have seen so many others SLSA's come on the market it sure makes us wonder what the problem is at Van's.

I grant you that I do not understand the process of SLSA and the making of an ELSA kit as well as I would like, this is partly because it cost a lot of money to get a copy of the rules to read. It is interesting that we have rules set up by our government that we may not see unless we pay some third party a large sum of money. But that is just another problem with the FAA and it is much like the TSA.

Best regards,

Vern
 
Just my opinion

I wonder if I am the only one thinking that this thread has gotten way out of hand. Vern old boy, lighten up! All of us who are building the RV-12 were well aware that this is an ELSA, and only "maybe" E-AB. Speaking for myself, I was well aware of this, and Van's made it clear. I think we will all be well served by the meticulous (read that time consuming) process Van's has gone through to bring this kit to market. I'm glad they are doing all the flight testing, and have every confidence that the SLSA approval process will be completed in due course. Sure there is bureacracy invloved in the process, but bashing the FAA and Van's will not speed up the process. I don't know about the rest of you guys, but I am done reading this thread. Let's get back to the constructive comments and help we have come to expect from this forum. There, I said it. Now I have to get down off of this soapbox. :)
 
Hi John,

I am sorry that you find the real problems of us getting the RV-12 approved for flight to be such a negative issue that we should not try to find some constructive way to make it work. Now that there are very few DAR's with authority 47 required to approve the ELSA aircraft and the long time it takes to get a registration through the process at the Registration office we may all have to wait 3 to 6 months after we have the RV-12 ready to fly before we can fly it,but I guess that is just what you mean by it will happen in due course. I hope some one is able to fly an RV-12 by this time next year but I sure would not bet any money on it.

I will get on to my finish kit, which arrived yesterday, and some day we will get the two remaining kits and then as you would say in due course it will some day be approved for flight.

Best regards,
Vern
 
vernhendershott said:
the long time it takes to get a registration through the process at the Registration office we may all have to wait 3 to 6 months
Click to expand...

Vern the only reason it would take 3 to 6 months is if someone keeps making mistakes in properly filling out the forms.
I just did one in three weeks and that was with one mistake that required them to send me a letter and me send back a corrected form.

By my experience...completing something like this in 3 weeks through one of our government agency's is fast.
 
Hi Scott,

I am sorry I was not clear when I said 3 to 6 months, I was referring to the time from the day the aircraft is in all physical respects ready to go fly and the day you can actually go fly. I did not mean to imply that the Registrar would take all that time. Three weeks is a good time for them and 6 can happen with no problems caused by us. The rest of the time would be:

1. Getting the paperwork from Van's (we do not know what we need yet)
2. Getting the Registration complete and real registration form in hand.
3. Getting a date with a DAR with Function 47 authority (not very many)
4. Inspection and approval or list to fix
5. Go fly

All of these must be in order and completed before the next step can be actioned (yes you can plan the next step but as an example the DAR will not do anything until you have the real registration in hand).

Have a good day.

Best regards,
Vern
 
Mel said:
Vern, I'm very sorry that you feel that we must "qualify" our support, but that is our job. A kit does not have to be on the "approved list" to obtain E-AB certification. But, if it not on the list, we must use the 8000.38 list to "qualify" our decision. Until the entire kit is complete, we cannot say with no uncertainty that it will meet the "major portion" rule. Like I said, if everything goes as it is planned there should be no problem with the E-AB status.
What you seem to be wanting me to say is; "Whatever Van puts out, I'll buy." I can't do that!
Everyone that has started building an RV-12 was given this information from the beginning. I don't think that Van has mislead anyone. He made it very public that if anyone wanted to build the -12 as amateur-built that it would be up to them to show it's qualification.
BTW, It's not FAA's job to inspect kits and put them on an approved list. They do that as a courtesy.
Click to expand...

Hey Mel!

Thanks for keeping a cool head and being so informative, as well as providing some real insight into the FAA world. It is so comforting to know that DAR's like you, are available for us 12 builders, with a real hope to go the E-AB route.

The 8000.38 document is a bit daunting for the run of the mill 12 builder. Van has provided some documentation in the RV-12 prints/manual that does support E-AB. There is a parts list that list each part, by name and number, and identifies it as "material", or "manufactured", as the case may be. This should go a long way in supporting an E-AB qualifying project. That, along with a good builders log, and DAR's like you, who are willing to support that effort, will go a long way in preserving the privilages of us home builders and our passion.

Thanks for being there!!

Tom
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top