Welcome! Becoming a registered user of ShortWingPipers.Org is free and easy! Click the "Register" link found in the upper right hand corner of this screen. It's easy and you can then join the fun posting and learning about Short Wing Pipers!

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 20 of 20

Thread: 51% rule

  1. #11
    Stephen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Lopez Island, WA
    Posts
    2,935
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: 51% rule

    I assume assembly counts towards the 51% rule but, how is it credited? If I fabricate a wing out of used or new piper parts and rearranged the wing components so it is significantly different from the original wing how would this wing construction be counted? Assembly or manufacture?
    "You can only tie the record for flying low."

  2. #12
    KSG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    St Charles IL
    Posts
    239
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: 51% rule

    Quote Originally Posted by Stephen View Post
    I assume assembly counts towards the 51% rule but, how is it credited? If I fabricate a wing out of used or new piper parts and rearranged the wing components so it is significantly different from the original wing how would this wing construction be counted? Assembly or manufacture?
    That's the grey area as I see it. Many kits have wing components supplied with the kit and builder puts them together to manufacture the wing. So why not as you mentioned manufacture the wing with the components in a different position. Would you have to build a wing using aftermarket components, would you have to fabricate all the components. Then to determine % comes in.

  3. #13

    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Location
    Frederick MD
    Posts
    197
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: 51% rule

    Quote Originally Posted by KSG View Post
    That's the grey area as I see it. Many kits have wing components supplied with the kit and builder puts them together to manufacture the wing. So why not as you mentioned manufacture the wing with the components in a different position. Would you have to build a wing using aftermarket components, would you have to fabricate all the components. Then to determine % comes in.
    That is why you use the checklist. One of the issues that I’ve seen is if the parts (major assemblies) flew on something that had an Airworthiness certificate before, you can’t take credit. Individual piece parts making up the assembly can be credited for the assembly, but not the fabrication. Use this guide when filling out the checklist
    https://www.faa.gov/aircraft/gen_av/...st_Job_Aid.pdf



    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  4. #14
    Southern Aero's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Gawja
    Posts
    87
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: 51% rule

    [QUOTE=dgapilot;108630]That is why you use the checklist. One of the issues that I’ve seen is if the parts (major assemblies) flew on something that had an Airworthiness certificate before, you can’t take credit. Individual piece parts making up the assembly can be credited for the assembly, but not the fabrication. Use this guide when filling out the checklist
    https://www.faa.gov/aircraft/gen_av/ultralights/amateur_built/kits/media/Am_Blt_Chklist_Job_Aid.pdf

    Doesn't really address the more complex nature of the tube and rag fuselage now does it?? ............ Back on the issue of using a part that has previously been on a certificated aircraft ............... You cant use a front section salvaged from a damaged Pacer and lengthen it but you can buy a manufactured fuselage if you find one to suit and lengthen it. You're golden ........ You can't use a salvaged spar from a PA12 but you can order one from Wag, Dakota or other suppliers! That definitely falls into the stupid column. I have a lot of heartburn with this interpretation/ruling. ............. Again, needs to be addressed and not left just as is............ but maybe there are just not unuff folks that are troubled by this issue to matter............
    Last edited by Southern Aero; 04-09-2018 at 02:31 PM.

  5. #15
    Administrator Steve Pierce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Graham, Texas, United States
    Posts
    11,031
    Post Thanks / Like
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: 51% rule

    End of day if I were going to build an experimental scratch build using some off the shelf components I would first meet with the DAR, get a plan, use the checklist and ducument the build thoroughly.

  6. #16
    Jim Hann's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Ballwin (St. Louis), Missouri
    Posts
    1,453
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: 51% rule

    Quote Originally Posted by dgapilot View Post
    And I know of one airplane that was issued an E-AB certificate, and a year or two later, FAA took it away. Then issued an Experimental Exhibition to that Aircraft. It also involved switching data plates. It started life as a Monocoupe 90A, and ended up as a Monocoupe 110 Special. Unfortunatly the owner and a good friend was killed in it several years ago.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Similar issue to this one, anybody remember the egg on the face apology from EAA about it?



    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
    1957 PA-22/20 "Super Pacer" based 1H0
    Lifetime EAA member
    Vintage Aircraft Association member
    Lifetime EAA Chapter 32 member


  7. #17

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Eufaula, OK
    Posts
    398
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: 51% rule

    A while back I encountered a Wagabond that someone had "built". It looked to me more like a Colt than a Vag so maybe the key is not confess to anything.
    "Good judgement comes from experience, and experience comes from bad judgement." - Fred Brooks

  8. #18
    Frank Green's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Frankfort NY
    Posts
    643
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: 51% rule

    As I understand it, it is the # of items you work on, not the # of hours you spend doing it and that is how many bend the rules and have the build it in a week business.

  9. #19
    Rick-CAS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Grain Valley, MO (E. Kansas City)
    Posts
    186
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: 51% rule

    I remember the SeaBee article. There was a whole lot to that project that put the rules to the test. I know later on the Corvette engine was approved under a STC that he developed along with a Canadian partner. It was approved in Canada first then thrown to the FAA as a bilateral agreement for use down here. Last I herd he was looking for a Standard Category certificate just to prove you could do it.

  10. #20

    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Posts
    6
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: 51% rule

    All depends how deep you get into the project, say a stretch pacer, exp of corse, if its taken apart COMPLETLEY, meaning down to bare, all wings disassembled, mods made and built back up, YES it certainly does meet the 51percent rule, i done it, recently. get a DAR who cares and no issues. if you build one like this its certainly more work than a kit build that is pre-fab . building one right from ground up with major mods is not any easier than a kit, actually probably more work.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •