Likely as an Experimental Exhibition. It would not qualify as an Experimental Amateur Built! Any work done on a component that was previously installed on a certified aircraft does not count towards the "major portion" requirement of 21.191(g). That work is considered Part 43 Maintenance, not fabrication and assembly. Keep in mind when you say EXPERIMENTAL, there are 9 different types of EXPERIMENTAL certificates each with different requirements and limitations.
I beg to differ with that statement ............ Any work done ............... There seems to be a some contradictory statements in the AC 20-27G concerning the use of "parts" from a previously flying aircraft ........... Can you show me where I'm wrong?
From the AC 20-27G .......
11
d. Use of Salvaged Assemblies from Type-Certificated Aircraft. The use of used or salvaged assemblies (for example, landing gear, horizontal stabilizer, and engine mount) from type-certificated aircraft is permitted, as long as they are in a condition for safe operation. However—
(1) You should contact your local FAA MIDO or FSDO prior to using a major assembly or sub assembly, such as wings, fuselage, or tail assembly from a type-certificated aircraft. As an amateur builder, you should be aware that when building your aircraft, the
excessive use of major assemblies or sub assemblies from type-certificated aircraft would most likely render it ineligible for certification under § 21.191(g).
(2) You will not receive credit for work done on, or the use of, salvaged major assemblies or sub assemblies when determining whether your amateur-built aircraft has met the major portion requirement. This would include any “rebuilding” or “alteration” activities to return these components to an airworthy condition.
(3) All fabrication, installation, and assembly tasks on the Amateur-Built Aircraft Fabrication and Assembly Checklist (2009) that you’ve completed by the use of used or salvaged assemblies can only be annotated in the “Mfr Kit/Part/Component” column.
This is sort of contradictory to the AC 20-27G, page 11, d, 2 ............. concerning "rebuild" or "alteration" and where it pays to find a Fed or DAR that recognizes the paragraph in 8130.2J, Page 15-5, (4) .............................. some will, some won't.
From the FAA's 8130.2J (what Feds and DARs are to use as a guideline) It states you
CAN use a portion of another aircraft and get
PARTIAL credit for the EAB 51% ruling.
(4) When Builders Use Articles from Other Aircraft. The use of used or salvaged articles, including military surplus articles, from other aircraft is permitted if they are in a condition for safe operation; however, all fabrication, installation, and assembly tasks accomplished with used or salvaged articles will be credited to the “Mfr Kit/Part/Component” column on the Amateur-Built Aircraft Fabrication and Assembly Checklist. No credit will be given toward the major-portion requirement for work on these salvaged articles. This includes any “rebuilding” or “restoring” activities to return these articles to an airworthy condition. Assembly credit
MAY be given in those cases where used or salvaged articles are assembled with
PORTIONS of the aircraft fabricated and assembled by the builder.
I understand the Feds want to stop folks from throwing together some junkyard parts and calling it an EAB. That's understandable. But some take the 20-27G statements to mean you can't use anything. This needs to be written, or just amended, for clarification. It's how airplanes have always evolved! Taylors, Pipers and even the Pitts S1 came from a J3 rear fuselage section.
The two airplanes hit hardest by this confusion is the Breezy and the Stretched Pacer (by whatever name). It makes zero sense that you can't use the front part of a damaged Tri Pacer fuselage, build an extended tail section for it and qualify for EAB. Yet, you can buy a ready made fuselage from a supplier and you're golden.
www.kitplanes.com
