> >Sounds like your DAR doesn't know what he is talking about. If that were the >case, all of the experimental aircraft that were built and then sold to >someone else, the new owner could never work of it unless he was an A&P. >Chris Theroux +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++=
Any owner, builder or not, of an EXPERIMENTAL aircraft is allowed to perform maintenance on the aircraft. The only thing the owner can't do, if he/she doesn't have the "mechanics license" for that aircraft, is sign off the yearly "condition inspection". That will require someone with at least an A&P rating but it does not require an A&P with I.A. rating. You must show proof that you are the builder of the aircraft to apply for the "mechanics certificate" for that aircraft which would then authorize you to sign off the annual "condition" inspection as well. I would advise you not to try to "sneak anything through" on the Fed's. One of the employees of the local FSDO shared with me a story of someone trying that and they were going to throw the book at him. You'd be better off to pay an A&P for the "annual" and hold the cost down by doing an "owner assisted annual" if possible. Larry Flesner
