My 2 cents worth. The term "Certified" is often used interchangeably when discussing factory built and experimental aircraft. It seems to be a confusion of licensing Category versus Manufacturing Standards. Factory built "Certified" aircraft MUST comply with the "TYPE CERTIFICATE DATA SHEET" (TCDS) for that aircraft, thus the term "Certified" comes into play. A TCDS is one of many requirements to manufacture an aircraft and every aircraft built under that TCDS must be built the same way, no variations. Before anyone jumps at that statement yes new models can be made and the TCDS can be modified but only with FAA approval. An experimental has no TCDS to comply with hence the term "EXPERIMENTAL". Another use or misuse for term "CERTIFIED", is that all aircraft are "CERTIFIED" by someone (FAA employee, DAR, etc.) to be "AIRWORTHY" to fly and then can receive a registration. Further, "EXPERIMENTAL" is a licensing category in the FAR's not a certifying category or standard. It simply means the aircraft is "NOT BUILT TO A TCDS".
I worked as a project engineer for a company recently that was doing a re-engine program and we had to change a factory built aircraft from "STANDARD" category to "EXPERIMENTAL" or "DEMONSTRATOR" depending on the situation. Why, because the new engine was NOT on the "TCDS". Doing flight testing we were "EXPERIMENTAL" and during Oshkosh and Sun n' Fun we were "DEMONSTRATOR". The difference, "EXPERIMENTAL", only required flight crew for testing and "DEMONSTRATOR" we could carry prospective buyers to fly and observe our modification. The company recently received a "SUPPLEMENTAL TYPE CERTIFICATE" for the modification. This means the all aircraft of that specific make and model with the new engine installed according to the "STC" can now be registered in "STANDARD" category as the original was. Sorry for the extra hot air. Maybe this helps some. John El Paso, TX In a message dated 6/10/2009 7:34:54 A.M. Mountain Daylight Time, ejans...@chipsnet.com writes: Mike, And, as long as you mentioned it, FAA regulations do not actually require any kind of instruments - flight or engine - for experimental category airplanes. However, builders would throw safety to the wind if they didn't. You would have a very difficult time finding an FAA (DAR or whomever) that would issue a Special Airworthiness Certificate to an experimental aircraft not having at least the basic instruments. For example, a compass is not required by the regs, but a DAR might require one before he issued a certificate. In such case, a compass from the aviation aisle of Walmart might get you by. Ed "Just a clarification for those suggesting that KR are not "certified" aircraft - KR aircraft ARE "certified" aircraft, just as Pipers, Cessnas, etc. are." Thanks for pointing that out Ed. I've been making the mistake of referring to the "other" aircraft as certifieds in various conversations, thus implying that Experimentals are not. It usually comes up in relation to conversations about what avionics & instruments can be installed . . . or not. Mike _______________________________________ Search the KRnet Archives at http://www.maddyhome.com/krsrch/index.jsp to UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to krnet-le...@mylist.net please see other KRnet info at http://www.krnet.org/info.html