Is your Experimental Airworthy? I am being told the EAA has it wrong.

[1600vw]

What difference does it make? None of these folks will ever sign off a condition inspection so let them think what they want. You can't control what others think, do or say.

This conversation came about on this other forum because we were discussing parts replacement. See how not knowing this little detail can open up a can of worms, when we talk about replacement parts.

[1600vw]

Arguing "airworthy" vs "safe for flight" is like quibbling over people who say "annual" with regard to the condition inspection. It makes ZERO safety difference, and very small amounts of regulatory difference. If you want to get right down to it, the FAA can always find something that isn't airworthy on any aircraft.

What you do need to know, and the lecturer in this video does cover well, is what the standards for the CONDITION inspection is. At least in the parts I endured wasn't wrong.

This is a far cry from the SA telling people to punch test their dacron or giving improper information on how to talk to ATC in class C airspace.

It has to do with parts or replacement parts. But also much deeper. But this was about parts.

[martymayes]

This conversation came about on this other forum because we were discussing parts replacement. See how not knowing this little detail can open up a can of worms, when we talk about replacement parts.

Again, don't see why it matters. Can't control what people think. If somebody insist on only airworthy replacement parts for their homebuilt-whatever turns their crank!

[martymayes]

I like when people call it a "conditional inspection"

[wyoranch]

I like when people call it a "conditional inspection"

I thought we all agreed that it was to be referred to as a "Giger"?

[Low Pass]

All I know is my E-AB was airworthy when I signed off it's last annual.

[1600vw]

During my last condition inspection my airplane was found to be in a condition for safe operation. Not in an airworthy condition.

[Dana]

I guess I'm one of the "no names" people. When I said on the other forum that my experimental is "airworthy" I meant it in the sense of BJC's first definition. Who cares what the FAA calls it, as long as I have an annual logbook entry saying it's in a condition for safe operation.

[Frank Giger]

One must perform an annual condition inspection to ensure the aircraft is safe to fly and airworthy in all respects.

Frank "I'm Famous!" Giger

[martymayes]

I thought we all agreed that it was to be referred to as a "Giger"?

Doesn't Frank's annual conditional inspection take the full 12 months?