Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 23

Thread: Legal question

  1. #11

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    WA
    Posts
    1,205
    A future jury might expect and find the more experienced professional mechanic, to be held responsible for a bad outcome. Regardless of actual facts.

  2. #12
    CarlOrton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    DFW Area
    Posts
    729
    Quote Originally Posted by Frank Giger View Post
    Similarly, Experimental Aircraft are not given any judgement as to their airworthiness by the FAA. Again, it is the builder that does that. The FAA only states that they saw the aircraft complete, with no statement of it's safety.
    When I received my special airworthiness cert for my Sonex, the DAR told me flat out that the FAA doesn't care if I kill myself in it. They just wanted to make sure that I didn't hurt anyone on the ground in doing so.

    Carl Orton
    Sonex #1170 / Zenith 750 Cruzer
    http://mykitlog.com/corton

  3. #13
    CarlOrton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    DFW Area
    Posts
    729
    Quote Originally Posted by fcairmotive View Post
    <snip> Turns out he has no experience with airplanes, fuel systems, electrical systems, brakes, engines or anything about mechanical "stuff". <snip> My question is, even though he is doing "all" of the work am I going to be liable sooner or later, at his demise, for the advice, help and fabrication on this aircraft.
    There's some detail missing (can't blame you) so we're left to speculate. He knows nothing, yet he's doing ALL the work (your emphasis). Are you looking over his shoulder advising, or actually doing it (you mentioned fab of the tank)? Is he intending to fraudulently represent that he built the plane? Are you documenting everything you do, with copies to him, such that he might be denied amateur-built status (potentially saving his life?)?

    All I see at this point is the robot wheeling around bleeting, "Warning! Warning, Will Robinson!!" As others have noted, it really doesn't matter how "in the right" you are. You didn't elaborate, but the way you stated it, the heir (making it sound like one person in particular) may not be pleased the builder is doing this in the first place.

    Renting a corner of the hangar is one thing. Doing all the work is a whole 'nuther thing.

    Carl Orton
    Sonex #1170 / Zenith 750 Cruzer
    http://mykitlog.com/corton

  4. #14

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Alabama
    Posts
    2,236
    LOL, it's absolutely true, Carl! The FAA mandates that builders place an Emergency Locator Transmitter in an aircraft so that in the event of a crash they can locate it. Unless it's a one seater with just the pilot. Then they couldn't give a rip and so an ELT is not required.

    By the way who normally does the initial flight for these aircraft. With no experience in flying except in the back seat he is convinced and cannot be convinced otherwise that with a Light Sport Certificate after learning to fly in a 7-AC Champ he can handle this "Kite" ,my word not his, for its initial flight and subsequent 40 hours. Tell me I'm not crazy, please.
    Typically the builder performs the first flight.

    You probably aren't crazy, but most builders are a tad touched in the head, to be honest.

    I did about half of my Sport Pilot training in a Champ, and was really low hour when I started flying my own aircraft from first flight; consensus in the community for my sort of aircraft is that a Champ is a good analogy for it. It may not be prudent or wise, but it's not uncommon or unusual. Certainly it makes the NTSB investigator's job a little easier in the event of a major event.
    The opinions and statements of this poster are largely based on facts and portray a possible version of the actual events.

  5. #15

    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    1,609
    Quote Originally Posted by Sam Buchanan View Post
    I have to ask.......why in the world did you get yourself into this predicament? Was it that important to rent part of your hangar?

    You need to extricate yourself from this arrangement as soon as possible....if continued, this will not end well.
    The best advice ever given to anyone.

  6. #16

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    2,575
    Many people build an airplane for the first time, especially a simple one, without having experience or formal training, and it works fine, thats a part of EAA. Others build under some supervision or even fast build programs at the factory that gets them started. and it can and should work out fine.
    And many people who have experience would be glad and even enjoy helping a first time builder. But that doesnt seem to be what is going on here. You resent the fact that this builder is not an experienced A an P, and/or you dont have confidence in your willingness or ability to teach him, maybe even inspire him. Kind of like Young Eagles, many pilots welcome a chance to introduce kids to flying in a positive way, but there are always a few, maybe for a good reason, who dont want to share. I hope he can rent space from someone who welcomes the chance, maybe there is an EAA chapter near, and not get into what is going to be a long term unending conflict with you, and I dont think the legal aspect is the real factor here since it hasn't been a problem for others.
    By the way, you may be expert in building, but maybe this person knows some things you dont. he may be a teacher or lawyer,nurse or computer expert in his own right.
    And you seem to already conclude he will crash one day.It will take some time to build so he can learn to fly as needed. If the plane is dual he can get some CFI time in it or a similar one, if not a Champ is a good basic trainer tho the LSA may be a lot quicker on pitch controls. I did the first flight in the Starlite we built because it was single seat.It handled fine in the air, side control notwithstanding.
    Last edited by Bill Greenwood; 03-08-2018 at 02:30 PM.

  7. #17

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Alabama
    Posts
    2,236
    As Bill wrote, it's about comfort level.

    There are folks in my EAA chapter that look at my plane and have said flat referred to it as a "death trap," as the notion of tube-and-gusset construction just strikes them as improper from the start. I never ask them for help, as I know they would be very uncomfortable with it.

    I do troll them a bit by pointing out all the non-aviation hardware I used in the construction, to be honest.

    OTOH, I knew when my ignorance of all things airplane related could get me into serious trouble and begged for help. My electrical system was designed and the installation overseen by our technical counselor, for example. And when I had to rebuild my VW engine, one of my EAA brothers spent a good couple of weeks combined time standing over my shoulder, not only guiding me but explaining it to me....the books were good, but nothing beats someone there to make things clear.

    As an A&P you may have to avert your eyes more than once when watching an amateur aircraft built. There are "best practices" and there are "gooder enough" practices, some of which may make someone used to following a manual and set procedures blanch. For certified aircraft, there are no "best practices," there are only "practices" with how to install stuff set forth.
    The opinions and statements of this poster are largely based on facts and portray a possible version of the actual events.

  8. #18

    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Location
    iron Mountain, MI
    Posts
    5
    The rules on 51% are pretty clear. But the DAR that inspected my project told me he was told in his “FAA DAR Classes” down in Oklahoma it was not his job to determine if the applicant actually built the plane. There’s a bunch of builder assist shops doing 90% of the builds, and as a builder who poured 9,000 hours into a very complex plane, I don’t agree with the system. But, this will NOT be an issue at airworthiness inspection time.

    Tom Sullivan
    Lancair IVPT N994PT

  9. #19
    Tralika's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    78
    I don't know why the builder you are "helping" would not be able to obtain a Repairman's Certificate. The DAR that does the final inspection and issues the airworthiness certificate will have nothing to do with the process to obtain the Repairman's Certificate. The "builder" takes the AW certificate, build log and a Form 8610-2 to the local FSDO. In my case, it was obvious that the folks at the FSDO had no experience with Experimental Amateur Built aircraft. They thumbed through my build log and asked me a few questions about the build process. The questions were very similar to questions I've gotten from non-pilots. They asked no questions about maintenance or inspection requirements on my plane. After making sure the form was filled out properly they issued my Repairman's Certificate.

    If you don't want the builder you are helping to obtain a Repairman's Certificate I think the only way to do it is to apply for the Repairman's Certificate yourself. Since only one certificate is issued for each aircraft he will not be eligible if you get there first. Also keep in mind that there is no time limit on when the to apply for the Repairman's Certificate. If your builder says he does not want a Repairman's Certificate, he can change his mind and apply a year or two later.
    Last edited by Tralika; 03-11-2018 at 08:40 AM.

  10. #20

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Alabama
    Posts
    2,236
    Well, he's not building the plane for the guy, just some subsystems like the fuel tank and plumbing for it.
    The opinions and statements of this poster are largely based on facts and portray a possible version of the actual events.

Posting Permissions

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