Certificated Owners: Would you re-register as Experimental if you could?

[ssokol]

A couple of days ago I got the monthly update from Piper Forum. One of the hottest topics for November was apparently a discussion on light bulbs - specifically, replacing the originally specified incandescent panel lamps with modern LEDs. The thread went on for page after page with all kinds of arguments both for and against. Most of the participants seemed to agree that the change was harmless, but also illegal.

If common sense changes like this are illegal for a certificated aircraft, then I have to wonder how many of us would swap over to experimental or the proposed Primary Non-Commercial category given the opportunity. To that end, I'd like to invite anyone here who has feelings on way or the other to take a brief (7 questions) survey:

https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/WK3T9XW

I know that this has been covered before, and I'm not necessarily trying to rehash the topic. Feel free to duke it out here, but please also take the survey. I really want some slightly more scientific data that I could take to the alphabet groups if enough people think its worth a shot.

Thanks,

Steve

P.S. - I'm posting this on several forums - APOA, PoA, etc. - to try to get as many responses as possible. You may see a similar post on those forums. Please forgive the cross-post.

[gbrasch]

Took the survey, good questions, would switch the old Tri-Pacer over in a heartbeat, as you say.

[Floatsflyer]

Re-registering from certified to experimental is a time wasted step when what you really want to accomplish is to keep the certified category with the addition of owner maintenance to create a new category of owner maintenance classification. This is what we have in Canada since 2002.

This is the list to date of all aircraft models eligible for this classification. New types and models are added every few years. Click Appendix H.

https://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/civilaviation/standards/maintenance-aarpe-recreational-classification-2752.htm

Here's some additional info on this classification that will be of interest to you in order to move forward with trying to create a new category for certified aircraft:

http://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/civilaviation/publications/tp185-6483.html#own

[Dana]

I don't know if it's still possible, but there was at one time the ability to re-register an aircraft that met the Primary category requirements as Primary instead of Standard, with increased owner maintenance options. The hitch was that it could never be returned to Standard, and so might impact the aircraft's resale value. I was considering doing it with my T-Craft, but I never did before I sold it. I haven't heard of a new Primary category though, the old one was limited to 2 seats and low HP IIRC, not too different from today's LSA.

Dana

[Bill Berson]

The Aviation Rulemaking Committee that advised needed changes to Part 23 did request this.
But I don't think the FAA has any plans to adopt this.

My participation this past two years as an ASTM member involved with this stuff will end on Dec 31 when my membership expires.
I give up. All I see is more rules coming, not less.
It would take a massive act of congress to change the FAA.

[TedK]

The Aviation Rulemaking Committee that advised needed changes to Part 23 did request this.
But I don't think the FAA has any plans to adopt this.

My participation this past two years as an ASTM member involved with this stuff will end on Dec 31 when my membership expires.
I give up. All I see is more rules coming, not less.
It would take a massive act of congress to change the FAA.

Bill - I am saddened at the thought of your departure from this issue. Congress wanted something that would halve the accident rate in the current GA fleet and the ARC bravely put forth the PNC concept in the face of bureaucratic rigidity in the FAA.

I see the glass half full. We have the PNC proposal, we have Congressional language, while not directive supports PNC. We need EAA, AOPA, AEA, and the Type Clubs to actively lobby Congress to include language directing the implementation of the PNC proposal.

However, to date, I haven't see the GA organizations throw their shoulder against this wheel. I suspect their bandwidth has been focused on the 3rd Class Medical reform, of which I concur is the first priority.

How do we get the GA community to actively advocate for PNC?

[Bill Berson]

Ted,Congress wants the FAA to cut cost in half and halve the accident rate. The FAA can't do both. Cost is being ignored.I complained. But without any backing from EAA it is hopeless.The rewrite of Part 23 will be a failure just like Primary category.A total deregulation is needed for private non commercial airplanes.We do have the deregulated freedom now with uncertified kitplanes. Kitplanes is the best option for the future of private aviation.

[L16 Pilot]

I took the survey and I would go experimental in a heartbeat too. Here's part of the problem: with tube, fabric and wood spar aircraft it's getting more and more difficult to find IA/AP's with experience for inspection and even routine (fabric/splicing/welding etc.) type repair and maintenance. Taking it to the 'big shop in the city' often means they're learning your wallet. Most IA's with this type of experience are getting older and ready to retire and I doubt much tube and fabric (if any) is taught in schools anymore. I've rebuilt several A/C of this type but I'd be willing to take a short course relating to inspection and maintenance of these light aircraft. I suppose something close to the LS presently being offered only for 'vintage' aircraft. At my age I have no interest in learning about controllable props, jet engines, retractable gear, etc. Magnetos and carbs, etc. are sent out to specialists for repair anyway. Don't expect it will happen in my lifetime but I can dream>

[skyfixer8]

I don t know where the Piper forum members got the info that LED lamps are not approved as a direct replacement for aircraft lamps, but if you go to the Whelen site, you will find that their lamps are FAA approved.

[Matt Gonitzke]

The OP was referring to instrument panel lighting. I thought Whelen only made exterior lighting.

[skyfixer8]

I have installed several types of panel lighting from strip lights to UMA electroluminescent bezels. Most came from Aircraft Spruce. All were STC d, some required no paperwork, while others needed to do a 337 for install with an STC. Never had any problems from the Fed.

[Ron Blum]

I took the good survey. Sorry to see all the negative comments. If you don't think that the OEMs are looking for solutions, you haven't been a part of any of the ASTM meetings or haven't heard the right stories. We are all VERY interested in this! OEMs don't want to add $$$ for a stick pusher, $$$$ for avionics, $$ for lighting, etc. We would definitely love to produce an airplane that a much larger percentage of the population can afford. We also realize that a $150K LSA is not affordable. The biggest problem at the moment with the re-write is the assumption that more regulations means a safer airplane (and less regulations means a less safe airplane). We need to continue to fight the good fight, and I, personally, applaud your efforts. Thanks!

[zebra]

Remember that you can use equivalent or better parts on legacy aircraft; even automotive, etc. I would be tempted to consider LED lighting to be better than original.

[raytoews]

We are so lucky here in Canada. We have the OM category. I am, as of lately. still the only Grumman Cheetah in the category and I have not regretted it for a minute.
I now have a much simpler exhaust system, Pmags, Trutrak autopilit, Efis, and a smoke system.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fu4rTclBWUQ

Did it all myself. I understand some pilots are not comfortable doing stuff to their airplanes but that is okay. I have had AME's work on my airplane and they had no problem as they don't have to write in the log book.
My insurance with EAA Cplan stayed the same.
As far as the value of the airplane who knows, airplanes aern't worth much anyway.

Ray Toews
Fort Vermilion AB
AA5Ax