It is "amateur built". So the same category as the bearhawk and rvs etc.

mmartin1872 wrote:It is "amateur built". So the same category as the bearhawk and rvs etc.

Lucky. I've been wanting to get a 180 fuselage over. Not as easy as it once was...

Well i got one set of wing spars disassembled and prepped for etch/alodine/paint today. My friend kept on welding the float fittings. All that is left to weld is the rear fittings... I lie. . We also have to weld the reinforcements for the sea plane doors and some tabs for extending the baggage area.

Don't mind all the broken parts that need replacement scattered all around. Lol

A1Skinner wrote:

mmartin1872 wrote:It is "amateur built". So the same category as the bearhawk and rvs etc.

Lucky. I've been wanting to get a 180 fuselage over. Not as easy as it once was...

Although it has been done (witness Greg Miller's Bushwhacker, for one), I understand it's a pretty tough show to get a certificated aircraft re-registered as an amateur-built experimental in the US nowadays.
I would like to know more about putting an airplane into the "owner maintenance" category in Canada. What do you have do to make it happen, and what are you allowed / not allowed to do to the aircraft afterward?

The airplane has to be on the approved list. You have to mark the airplane d data plate and engine data plate with an x.. and you are basically good to go after you apply for your new cofa. The main stipulations are you v can't install a constant speed prop if it wasn't originally installed. . You can't up the gross weight and you can't change from fixed gear to retractable gear.. you then can maintain the aircraft yourself. And I believe you can install uncertified parts onto your airplane.

hotrod180 wrote:

A1Skinner wrote:

mmartin1872 wrote:It is "amateur built". So the same category as the bearhawk and rvs etc.

Lucky. I've been wanting to get a 180 fuselage over. Not as easy as it once was...

Although it has been done (witness Greg Miller's Bushwhacker, for one), I understand it's a pretty tough show to get a certificated aircraft re-registered as an amateur-built experimental in the US nowadays.
I would like to know more about putting an airplane into the "owner maintenance" category in Canada. What do you have do to make it happen, and what are you allowed / not allowed to do to the aircraft afterward?

Basically, any airplane over 200 hp or with a CS prop can't get put into OM. And any aircraft that has over a certain percentage in the commercial fleet won't qualify either, though I'm not sure what that percentage is.
Once it's in the OM category it is almost impossible to get out, or at least cost wise it is very prohibitive. I've spoken with a few guys, and from what they said you can basically do anything. According to TC they still need to approve certain mods, like a landing gear change for example, but in discussion with guys who are in the category, they can do whatever they want. TC basically doesn't want to hear from them much. We also can't fly into the US with a OM plane.
Overall it really is great, and I'll have a plane in it one day. Just too bad that a 180 will never be allowed in, although I can see why. Maybe things will change if the third class medical changes down there...

There are a few guys flying Republic SeaBees that have rebuilt them as amateur built aircraft that look incredibly similar to a SeaBee but you can't call it a SeaBee anymore

From what I've read, they do it by removing every single rivet, building a bunch of parts and treating it as a 51% kit plane (sorta). It's all black magic cuz I can't find FAA regulations that would allow it since any part used on a certified airplane will not count towards the 51% rule. Unless you are using the old parts as templets and you can get the FAA to buy off on that.

But, it's been done as there are a few SeaBees running corvette engines in them.


IMO, if you're willing to drill out a million rivets, clean, repair, prime, paint, jig and re-rivet, re-wire, re-plumb re-everything the poor thing back together - You deserve a builder's cert as that is FAR more work than building a kit plane.

We recently got a 108-2 0-470J engine conversion completed. Makes for a great performing airplane. To keep it at just under the yellow ark it is turning 2200 RPM at 18 inches.... Need to check the accuracy of the airspeed and tack yet but that is where we are at the moment.

Weight and Balance is a biggie, wound up sticking a 6 pound weight under the horizontal next to the tail post..

Brian.

I'm hoping not to need 6 lbs.. We're building the airplane with the battery all the way back there, and we are going to put the permanent survival kit back there . Elt etc. Hopefully lighten the nose up with a light starter and alternator.

An MT prop would be quite a bit lighter than the usual Mac or Hartzell, and could go a long way toward keeping your CG under control. But at about $13K it might be tough to fit into your budget.

I was dreaming about a mt prop for this project. Good thing I got a year or two in order to finally decide

mmartin1872 wrote:I'm hoping not to need 6 lbs.. We're building the airplane with the battery all the way back there, and we are going to put the permanent survival kit back there . Elt etc. Hopefully lighten the nose up with a light starter and alternator.

That's the way to do it... Unfortunately, following the rules of the STC certified world we were limited to moving the battery to the baggage compartment...

The Amat would be the cats meow on the Stinson with that engine..

Brian.

Productive weekend. Got the aft fittings welded on mostly. . And got one set of spars prepped and primed.

Sent from my SM-G920W8 using Tapatalk

What are the round sockets for?

I'm not 100 percent sure. . We are welding in a certified stinson float kit and it included these in the blue prints. . I'm thinking it is maybe to run a pipe through when you are changing over to floats. .

Sent from my SM-G920W8 using Tapatalk