Certified to Experimental

I'm totally frustrated and I need some education and advice.

Im an A&P rebuilding my own 1946 Stinson 108-1 from the frame up. It will be a non-traditional rebuild adding some features that purists would not like glass panel and other improvements.

I can not make any improvement on my CAR3 certified aircraft with out a mountain of regulatory issues. This is NOT a slam on the Experimental side of aviation, but every day I watch videos of experimental owners making all kinds of changes to their aircraft with out any issue.

Speaking with a DAR and DER, it is possible to take my Certified aircraft our of normal category and move it into the Experimental realm.

So here are some of my questions.
- Have any of you made this change before?
- How do I insure the aircraft for both liability and Hull?
- Are there any FAA enforcement issues?
- Anything else I'm missing?

Thanks for the education and advice.

The only way to become EAB is build over 51%. Even that is a schetchy deal with a questionable outcome. You would need approval from the FAA on your plans before proceeding. The only other classes of experimental are for exhibition or developmental use. Basically restricting you to a limited operating area and required crew with tight operational specifications. As tight as the insurance market is currently, I would doubt insurance would be possible at all. Many others before you have tried unsuccessfully to convert certified to experimental with limited success.-build/buy an experimental. Its just much easier.

As noted above, about the only Experimental category that you’d be eligible for would be Experimental Airshow and Exhibition.

In that category, you are required to notify the FAA of any and all places you intend to “show” the aircraft. You are permitted to fly locally for proficiency. If you tell the FAA you’re going to XXX in June, you’re not required to go there, but at least theoretically you’re not supposed to just decide to go there in July instead.

Now, reports I’m hearing suggest that the FAA is pretty lax on all that stuff at the moment, so this could be a viable path.

BUT, what would spook me is if a bunch of folks jump into that category, or there’s an ugly accident there, the FAA could really cinch down on these rules. All they’d have to do is just enforce things they’ve been ignoring.

If that happened, that category could become a PITA. And your airplane in any case is going to be lower in value.

Most of the other EX categories, like flight test, are a temporary deal only, with a time specified that the plane has to be returned to certified.

MTV

Someone mentioned Primary Category special permit as an option


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Opinion here - two things
Why is the upgrade process so difficult? Glass panel is not a problem, plenty of STC's. Stinson is on theGarmin G3X AML.
There are many other upgrades available through Univair. Pretty easy stuff with you as an A&P. Install, fill out the 337 and get your IA to sign off.

If you're determined to go experimental, and I understand why you would be, then sell the Stinson and build a full on EAB. I think the value of some morf of the two would be in the tank if it's possible at all.

Bearhawk Builder wrote:Opinion here - two things
Why is the upgrade process so difficult? Glass panel is not a problem, plenty of STC's. Stinson is on theGarmin G3X AML.
There are many other upgrades available through Univair. Pretty easy stuff with you as an A&P. Install, fill out the 337 and get your IA to sign off.

If you're determined to go experimental, and I understand why you would be, then sell the Stinson and build a full on EAB. I think the value of some morf of the two would be in the tank if it's possible at all.

I totally agree. The one difference you've not noted, though is the difference in price of certified vs experimental avionics (and everything else). That can be substantial.

But, as you say, I suspect the value of the airplane would significantly decrease by changing category, and that'd probably offset any cost savings.

This always sounds like a good deal, till you dig into it. And, building an E/AB airplane would make much more sense. But, they're not cheap either, unless you can do virtually all the fabrication.

MTV

There is a lot of conjuncture on this thread that may not be the most accurate. Kyle Bushman just took a Cessna 175 to experimental - and has done some pretty nice improvements. There has been a lot of articles on what Kyle has done, one is here:

https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/all ... -the-beast

Kyle is a pretty down to earth dude - if you really want to get the scoop on the ins and outs on taking a certified aircraft to Experimental - I would reach out him directly, he is really active on Facebook if you want to reach out to him. Much better to get the latest info from someone that has actually gone through the process recently.

I agree with Corefile. Kyle would be a good contact.

Also, it’s important to note which version of experimental you are wanting to do and the restrictions that goes along with each. Kyles plane is Experimental Exhibition. Getting a previously certified airplane into Exhibition is not challenging. Getting a certified airplane into Experimental Amateur Built is not possible if your going to be fully truthful with the DAR/FAA.

Before I built my BH I wanted to build an experimental Stinson 108. I talked to the FSDO and a DAR. After learning that Exhibition was my only option and the restrictions that went with that category I didn’t do it. Admittedly, I’m a rule follower and couldn’t see how to realistically use the airplane in that category. It might fit your use or if you are comfortable bending or breaking rules through loose interpretations then Exhibition might be just fine.

Good luck with your project!

corefile wrote:There is a lot of conjuncture on this thread that may not be the most accurate. Kyle Bushman just took a Cessna 175 to experimental - and has done some pretty nice improvements. There has been a lot of articles on what Kyle has done, one is here:

https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/all ... -the-beast

Kyle is a pretty down to earth dude - if you really want to get the scoop on the ins and outs on taking a certified aircraft to Experimental - I would reach out him directly, he is really active on Facebook if you want to reach out to him. Much better to get the latest info from someone that has actually gone through the process recently.

I agree that it'd be good to find out how the FAA is currently dealing with Experimental/Airshow and Exhibition category aircraft. I know a number of folks who are operating in that category, and they tell me that the FAA has been very flexible with the reporting/scheduling requirements lately. Many warbirds and airshow aircraft operate in that category.

I found it interesting that the only modification described on that 175 that isn't covered by STC (therefore applicable to certified aircraft) is the slats. The engine, tailwheel, etc are all STCd for the 175. It is an interesting airplane in any case.

But, I totally agree that before you jump into Experimental Airshow and Exhibition, do some serious research, and always best to talk to the folks who are operating there.

MTV

A couple years back, the EAA was pushing a "Primary Noncommercial" category that would allow owner modifications outside the TC. It was supposed to be part of the Part 23 re-write. I don't think it ever got much farther than the "back of the bar napkin" phase. IIRC, if the owner wanted to return it to commercial use, all the non-TC mods would have to be removed.

EDIT: Actually, it got as far as the "PDF" phase, but was apparently too radical for FAA. Didn't make it to the rewrite...
http://eaaforums.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=3777&d=1396123203