Important details also, and I think this is an area that requires
detailed discussion with FAA first. Even the FAA should know that a
Pitts is an aerobatic airplane, but where a kitplane has a POH that
cites utility category max G's, there might be a problem? Mere lack
of inverted systems would seem to deny approval, as safe operation
depends upon the pilot's ability to maintain positive G's throughout
common maneuvers. Has there been such approval for "non-acro"
kitplanes out there?
A "general rule" may apply. One of our EAA'ers restored a New
Standard D-31, the only one of its kind in existence, and tells the
story of response to an inquiry to FAA. "I don't give a #%*!@ what
you heard. This is my office, and that's the way things are!"
Regards,
Fred F.
Augustene Brown wrote:
>
> I would like to go a little further as it relates to the FAA rules about
> aerobatic aircraft.
>
> Once you are in the 40 hour flight test period, if you DO NOT perform any
> aerobatics, in the test period then the a/c is NOT CERTIFIED FOR
> AEROBATICS, AS PER THE OPERATING LIMITATIONS FOR THE AIRPLANE.
>
> If during the 40 hour test period you perform aerobatics, you must list
> each maneuver performed, in the aircraft log book. After the test period
> of 40 hours the aircraft is then CERTIFIED to perform the Aerobatic
> Maneuvers that are listed in the log book as per the operating
> limitations for that aircraft.
|