Experimental or E-LSA????

[Bobdog]

Hi Gang.

I'm ready to register my Taylorcraft "kit", and can't decide if I should go with the new E-LSA or with the regular Expermental. Any ideas you might have, would be appreciated.

[taylorcraftbc65]

Re: Experimental or E-LSA????

Hey Bob, by experimental, do you mean that you restored a Taylorcraft fuselage that had no paperwork on it at all? that is the problem I think that I will run into with the BL65 that we are restoring. sabrina

[Bobdog]

Re: Experimental or E-LSA????

Actually, there was a data plate and log books included in the "kit", but they were not the correct ones for my fuselage. I feel that it is deceptive to build a plane around a data plate, so I'll register my plane as a homebuilt.

[N96337]

Re: Experimental or E-LSA????

Good for you Bobdog. I plan on just experimental/homebuilt. I don't really see the big benefit in LSA for me... I'm sure someday it could be, but I'd rather be able to use the higher gross weight if I want to.
I'll be really interested in your progress, please keep us informed!!
JH

[jgerard]

Re: Experimental or E-LSA????

Definitely go for amateur built experimental.

[M Towsley]

Re: Experimental or E-LSA????

JH,

Don't forget, if you use the higher gross weight (over 1,320), you won't be able to fly it as an LSA if and when the time comes! You can't reduce it later and be legal.

[DanBrown]

Re: Experimental or E-LSA????

Is it legal to register a homebuilt experimental t-craft right at 1320 to get some extra gross weight and still be able to fly it under LSA rules?

[murphy]

Re: Experimental or E-LSA????

I have a question for the group can you restore a Taylorcraft (F21A) add a larger engine (0320) and call it an experimental? How does all that work, do the Feds allow anyone to build a kit that resembles a Taylorcraft or is there a percentage you must change the airplane?
Thanks,
Mike

[Swick-T N7010S]

Re: Experimental or E-LSA????

How are you going to meet the 51% rule? I always though that you can not rebuild a certified airplane and register it as experimental unless you can prove that you build or modified more the 51%. The Swick Clip wing conversion qualifies as a homebuild but ther are lots of mods to the factory airframe.

Mike

[Vasey fan]

Re: Experimental or E-LSA????

In experimental-amatuer built, doesn't the builder have the option of changing the limitations? If so, I would think you could change engines or gross weight, etc, at a later date to take advantage of the LSA rule.

I believe the restriction in the rule was meant to keep folks from STCing a lesser gross to squeak in under the weight. The C-120/140 folks are a little upset over it.

[M Towsley]

Re: Experimental or E-LSA????

Talk to the Feds at AFS610, 1-405-954-6400, or if you're not inclined to do that talk to the folks at EAA. They will tell you what you can do. Experimental/Amateur built I am not sure. I do know if you change say an Ercoupe, that was under 1320, to a higher gross it can never go back to LSA.

[Bobdog]

Re: Experimental or E-LSA????

I reserved the N number for my "new plane". It gets a little intersting here....My fuselage number is 8770. According to the FAA records, 8770 is alive and well in Florida. So I checked the records on both sides of my serial number, and all are still registered EXCEPT ser # 8772. As I recall the factory was often off by a couple of numbers, so I have every reason to belive that my fuselage probably started life as ser # 8772. The N number, N96472, originally assigned to 8772 was available so I reserved it. I wish I would have done this a few months ago, so I could have celibrated her (plane still unnamed) 60th birthday!
Thank you all for for your input,.....I'll go with the regular experimental.

Bob

[mulwyk]

Re: Experimental or E-LSA????

An experimental T-craft. That certainly sounds like an excellant idea for many situations. And it would greatly reduce the cost of ownership. Please keep us posted on your progress, Bob.

51%? I wonder how they measure the 51% figure. I see kit planes that are supplied with ALL parts finished...the "builder" only does assembly. And then you have the "fast build" kits with sub-assemblies complete.

If compared to these experimental kits wouldn't a T-Craft rebuild qualify for 51%? In a decent restoration the plane is completely disassembled, all parts cleaned, repaired, painted and THEN it's completely assembled again. Plus most restorations include fabrication of new wing spars and fuselage wood.

Sounds like more than 51% to me. But the FAA may see it differently.

Bob Gustafson

[Bobdog]

Re: Experimental or E-LSA????

I agree with you. the FAA says the the plane can be built from "spare parts" which is exactly what my plane is. I also think that there is a strong argument for being able to convert from standard to experimental after a complete restoration, if the owner desires to,.....the only problem here is the fact that the plane was a previously licenced plane. Forest probably has more insight on this.

[cpirrmann]

Re: Experimental or E-LSA????

I agree with you. the FAA says the the plane can be built from "spare parts" which is exactly what my plane is. I also think that there is a strong argument for being able to convert from standard to experimental after a complete restoration, if the owner desires to,.....the only problem here is the fact that the plane was a previously licenced plane. Forest probably has more insight on this.

I think you're right about the problem. I got info from EAA and making a licensed, certified experimental appears just for that. To experiment with for a specific purpose at a specific place. Not like an experimental homebuilt. It'd seem to be better to reverse engineer a T craft and build one from scratch, witha different engine, etc, or whatever. Hmmm..... maybe I better get some tubing and try some of Forrest's ideas.