Kit Built AIrcraft - Restrictions?

[Sunfish]

OK, so humour me. Yes, I know I'm probably mad to consider building an aircraft from a kit. Yes, I know it will depreciate in value. Yes, I know a lot of kit builds don't get finished. No, its not some trike powered by a clapped out VW. No, it won't be a Jabiru, I've already courted epoxy allergy building a sports boat last year. I'm trying to do some due diligence on one of these all metal LSA's.....

STOL CH 750 light sport utility airplane from Zenith Aircraft Company - the ultimate short take-off and landing sport kitplane - Sport Pilot Ready (http://www.zenithair.com/stolch750/index.html)

However I have a question. My understanding of CASA regulations, as interpreted from the RAA website, is that building an LSA aircraft from a kit (an "approved" kit) will result in your receiving an experimental C of A.

Reading a little further, it appears to say that flying an aircraft with an Experimental C of A over built up areas is prohibited without permission (presumably endorsed on the C of A) of CASA.

If this interpretation is correct, which I acknowledge it may not be, how difficult is it to get this permission from CASA? Is it freely given, or is it as rare as hens teeth? I know there is a vari eze at YMMB sometimes, so presumably it's not impossible.

..No response from RAA so I'm posting this here.

[Jabawocky]

Gooday Sunnie!

This thread could be worse than CASA....30 different answers all due to the way people have to read the various regs :ugh:.

Check your PM's for more info.

[VH-XXX]

I am very surprised that you got no response from the RAA, they usually reply within an hour or two for questions like this.

Approval to operate over built up areas is given based on approved engine type, such as Rotax 4 stroke, Jabiru, Lycoming etc. Same as GA world, approval is also given if required but can also have some restrictions like "avoid populous areas to the greatest extent possible."

Why not go GA? Register as a member of GA, no $165 annual membership fee, no $220 initial rego and no $110 yearly rego fee plus you get letters on the side and you could fly at night if you wanted.

[Frank Arouet]

Depends on what you want to use it for.

LSA is "factory built" with "factory" maintenance schedule etc. (in this Country). LSA can be put on line for flying training.

Kit built is experimental in RA-Aus or SAAA. You may still be able to buid it via SAAA that is non experimental with all inspections etc.

[VH-XXX]

The rules have changed Frank. The ABAA system no longer exists, it's all experimental now and there are no stage inspections or certiication required in GA except for the final issue of the C of A.

In the RAA world you can build under CAO 95.10 amateur built, or LSA experimental. You can buy factory built CAO 95.55 etc or LSA and only factory built aircraft can be used for training, except for to the builder of a kit built aircraft.

LSA kits must comply with the LSA regulations and be manufactured after a certain date (around 2005).

LSA can be either GA or RAA registered as factory built.

What I don't know is if you can register an LSA under experimental GA however there would be little point anyway as you may as well go GA experimental.

When you make a full comparison you will realize that GA experimental is quicker and easier with less paperwork hat RAA and if you have co-owners they can also learn to fly under GA but not RAA and of course under both registrations you van perform owner maintenance.

The primary reason why RAA builders would build under LSA would be to take advantage of the greater 600kg MTOW, other than that there are few if any benefits.

It's ironic because LSA was invented to level the GA vs RAA playing field and to bring in new lower cost GA aircraft to help the GA schools compete with their RAA counterparts for cheaper flying training. A good example of this in practice would be the LSA registered Sportstars that you yourself Sunfish fly at the RVAC.

[The Green Goblin]

No-one will hire you an aeroplane after your bingles sunny?

I'm surprised you want to build an aeroplane and fly it considering you think all Pilots are narcissistic pigs with contempt for their passengers, management and anyone who is not a Pilot.

:E


If you really want to kit build why buy something boring when you can build something exciting?

Team Blog (http://www.teamrocketaircraft.com/)

Evo_new_1 (http://www.lancair.com/Main/evo.html)

e.t.c e.t.c

[Back Pressure]

Goblin, I'm relatively new to Pprune, and even I found that predictable !

Will this get me on your hit list ? :ouch:

[VH-XXX]

A mate of mine has a Zenith. On the chat channel recently he was telling me his ground speed...... 25 knots !

[Arnold E]

OK, somebody has to say it, why not build an RV then all the problems go away.
Experimental or GA, whatever you like. You can go anywhere in an RV, no restrictions.:ok::ok:

[Eljay]

As long as you don't want to carry anything, except your tooth brush

[VH-XXX]

I'd rather take no baggage in an aircraft and know I can get home versus having to pack a swag in my 65 knot machine every time I fly more than 50 nm!

There is plenty of room in an RV, a mate carries 2 Jerry cans in his rv7 for overseas trips plus his baggage for 2.

[Deaf]

Operation over a builtup area is covered by CAR262, as mentioned the primary concern is engine type but the aircraft type is also considered with more than the normal 25/40 hours often required especially if the a/c design is the Sunfish Supa Mk1.

Approval is required from CASA or an authorised person. For RAA talk to Steve Bell.

The other option is the Savannah range VG and XL (same base design) for a bit more useful, better crosswind and a bit more speed (even more for the ADV)

Pluses for all are the STOL capability
Downsides are:
Cruise especially with a headwind
Could develop bad habits for other a/c types

[Sunfish]

Looking at the CH750 which is a little heavier built than the Savannah range. Engine would be O-200 or Rotax 912 or possibly 914 with an airmaster constant speed prop.

Busy thinking about getting current again since the last Six months have been building, fitting out, and racing a sports boat.

The costs of the sports boat and an aircraft are about the same once you start adding in carbon mast, Sails, etc.

[Arnold E]

O.S. Where is that? I am an RV builder, and would be interested in that group.:ok:

[The Green Goblin]

Goblin, I'm relatively new to PPRuNe, and even I found that predictable !

Will this get me on your hit list?

Don't take life too seriously mate, I sure as hell don't. I'd have a beer with sunny anytime.

As for hit lists, I don't hate Kiwis contrary to popular vote, 2/3 of the people on here that actually know who I am are Kiwis.

I support any Pilot who is willing to put in the hard yards to fulfill their dream and will help anyone in anyway I can to pursue it.

I have a Passion for the industry from GA, to the Airlines and love the comradery we share.

As for being predictable, thats why I started this profile. To stir a little here and there in an entirely tongue in cheek manner without ruining my usual username. Somehow I enjoyed the persona and after a couple of years I'm still here!

P.S Sunny, don't be boring - build something that'll cause a bit of hanger envy :p

[Arnold E]

P.S Sunny, don't be boring - build something that'll cause a bit of hanger envy http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/tongue.gif
RV, no choise:)

[Jabawocky]

Agreed Arnold............. every time I go somewhere I plan for 20 min of holding, on the apron! :ok:

[M14_P]

GG, that thing the evolution, is one of the single most ugly machines I have ever seen, I hate it!

[Howard Hughes]

I like the Evolution, but who has over a million bucks for a kit built?:eek:

[onetrack]

That Zenith CH 750 is pretty cool with its amazing STOL capability - but to my untrained eye, the cabin area strength looks pretty weak to me. The aircraft looks as if a heavy nose landing would impact the cabin windscreen pillars severely - and they look horribly flimsy to my eyes. The rest of the craft looks pretty robust, if somewhat agricultural.
There's no arguing with the panoramic viewing ability from the cabin - but I wonder if it's been at the expense of cabin strength?
The company appears to be well organised, and the building methods are very adaptive, clear, and straightforward. I trust they have "deluxe" seating options. Most kitbuilds seem to have seating stolen from the nearest park.

[frigatebird]

Seats !!!

Now those are important items. When you sit in one for hours and hours, day and night, they need to be comfortable, with good adjustment, in and out, up and down, thigh support, lumbar support, and all.. Recall one of the best I have used was in an ATR, and the prize for the bad one was split between Airvan (not enough adjustment, back too straight) and the bare Nomad mesh one. Even my Cessna one seems to have me too close to the side of the fuse for long trips. If you are building your own aircraft, then it should be a priority to get the ergonomics right for enjoyment later.