Testing a new home built
Thread Starter
Testing a new home built
I seek the collective wisdom of the ppruners here. can anybody tell me, or direct me to the requirements of test flying a new homebuilt in relation to who and how many pilots are allowed to fly the said aircraft. Is there allowed to be more than one pilot on board? I have looked in the experimental aircraft section on the CASA website but cant find a reference to how many people are allowed to be on board during initial testing. I have no doubt somebody here knows the facts and I wait in eager anticipation. 
I seek the collective wisdom of the ppruners here. can anybody tell me, or direct me to the requirements of test flying a new homebuilt in relation to who and how many pilots are allowed to fly the said aircraft. Is there allowed to be more than one pilot on board? I have looked in the experimental aircraft section on the CASA website but cant find a reference to how many people are allowed to be on board during initial testing. I have no doubt somebody here knows the facts and I wait in eager anticipation.
This requirement is often not adhered to and usually followed up with with disciplinary action.
If you want multiple pilots to fly off the hours, they often approve an experienced test pilot for the first 5 or so hours and then someone else for the remainder as flying in a small area for potentially up to 40 hours or so can get somewhat boring.
Are you an SAAA member. If not, join as they are the primary source of info on such matters. Pilot requirements will be specified in the phase 1 airworthiness certificate conditions issue by an Approved Person. As noted above, SAAA have a comprehensive guide to flight testing.
Thread Starter
Pilot only. If there's a legitimate need for a co-pilot, (fairly unlikely unless perhaps it is a highly complex aircraft) you'd have to take it up with your AP that issues your C of A.
Arnold: I was the nominated pilot for a homebuilt Murphy Rebel. The permit stated I had to do the first 5 hours then the owner could fly (solo) the next 50 within a designated area of about 50 x 50 miles. I also had to give the owner a tailwheel endorsement although we did this in another aircraft.
After the initial flight 5 hours I left. Around 3 months later the owner was accused of not following the permit and doing the 5 hours himself. I had to provide airfare documentation, certified log book entries and a statuary declaration to get the SAAA to leave the owner alone. I got the feeling a witch hunt was happening although everything we did was legit and IAW with the permit.
Get a good permit and stick to it and document it. Unless things have changed, the owner has to apply for and write the permit and submit it for approval. In this case the owner couldn't nominate himself for the first 5 hours because of not having tailwheel experience. (initially he applied to do all the testing hours)
After the initial flight 5 hours I left. Around 3 months later the owner was accused of not following the permit and doing the 5 hours himself. I had to provide airfare documentation, certified log book entries and a statuary declaration to get the SAAA to leave the owner alone. I got the feeling a witch hunt was happening although everything we did was legit and IAW with the permit.
Get a good permit and stick to it and document it. Unless things have changed, the owner has to apply for and write the permit and submit it for approval. In this case the owner couldn't nominate himself for the first 5 hours because of not having tailwheel experience. (initially he applied to do all the testing hours)
The conditions written on the airworthiness certificate by the approved person are law. SAAA APs will typically consider the risks associated with the test period including aircraft type, nominated test pilot experience, engine type, etc. I have tested two aircraft that I built myself. In both cases the test program was rigorous and useful in identifying rigging issues and exposing me gradually to the handling characteristics of aircraft types I had not flown before. It is not a tick & flick exercise. Carrying additional non essential personnel is irresponsible, in my view, in an untested aircraft. If you are not current or competent find a willing and capable person to do the initial testing for you. Many home built aircraft accidents occur when pilots have spent years and $ building an aeroplane and not flying and then take on the test flights.. In many cases they have built an aircraft that has higher performance and is more sensitive/responsive than anything they have flown before. The test program also takes them to parts of the "envelope" they have not seen before.
- Are you not able to fly it yourself?
- Do you need someone else to fly it but don't trust them with your baby?
- Do you feel it is technically required for the safe operation of the aircraft?
- Is there another similar aircraft out there that you or your test pilot can fly in first?
There are test pilots out there that have done dozens of first flights. Some want money, some will do it for the love. Don't skim on your pilot qualifications, skills or experience for the sake of a few hundo's $ or another reason, that in hindsight seemed like a good idea at the time.
I've done more than half a dozen first flights of homebuilts and a factory built. You'd be surprised what can pop up and if you're low time on the aircraft type, things can go unexpectedly pear-shaped very quickly.
Thread Starter
Yeah none of the above and it realy is an academic question now coz I had to sell the aircraft, but I wondered where the ultimate authority comes from, is it CASA or the SAAA and if its the latter who gave them that authority?
SAAA have a close relationship with CASA. If you happened to fly two-up and got caught, the call will likely come from CASA.
The SAAA is not a regulatory authority. The airworthiness certificate with the operating limitations is issues by an Approved Person under a CASA authorisation and approved procedures manual. That makes CASA the regulatory authority.
If the conditions in the airworthiness operating limitations are breached CASA can get excited. If there is an accident then all sorts of angst will arise from many sources...CASA.Coroner.lawyers etc. ...not to mention the disrepute it brings on the rest of the amateur built movement.
If the conditions in the airworthiness operating limitations are breached CASA can get excited. If there is an accident then all sorts of angst will arise from many sources...CASA.Coroner.lawyers etc. ...not to mention the disrepute it brings on the rest of the amateur built movement.
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Sydney NSW
Age: 76
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CIVIL AVIATION REGULATIONS 1988 - REG 262AP
Experimental aircraft--operating limitations
(3) A person must not operate an experimental aircraft outside the area assigned for the purpose by CASA or an authorised person, and must not carry persons other than essential crew in the aircraft, until it is shown that it:
(a) is controllable throughout its normal range of speeds and throughout all the manoeuvres to be executed; and
(b) has no hazardous operating characteristics or design features.
Penalty: 50 penalty units.
Experimental aircraft--operating limitations
(3) A person must not operate an experimental aircraft outside the area assigned for the purpose by CASA or an authorised person, and must not carry persons other than essential crew in the aircraft, until it is shown that it:
(a) is controllable throughout its normal range of speeds and throughout all the manoeuvres to be executed; and
(b) has no hazardous operating characteristics or design features.
Penalty: 50 penalty units.
50 x $155.46 = $7,773.
Ouch!
Ouch!
7700 and all,
Most of the new/newer regulations seem to now be carrying 50 penalty points, regardless of the gravity of the (in the majority of cases, I would estimate) strict liability offence.
It maximizes the administrative fine CASA can levy, as you all undoubtedly know.
Tootle pip!!
PS: You can get the straight unvarnished facts re. all matters certification of Experimental Amateur Built aircraft from Dines Aviation Services. They/he has historically issued about 60%+ of the relevant Special Certificates for these aircraft/helicopters. In my opinion SAAA sometimes mixes up their policies and what the law actually says. Look 'em up.
Most of the new/newer regulations seem to now be carrying 50 penalty points, regardless of the gravity of the (in the majority of cases, I would estimate) strict liability offence.
It maximizes the administrative fine CASA can levy, as you all undoubtedly know.
Tootle pip!!
PS: You can get the straight unvarnished facts re. all matters certification of Experimental Amateur Built aircraft from Dines Aviation Services. They/he has historically issued about 60%+ of the relevant Special Certificates for these aircraft/helicopters. In my opinion SAAA sometimes mixes up their policies and what the law actually says. Look 'em up.
Last edited by LeadSled; 21st May 2017 at 08:25.
Not looking forward to the certification process at all because it seems like a book with seven seals.
My tech. Counsellor has said he is happy with my workmanship and wants to see the aircraft next when I think it is in flying trim.
Do I get to fly the thing over populated areas? Is my interpretation of the regs correct? I live in fear of some "gotcha" that will require years of rework.
As for first flight, I understand the logic, but struggle with the idea that there is anyone keen to do a first flight in our remote area apart from me. I plan to spend a week at a "training establishment" with a similar aircraft if it is going to be me.
Having flown a clone of the aircraft, I am aware of sensitivity in pitch, after badly stuffing up quite a few landings in succession, thankfully with a competent (and quick) instructor.
To put that another way, I have already demonstrated to myself how easy it is to total your new baby.
My tech. Counsellor has said he is happy with my workmanship and wants to see the aircraft next when I think it is in flying trim.
Do I get to fly the thing over populated areas? Is my interpretation of the regs correct? I live in fear of some "gotcha" that will require years of rework.
As for first flight, I understand the logic, but struggle with the idea that there is anyone keen to do a first flight in our remote area apart from me. I plan to spend a week at a "training establishment" with a similar aircraft if it is going to be me.
Having flown a clone of the aircraft, I am aware of sensitivity in pitch, after badly stuffing up quite a few landings in succession, thankfully with a competent (and quick) instructor.
To put that another way, I have already demonstrated to myself how easy it is to total your new baby.
Just get someone else to do it Sunfish.. someone with experience test flying. You might find yourself uninsured if it all goes pear shaped. Shouldn't be hard to find someone to fly it for you, it's a pretty standard aircraft... 3 axis, nose wheel, thus can't go far wrong.
Sunfish
If you are an SAAA member, go to the SAAA website and read the Kitplane safty articles then buy the CofA package and study it. The process is no more daunting than the build.
Test flying is a new ball game. Just being aware of the difference between your aircraft and a C152 is not enough. Have you done any serious unusual attitude recovery training? Do you know the stall characteristics
of your aircraft type? Have you done any slow flying just above stall speed recently? Have you had any aerobatic or at least incipient spin recovery training recently?
Initial operating limitations will likely exclude over populous areas and any future operations would be part of the Phase 2 approval. Read CAR 262AP
If you are an SAAA member, go to the SAAA website and read the Kitplane safty articles then buy the CofA package and study it. The process is no more daunting than the build.
Test flying is a new ball game. Just being aware of the difference between your aircraft and a C152 is not enough. Have you done any serious unusual attitude recovery training? Do you know the stall characteristics
of your aircraft type? Have you done any slow flying just above stall speed recently? Have you had any aerobatic or at least incipient spin recovery training recently?
Initial operating limitations will likely exclude over populous areas and any future operations would be part of the Phase 2 approval. Read CAR 262AP
Moderator
Steve Dines .. haven't spoken to him in aeons. Trust life is treating him well.
Another consideration for initial testing, especially for the first couple of hours when surprises might manifest, is to look at using one of the experienced professional TPs about the place. Regardless of what anyone says, homegrown TPs are fine for routine work but that's as far as it goes ..
Several retired CASA TPs would, in all likelihood, be available to assist at reasonable cost .. all top guys and lots and lots of relevant experience. While the military folks are more than competent, their mindset is in higher performance so one should be looking at those folks who have a reasonable amount of low end civil experience.
Nicko (current CASA TP) in Canberra might be worth a telephone call to get some competent and useful heads up guidance. Thoroughly pleasant chap.
Another consideration for initial testing, especially for the first couple of hours when surprises might manifest, is to look at using one of the experienced professional TPs about the place. Regardless of what anyone says, homegrown TPs are fine for routine work but that's as far as it goes ..
Several retired CASA TPs would, in all likelihood, be available to assist at reasonable cost .. all top guys and lots and lots of relevant experience. While the military folks are more than competent, their mindset is in higher performance so one should be looking at those folks who have a reasonable amount of low end civil experience.
Nicko (current CASA TP) in Canberra might be worth a telephone call to get some competent and useful heads up guidance. Thoroughly pleasant chap.
While I greatly respect the knowledge and experience of those who have thousands of hours more than I could ever hope to get, I think this is being over-thought.
I built an RV-9A from a quick-build kit, and did the test flying myself, even as a low-time pilot. Was I concerned about such an endeavour? Not in the slightest. Did I consider reasonable risks & events that could occur? Most definitely. Other than some EMS alarms that were set a little too conservatively for a new engine, the flight test phase went off with only a few minor issues.
My RV-9 was the 1020th RV9 flying, and while each may be slightly different, the chances of any particular RV9 having such significantly different flying qualities from the factory demonstrator so as to make it hazardous are so remote as to be considered irrelevant in the risk assessment. My insurance had no restrictions on me carrying out the test flying either.
The vast majority of homebuilt aircraft these days tend to be similar in concept to my -9, in that they are not designed by the builder, rather the builder orders plans, or a kit, from a reputable manufacturer who has done the necessary flight testing to show an average pilot will not kill himself in that design through any fault with the design.
Now, if you decide to design and build your own plane, then professional help would strongly be recommended, but I do not consider it at all necessary provided you properly prepare both yourself and your aircraft.
I built an RV-9A from a quick-build kit, and did the test flying myself, even as a low-time pilot. Was I concerned about such an endeavour? Not in the slightest. Did I consider reasonable risks & events that could occur? Most definitely. Other than some EMS alarms that were set a little too conservatively for a new engine, the flight test phase went off with only a few minor issues.
My RV-9 was the 1020th RV9 flying, and while each may be slightly different, the chances of any particular RV9 having such significantly different flying qualities from the factory demonstrator so as to make it hazardous are so remote as to be considered irrelevant in the risk assessment. My insurance had no restrictions on me carrying out the test flying either.
The vast majority of homebuilt aircraft these days tend to be similar in concept to my -9, in that they are not designed by the builder, rather the builder orders plans, or a kit, from a reputable manufacturer who has done the necessary flight testing to show an average pilot will not kill himself in that design through any fault with the design.
Now, if you decide to design and build your own plane, then professional help would strongly be recommended, but I do not consider it at all necessary provided you properly prepare both yourself and your aircraft.
Vag277:
Will look at the SAAA website and buy the package.
I have now experienced the differences between this aircraft and a C152/172/PA28 etc several times. The chief one being pitch sensitivity at low speed. The stall characteristics are relatively benign as it is a STOL aircraft with fixed LE slats, unless kicked very hard in the guts, its stall is really a mush, similar to a Sportstar of all things. The pitch sensitivity is a necessity associated with the necessary low speed elevator authority. The aircraft allegedly has been spin tested by the designers and recovers conventionally. There are no vices reported from the builder/flyer community apart from the need to carry a little power into the flare unless you are very stol experienced because the aircraft stops flying suddenly because of its draggy nature.
Once airborne, the aircraft is a joy to fly, there are hundreds of these designs flying. Landing requires care because of the low mass momentum and pitch sensitivity. The demonstrated crosswind is 17 kt.
I have done unusual attitude and aerobatics work, until my instructor broke her leg, so didn't get an aerobatics rating.
A draft POH is already available and the aircraft flight envelope has already been thoroughly explored (even aerobatics, at which the aircraft is not very good!).
I need no cautions about unforeseen "gotchas", I worship at the church of Murphy. What I need is a support team of people who are smarter than me when I'm finished the engine runs and paint.
Sunfish
If you are an SAAA member, go to the SAAA website and read the Kitplane safty articles then buy the CofA package and study it. The process is no more daunting than the build.
Test flying is a new ball game. Just being aware of the difference between your aircraft and a C152 is not enough. Have you done any serious unusual attitude recovery training? Do you know the stall characteristics
of your aircraft type? Have you done any slow flying just above stall speed recently? Have you had any aerobatic or at least incipient spin recovery training recently?
Initial operating limitations will likely exclude over populous areas and any future operations would be part of the Phase 2 approval. Read CAR 262AP
If you are an SAAA member, go to the SAAA website and read the Kitplane safty articles then buy the CofA package and study it. The process is no more daunting than the build.
Test flying is a new ball game. Just being aware of the difference between your aircraft and a C152 is not enough. Have you done any serious unusual attitude recovery training? Do you know the stall characteristics
of your aircraft type? Have you done any slow flying just above stall speed recently? Have you had any aerobatic or at least incipient spin recovery training recently?
Initial operating limitations will likely exclude over populous areas and any future operations would be part of the Phase 2 approval. Read CAR 262AP
I have now experienced the differences between this aircraft and a C152/172/PA28 etc several times. The chief one being pitch sensitivity at low speed. The stall characteristics are relatively benign as it is a STOL aircraft with fixed LE slats, unless kicked very hard in the guts, its stall is really a mush, similar to a Sportstar of all things. The pitch sensitivity is a necessity associated with the necessary low speed elevator authority. The aircraft allegedly has been spin tested by the designers and recovers conventionally. There are no vices reported from the builder/flyer community apart from the need to carry a little power into the flare unless you are very stol experienced because the aircraft stops flying suddenly because of its draggy nature.
Once airborne, the aircraft is a joy to fly, there are hundreds of these designs flying. Landing requires care because of the low mass momentum and pitch sensitivity. The demonstrated crosswind is 17 kt.
I have done unusual attitude and aerobatics work, until my instructor broke her leg, so didn't get an aerobatics rating.
A draft POH is already available and the aircraft flight envelope has already been thoroughly explored (even aerobatics, at which the aircraft is not very good!).
I need no cautions about unforeseen "gotchas", I worship at the church of Murphy. What I need is a support team of people who are smarter than me when I'm finished the engine runs and paint.
