Why Isn't Ra-Aus/Experimental Aircraft "Certification" this simple...?

[winsor68]

My Opinion...

 

This whole talk of Ra-Aus Aircraft and "Certification" is in my opinion pointless without a simple and cheap system of certification. To my mind a simple system would suffice... The Factory builds a "fleet" and flies them... and if the original fleet has more hours than your factory built aeroplane you are "certified".... If not you are "experimental"... the popularity would depend upon the aircraft having a long faultless service life... i.e. the more in service the better the safety data for the pilot in command and Pax to self-"certify" themselves... Common sense prevails... Of course all that goes without saying... I want a Virgin Lame wth a couple a homebuilt aircraft under his belt to go over any aeroplane model I am going to fly in a simple no strings arrangement with the importer with those first models... The systems should be in place....

 

 

[dodo]

The logic is that you either buy an aircraft that has been designed and tested thoroughly, or you go off on your own and build "stuff".

 

Your options are:

 

1 If it is factory built, the design and engineering is tested (g-loads, spin recovery, etc.etc.), the factory is responsible for the type, and you can, to some extent, rely on that.

 

2 If you built it, you are responsible for design, engineering, and subsequent problems with it.

 

There isn't any room in that paradigm for something you built similar to someone else, and want it to be considered 'factory' and thus trustworthy, or for you to build a few identical aircraft of your own design, and want to call them a 'type'. It is either type-certified, or it isn't.

 

LSA is supposed to be an option to bridge that gap, but to me, it seems likely just to confuse the distinction.

 

The core principle is that the designer/builder is responsible. so you can build your own for fun and fly it, but if you want to build and sell a series, you have to take responsibility, and also, set up a system to support the aircraft you built. For an instructive example, check out the history of the Thruster aircraft and it's derivatives. TOSG was successful after the failure of the type holder. Vision wasn't.

 

dodo