AOPA Turbine Pilot Magazine - March 2025 - 92

RUDDER & WRENCH
Savvy Maintenance coverage
sponsored by AIRCRAFT SPRUCE
Is all this FAA-mandated red tape just
the price we must pay for the privilege of
slipping the surly bonds of Earth? Well,
not exactly.
A different world
Every year, as the last week of July
approaches, I point my airplane toward
Lake Winnebago and enter a singularity
in the aeronautical space-time continuum
known as EAA AirVenture where
Newtonian mechanics and FAR Part 43 do
not apply. During that one week out of each
52, I find myself surrounded by thousands
upon thousands of beautiful aircraft that
are not only capable of slipping the surly
bonds of Earth but also the surly bonds of
FAA regulatory red tape.
These magnificent flying machines
SAVVY MA INTENANCE / OPINION
Worth the squeeze?
L IKE MANY OF you, I'm an aircraft owner.
I have been one for a long time. I bought
my first airplane-a Cessna 182-in 1968
when I was 24 years old. Four years later
at age 28, I traded up to a Bellanca 17-30A
Super Viking. Then at age 43, I upgraded to
a Cessna Turbo 310, which I've now owned
for 37 years. Since I'm now 80, it's a safe
bet that this one is my last airplane. Sigh.
All of these have been certificated airplanes.
All had type designs that passed
muster with the FAA as evidenced by their
type certificates and standard airworthiness
certificates. Consequently, all came
with costly strings attached. As owner, I
was legally responsible for keeping them
in " an airworthy condition. "
92
AOPA PILOT / March 2025
Is the safety benefit of certificated aircraft
worth the regulatory burden?
BY MIKE BUSCH
Among other things, this meant that
every 12 months they had to undergo an
annual inspection by an A&P mechanic
with inspection authorization to ensure
they continued to comply with their type
design. They also had to comply with any
applicable airworthiness directives and
airworthiness limitations that the FAA saw
fit to publish, some of which could be quite
painful. Any significant improvements I
wanted to make to the aircraft were considered
" alterations to the type design "
and had to pass muster with the FAA in
the form of an STC or field approval. Any
repair or modification parts had to be
FAA-approved (or at least " acceptable for
installation on a certificated product " ).
don't have type certificates or FAAapproved
type designs. Since they don't
have type designs, they don't need to have
annual inspections to ensure that they
are in compliance (although they do have
12-month condition inspections to ensure
they're in condition for safe flight). With
rare exceptions, they aren't subject to airworthiness
directives or airworthiness
limitations. Their owners can improve or
modify them any way they like without
FAA blessing, provided only that those
alterations don't make the aircraft unsafe
to fly. Maintenance can be done by nonA&Ps,
and condition inspections don't
need to be done by IAs. Unbelievable!
The FAA refers to these aircraft as
" Experimental-Amateur Built " or " E-AB "
for short. This terminology is a bit misleading.
The majority of E-ABs are well-proven
designs like the Van's RV, Lancair, Glasair,
Sonex, Long-EZ and Zenith, each with
fleet sizes in the thousands (well more
than 10,000 for RVs), so they're not exactly
experimental. While some of them are built
by actual amateurs, lots are built by highly
experienced aircraft builders, sometimes
under contract to a nonbuilder owner. So
the builders are a mixed bag of amateurs,
professionals, and semi-pros.
When I look at these E-ABs on the
flight line at AirVenture, I find it hard
not to drool. Many are breathtakingly
gorgeous. Most have wall-to-wall glass
cockpits that put my 1979-vintage steamgauge
panel to shame. Many are faster than
RAUL ARIAS
AOPA Turbine Pilot Magazine - March 2025

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of AOPA Turbine Pilot Magazine - March 2025
