Night/VFR/IFR/IMC In Permit A/C

Nigel Hitchman · Post by **Nigel Hitchman** » Mon Aug 01, 2011 9:01 pm

Chris,
when you finish your homebuilt in the UK you have to get it inspected by the FAA, or by a DAR, who is basically a private individual who does the work on behalf of the FAA. This inspection is a lot about paperwork and that aviation standards have been used. Once this inspection has been done the builder is issued with a "repairman certificate" which gives the builder authority to sign off his own annual inspections, sort of an A+P with inspection authorisation, but only for that particular aircraft, after the first initial inspection no one else needs to look at the aircraft ever, except the builder to sign off his own annual inspection. This is nothing to do with the EAA, although the EAA do facilitate things and make people available to give advice, if you want it.
If the builder then wants to fly IFR, he has to have certain equipment, as Mark Albery mentioned, and some of this equipment needs to be signed off by someone once a year, just the same as it does for a certified aircraft, the builder could take his aircraft to the same maintainance organisation as used by certfied aircraft, to get these sign offs.

I dont see why we couldnt have the same thing here. Permit renewal is done as it is now, but if you want IFR approval, then you need to go to an approved organisation to get x,y,z tested and approved. This doesnt need to be an LAA inspector, but could be anyone approved to do it. If there is demand you might find some inspectors getting approval for some things, but many would not. I am sure there are current instrument calibration shops, or radio companies who could do the job on LAA and certified aircraft.

Phil,
nice idea, but I think night would have the least demand, most of the airfields we fly from dont have any lights. Whereas IFR in nice weather, or just cloud breaks and then VFR on top would have a much higher demand. IFR is not just what you are classing as "hard IMC" for a start flight into known icing conditions requires a whole different approval and you cant do that in many certfied aircraft that are certified for IFR!

ThePipster · Post by **ThePipster** » Mon Aug 01, 2011 9:47 pm

Hi Nigel

Agreed on differing actuals for IFR, but if you allow IFR flight the worst case scenario must be catered for.

Also agreed on night activity, but as a step approach to something bigger it could pave the way to new / updated / tiered inspections at minimal risk?

Phil

Nigel Hitchman · Post by **Nigel Hitchman** » Tue Aug 02, 2011 12:25 pm

Phil,

agree with what you say, I was just making the point that maybe flying by IFR rules in nice weather, or weather requiring SVFR in controlled airspace, but still fine for VFR might be more popular than "hard IMC"!!

Agree you have to have systems in place for the worst case, but worth thinking about is you make your minimums higher for the level of equipment. For example I can land with the cloud on the ground and 75m viz at work in a properly equipped aircraft. Some airliners though need 200ft and 550m. I seem to remember the IMC rating has higher minima to these. The lower the minima, the better the equipment needed and the more often it has to be checked.
Maybe for LAA aircraft there would be a higher minima than say a C of A Ce 172, at least initially. And the minima could change depending on the equipment fitted and how often/by whom it was checked.

Rod1 · Post by **Rod1** » Tue Aug 02, 2011 1:23 pm

If I remember the results from the recent member’s survey about 12% had an IMCR which would allow IFR flight in UK airspace. I assume another 1 or 2% will have an IR. The avionic tests mentioned above would cost less than a tank of gas for an RV10 and are available at most maintenance facilities. I would have thought that the second hand value of an RV10 would be increased by a very large amount if it had IFR clearance, but I have no problem with that.

Rod1
(none RV owner)