LeSving wrote:
In principle yes. Nothing in a non certified aircraft is required to be certified. The only reasons to have certified equipment is to have equipment that are build to standards to fulfill non aircraft specific requirements (radio, transponder, IFR avionics typically).
This is in contradiction to what you wrote two days ago:
LeSving wrote:
There is no way today to fly IFR with non-certified avionics. It is not even possible VFR.
Make up your mind. Do you absolutely need certified avionics for IFR or only “typically”. Do you need certified avionics for VFR?
Airborne_Again wrote:
Do you absolutely need certified avionics for IFR or only “typically”
Figure it out. Start by actually reading what I wrote.
Peter wrote:
That is country dependent however.
Of course. National regulations. The principle of certified equipment is the same all over however. One would believe the principles of non certified aircraft/equipment also is the same all over, but no.
Peter wrote:
Could you bolt a PT6 on the front of an RV in Norway?
You could try, but I doubt you would get anywhere. The RV is a kit, designed by Vans. In such circumstances you would need a recommendation from Vans that this is OK. I highly doubt Vans would recommend this. It would be simpler to design an aircraft from scratch. A 200 hp turbine should work, maybe.
Peter wrote:
Could you bolt a PT6 on the front of an RV in Norway?
You probably could do it in any EASA country, if persistent and knowledgeable enough, or well funded. That’s what the “experimental” class/category is all about, after all, not homebuilt kits. After all, there is an I-reg pocket rocket! – not an RV, not a PT-6, but I dare say, close enough.
