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.
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.
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?
That is country dependent however. Try to get some stuff past the UK LAA…
Could you bolt a PT6 on the front of an RV in Norway?
look696 wrote:
Despite com and txp in your homebuilt, you can make use of any avionics you want, even self built electronics.
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). Engines, instruments and the aircraft itself have no such non aircraft specific requirements to fulfill, this the only requirement is airworthiness as seen by the authority.
Despite com and txp in your homebuilt, you can make use of any avionics you want, even self built electronics.
Certified is certified according to EASA or FAA or whatever other bureau, in an aviation context. I mean exactly the same thing as you. For avionics I guess the appropriate term is TSO/ETSO? Manufactured and/or designed after a performance standard for aviation. Maybe there are other kinds of certified for this kind of equipment, but I don’t what that is.
The point is, the airspace/ATC for instance, will require an equipment to function after an aviation performance standard. It does not require the equipment to be manufactured under an authorisation. The equipment does not need to be certified to be acceptable for the ATC, they only need documentation that it indeed performs after the standard.
In principle any kind of documentation will do. In practice it is cheaper/easier to manufacture the equipment after the appropriate authorization. That’s why there are no non certified transponders or radios today, not for European airspace. No non certified GPSes anywhere and so on. It makes no sense to produce non certified avionics.
Instruments is a different matter and also autopilots and all kinds of systems, engines.
LeSving wrote:
That point is moot in all circumstances. There is no way today to fly IFR with non-certified avionics. It is not even possible VFR. However, it has nothing to do with the instruments being certified, but everything to do with instruments satisfying airspace and ATC and other requirements….
What exactly do you mean by “certified”? I have the feeling you mean something different from what most people mean.
that it would be mandatory to use only certified avionics in your homebuilt if you would do NVFR/IFR.
That point is moot in all circumstances. There is no way today to fly IFR with non-certified avionics. It is not even possible VFR. However, it has nothing to do with the instruments being certified, but everything to do with instruments satisfying airspace and ATC and other requirements.
Radio: no need to be certified. But the radio authority in each country request that the radio has certain performance characteristics. They don’t do tests themselves, like they did before, but leave it up to the manufacturers to document that it does. The only way for the factory to document that the radio meet the requirements is to certify it.
Transponder: no need to be certified, but this time ATC and airspace requirements needs documents showing the equipment meets the requirements.
All other avionics, GPS, mode B, DME etc, VOR will meet the same problem as the transponder.
The result is there are no non certified avionics to be purchased anywhere. It makes no sense for a manufacturer to make non certified avionics. There are a few exceptions, but none of those can be used in Europe, not for IFR and not for VFR.
The point about certified avionics is moot.
europaxs wrote:
It looks like Germany allows IFR in homebuilts as from last year
This seems to be a safety analysis only (haven’t read it, only overlooked) , but still says, that it would be mandatory to use only certified avionics in your homebuilt if you would do NVFR/IFR. Maybe NVFR and IFR in homebuilt is in the pipeline at Germany …. but as we know, that could be years … Will try to read and understand that completely later on.
