Ormazad, I also own an RV7 and I often fly in your area in summer. You will end up paying between 140k and 200k eur for your rv7, depending on options and building skills. My question to you is: would you be happy to pay e.g. eur10k more to have it certified for night and ifr and international flights (and resale value)? What’s the max amount you would be ready to pay to have it certified?
The problem is not the purchase cost but the operational cost .
ormazad wrote:
ormazad 11-Dec-19 18:03 217
The problem is not the purchase cost but the operational cost .
I also hated when Cirrus made me pay 100eur for a 5eur sticker (!), but the reality is that nothing stops Vans to increase overnight the prices of its spare parts and we rv owners would still be forced to swallow the new prices (who realistically would start to produce dyi aluminum or fiberglass parts to save on Vans original parts)? So, if a manufacturer of a certified plane upheld a policy of low prices for replacement parts like Vans does, a customer would experience the same low operational costs, but in a certified environment. Regarding annuals/50h costs, going N-reg would approximate, in the certified world, the costs of maintenance of an experimental (no mandatory 50hrs, etc..), still being 1000eur more per annum, maybe. All other operational costs would be the same (insurance actually more expensive for experimentals, and resale value less favorable). I’m still convinced there is a business opportunity, a gap to be filled, between a 900k cirrus and a 200k rv (with brs, to stay on topic).
CS-LSA is VFR day only. CS-VLA is VFR day/night. CS-23 is IFR. To “upgrade” LSA to 23 is a big step, as LSA is merely UL with some additional paperwork (psst, don’t tell mh ). VLA to 23 is ? don’t know, but it must be something, engine probably?
The Pipistrel Virus 121 CS-LSA claims to be Night VFR.
Local to me in the US are two manufacturers of aircraft components, one makes high tech CS propellers and the other makes landing gear and brakes. Both make a very good living, but only one of them sells into the certified market as well as the Experimental market. The other watches what it takes to certify components and wants nothing to do with the TSO/STC market, despite having been enticed with offers to fund the whole thing in exchange for a license to sell under well known brand names. Its not an uncommon point of view, for many manufacturers the certified market is just not big enough to justify the hassle.
Highly probable I have it wrongly in mind; but in light of Part NCO, isn’t the ‘IFR-certification’ part of history as the pilot has to ensure he has the equipment he/she needs for the flight planned? Extremely speaking, having an IFR-GPS installed in a Katana, next to the other required components, and (legally) flying around in light-IMC / VFR-conditions?
No. Nothing to do with Part-NCO. An aircraft must still be type-certified for IFR flight.
What is no more is the airframe-specific “certification”. Although that really never existed as such in Germany either.
As bosco says, the TCDS or if older the operating manual needs to say something about IFR, but, additionally the rules in NCO for equipment required do apply as @mikewhiskey hinted. That is actually an improvement as many planes can legally fly ifr now when they could not in the past.
There are quite a few incorrect „rumours“ still going around about needing an autopilot or multiple backup instruments to fly ifr.
Snoopy wrote:
the TCDS or if older the operating manual needs to say something about IFR, but, additionally the rules in NCO for equipment required do apply as @mikewhiskey hinted. That is actually an improvement as many planes can legally fly ifr now when they could not in the past.
Under FAA rules applying to N-register aircraft worldwide, anything not prohibited in the TCDS or reference documents including the POH (if there is one) is allowed. Most aircraft types do not have any such prohibition. If an explicit reference to IFR flight is required for EASA registries, its another reason to avoid them. Equipment required is per ‘another cutesy acronym’… as if you hadn’t heard enough of them.
GRABCARD (IFR Minimum Equipment)
Generator or Alternator
Radio/Navigation Appropriate For Flight
Attitude Indicator
Ball (Inclinometer)
Clock
Altimeter (Pressure Sensitive)
Rate of Turn Indicator
Directional Gyro
IFR in something like a 1946 Cessna 120 with one nav/comm is thereby completely legal – and I know somebody that trained for their IFR rating in just such a plane.
(My aircraft does BTW have an annoying limitation to VFR – snuck into the POH as a instrument panel placard limiting the aircraft to Day and Night VFR, with no other mention anywhere else. Very unusual in 1971 and related to non-US original certification accepted by FAA under treaty).
