Part 24

[Tailspin]

Part 24

Ok Let me open a can of worms for those who are interested. Specifically those of you building an Aircraft.

I spoke to CAA this morning about the finilisation of my VP and i was told the following.

My aircraft will have to undergo stress test to Max G limit before they will give me approval forms. Even with evidance of over 600 flying aircraft i will have to prove all the stresses statically before anything is done.

These tests should be done before final finishing of the airframe as it could damage the covering etc.

I will be arranging a meeting between the CAA, EAA and any interested parties so we can get to the bottom of all this crap. This includes all amater built aircraft.

[RudiGreyling]

It is getting worse and worse...

[Morph]

While I was building my BB Monty and Boet had the same issues with CAA. The big issue is the wings. CAA need to be sure that the build standard of the wing is up to specification and unfortunately the only real way to test this is to load it until it exceeds specification or fails. Additionally the whole lot needs to be turned upside down and loaded again to the the negative G rating. It is a nightmare to imagine having to build two sets of wings, one for CAA to test to breaking point and then the other as the production wing. Who says that the second wing will not have flaw in it?

Give Monty or Boet a call and ask them how they resolved the issue for the BB's.

[John Young]

These tests should be done before final finishing of the airframe as it could damage the covering etc.

Who says that the second wing will not have flaw in it?.

Simple - 60 sand bags loaded with a combination of balloons and ping-pong balls - screw through the scale - photograph - submit.

Regards
John ZU-CIB

[Tailspin]

My Worry is not if she will hold for the tests.

I am worried about some moron putting a hole through the covering or worse

I know how she was built trust me i was there :D

[t-bird]

Hi Gavin

If you meet with CAA, please ask them about Gyro plane testing.

Do you need to test the Rotors even if you bought from a manufacturer?

What about the rotor hub?

Strength of the tail?

[Morph]

Tailspin,

I think John is right in the sense that you do the tests yourself with an AP that you trust and submit the prove in the form of phodees and weights to CAA. that way you can be as gentle as posible to ensure no damage. Besides ping pong balls don't have sharp edges

The big challange is to take a fully rigged airframe and turn it upside down without damaging it.

However on the good side you will know that your wings are really strong

[skybound®]

Had one local chap who was building, where the CAA insisted on being present for the test.

[Tailspin]

I am just waiting for a Mail from the Dude at the CAA then i will be sorting through the paper trail and if i haveto do the tests i will do them personally and with a CAA rep present.

Put some serious thought into the whole thing lastnight and can sorta understand their concern as a few have fallen from the SKY and they are trying to cover all the bases i suppose. I should just cool my jets and do the schlep and get it done and like Duckie says " JUST FLY MAN "

[Morph]

How do they recommend you support the aircraft before loading it? How many attachment points?

[Tailspin]

I am still waiting for the Mail.
Then i can give more information.

[RudiGreyling]

I am just waiting for a Mail from the Dude at the CAA then i will be sorting through the paper trail and if i haveto do the tests i will do them personally and with a CAA rep present.

Put some serious thought into the whole thing lastnight and can sorta understand their concern as a few have fallen from the SKY and they are trying to cover all the bases i suppose. I should just cool my jets and do the schlep and get it done and like Duckie says " JUST FLY MAN "

Hi Tailspin,

Please don't give in to easily it will make it worse for us to follow...
It will become the NORM and it shouldn't. If it is an airplane of known design with a couple of flying already, then there should be NO need.
If there has been failures on a specific model, then yes look at that specific model but not a blanket all on every aircraft of known design.

PLEASE get your Local EAA or AP involved to fight this BULLsh!t

Here is Why:
Why do we have it APed by an approved person? He checks the quality.
Why do we take glue sample break it, and safe it as evidence.
Why do we set rivets to a specification.

If you do all this to a proven design there should be no NEED, especially if you use an EAA and CAA approved AP.

Add this 'new' requirement to the money being spend by some people to get NTCA on the CAA acceptance list even though there are 60 flying exampes in SA.
CAA wanting us to strictly adhere to Certified Maintenance Schedules and overhaul schedules etc is KILLING experimental aviation.
Experimental and NTCA was the place for the guy that wanted to fly at a cheaper rate, the way things are going it is quickly not becoming that.

Regards
Rudi

PS: I have been fighting for 3 months to get a builders number for a RV kit with 60 examples flying in SA already, I am not giving up, don't you!

[Morph]

I agree with Rudi, additionally, unless they provide the lab and expertise you only stand the risk of destroying your creation if you do it wrong plus it's setting a precident.

I know Monty, (the manufacturer of the BB) has had to appoint a small select group of AP's who he is satisfied are skilled in AP'ing the wings. This he has sent to CAA and they will only accept signoff from these guys.

I am not sure how this can be achieved on the VP side, but surely there must be an expert in South Africa who CAA trust that can inspect and sign them off.

[Morph]

Additionally the wing is designed to fail at or near the max G rating. Let's assume +6, -4. Under normal flying conditions you would never ever even get to +6 g's in the entire lifetime of the aircraft. By wingloading every aircraft you are deliberately taking the wings and airframe close to this point of failure and what guarantees are you going to have that you have not caused some structural fracture or latent failure that will result in a catastrophic failure of the aircraft in flight.

I would be very nervous about this.

[Tailspin]

Hi All

No I am not going to give up.
Since i am the Local EAA representative i have a duty towards other builders to get through this. I still have not recieved any mail from the guy yet i have tried to get hold of him but to no avail.

I will not give up and i will not surrender, this is just another bump in the road that i need to get over.

I will definately make sure that this does not stop me as this is just the first build i still got two more to do

Morph

This is exactly what is making me nervous i know she is strong but what damage can the tests do that one day i have a wing collapse then where do i go cos i don't think they have a complaints department up above ??