Prop Change Nightmare

[Louisvw]

The day's that you can change your propeller on your Microlight or Gyro is gone
I just received my new authority to fly and modification number after replacing my 3 blade constant speed propeller with a other similar 3 blade constant speed propeller

So be careful to change or replace any thing on you Aircraft you will require a modification approval number before you can take your propeller off and if you need to refit your old prop after a few months you will go through the same exercise again
Yes a new mod number , a proving authority to fly and I was told CAA will sent me a invoice for minimum of two hours of their time that sound's like over R 2000.00
See AIC 61.6

[Wagtail]

We also have to deal with the same issue every now and then. On the one hand I can honestly say I understand and respect where CAA comes from, some of us have really stroked the cat a bit in the past...NTCA is no longer the hardcore Experimental of the old days. You write out a cheque and you buy what you want, then you pay someone to maintain it, soem of the guys don't even get there hands dirty to change the oil, don't get me wrong, nothing wrong with this, it is just that some deeper level of control and responsibility starts coming into play. In the old EXPERIMENTAL days we modified a Basic and put bigger wings on so we can use the farm's old Ferguson to tow us because we were no longer allowed to drive the bakkie...obviously the Basic crashed so many times we lost count, and the toll was a few torn school sherts and soem holes in your school trousers.....teh one relly bad crash resulted in a brocken arm, but it was really bab luck, hitting the only really solid fence post on the farm....

Anyway, we now have some really fancy toys and sorry they are also complex and sensitive. Vibrations and aerodynamics are now really important issues and structures are very sensitive designs.

The issue is not so lost, if the manufacturer did his "homework" properly, he would have specified a number of prop-engine combinations for which his design has resceived Type Acceptance..

The following "modifications" NORMALLY does not need CAA Engineering approval:
- SB issued by the Manufacturer. ( The manufacturer must pass these SB's by the Acceptance Authority anyway, but the point is it is the responsibility of the Manufacturer )
- Improvements which do not alter form or function of any critical components......this is a nice debate....increasing the size of the rear windscreen??, putting bigger wheels on....oh-no, the axle broke off because the moment arm at the axle attachment increased....

Let us all just be awake and carefull, the old saying of ask forgiveness rather than permission is not so easy anymore. Remember, it is the responsibility of the AP signing out the aircraft to tick the box " 7.3 All modifications have been approved by the Commissioner".....To do this, the AP MUST actually have a copy of the Build standard with him...
Anyway, these are the issues we will get drilled on during our AMO inspection...

When you want to "modify" something, write them an e-mail and explain and ask "permission". You wil lbe surprised how many times they will respond by e-mail that if a properly rated AP signes it out in the Logbook they will accept it....if they really feel that it MUST go to Engineering, maybe, just maybe they can save your life or at least save you some serious cost.

Hey good news is we do not need to ask permission to enoy it, just be carefull this holiday season.

[Aerosan]

Ja nee kom ons maak geld.....

Soon there will be a new class, just for the "old time" experimenter. A pity as far as Im conserned.

In my eyes, a factory kit is just that "a factory aircraft" and there should be a class for that. A homebuild VP with a "backyard" VW aircooled motor should still be "experimental and or homebuild" and the person who build this should have carte blance, without modification authority`s ect. If I want to attempt to fly a piece of wood with a modified lawnmower enging im my backyard I should be allowed to...... My 2c and all said and meant within reason

[Duck Rogers]

...... If I want to attempt to fly a piece of wood with a modified lawnmower enging im my backyard I should be allowed to......

I did.........on the school's rugby field! (why am I not surprised that it didn't work )

[Tailspin]

...... If I want to attempt to fly a piece of wood with a modified lawnmower enging im my backyard I should be allowed to......

I did.........on the school's rugby field! (why am I not surprised that it didn't work )

Duckie

Suddenly Many questions are being answered

[grostek]

Ja nee kom ons maak geld.....

Soon there will be a new class, just for the "old time" experimenter. A pity as far as Im conserned.

In my eyes, a factory kit is just that "a factory aircraft" and there should be a class for that. A homebuild VP with a "backyard" VW aircooled motor should still be "experimental and or homebuild" and the person who build this should have carte blance, without modification authority`s ect. If I want to attempt to fly a piece of wood with a modified lawnmower enging im my backyard I should be allowed to...... My 2c and all said and meant within reason

Hi Aerosan,
I agree with you wholeheartedly except I would welcome a seperate category with its own more relaxed rules for the "old time experimenter"

The only problem I see is that CAA will treat (and do at present) your project like a certified kit aircraft, sure a one off, but still having to go through the load tests and the required paperwork as if it were a series produced kit aircraft.

I think many old and potential new home builders are moeg or skrikkerig for these rules and regs so those days are probably gone forever.

Unless we, and we being, okes that can and want to scratch build either off established plans or our new plans, fight for a seperate classification.

I salute the few that are still walking this road despite the paperwork and testing involved. One person springs to mind, Oupa G with his Bosvarkie.

The tests required by CAA for a brand new design are not a bad thing, but surely load testing only, supervised and wittnessed by an AP, should be enough to prove the structural integrity. ie Wing load test, fuselage load test, wing attach fittings load test and engine mounting load test.

Not load testing plus a full structural analysis and detailed plans for each any every component by a professional engineer who costs beeeeeg bucks as seems to be required now.
That is where the paperwork seems to be over the top.

This is how I understand the system to be now, if I am wrong please correct me and enlighten us all.

Also how about CAA delegate responsibility to EAA or RAA for true one off homebuilds and we go full circle and get all our approvals from the EAA or RAA supervised by suitably qualified APs like it was in the old days.

Have a category for the kit aircraft assemblers and another category for the true homebuilders/scratchbuilders using own or established plans. Each category with its own rules and regulations.

Kind regards,

Gunter Rostek

[redrocket]

JA

Renember the good old days back in the 80's when at least once a week on the old SABC news, a microlight would crash and kill the pilot.............................................................................................

They were the pioneers......... and very dead...
And the reason why we are being regulated.


Renember
The dead pilots do not become bold pilots
or is it
The bold pilot never becomes an old pilot
or is it
there are old pilots but no bold pilots

dont get in an argument with an idiot because he will win you with experience

Regards
redrocket

[Biggles]

after chatting to Louis I checked my aircraft log book and the the prop on DNP had been changed from teh original. This has gone through a change of ownership and numerous Annual inspections and been issued several ATF with this prop. Do I now have to go through the schlep of getting a modification approved?

[Boet]

Biggles, sometimes better just to shut up.
And fly

[Biggles]

Biggles, sometimes better just to shut up.
And fly

I would like nothing better... Maybe I should move into the middle of no-where and just shoot at anyone that wants to look at paperwork.

[Aerosan]

The Wright brothers can thank their lucky stars that the SACAA wasnt around in 1907. On the flip side we might have perfected teleportation by now???????we sure as hell wouldnt have had aircraft flying.