X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Sat, 17 Sep 2005 15:44:28 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from fed1rmmtao10.cox.net ([68.230.241.29] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.0c2) with ESMTP id 725137 for lml@lancaironline.net; Sat, 17 Sep 2005 14:32:45 -0400 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=68.230.241.29; envelope-from=rickschrameck@cox.net Received: from [192.168.1.101] (really [68.108.32.101]) by fed1rmmtao10.cox.net (InterMail vM.6.01.05.02 201-2131-123-102-20050715) with ESMTP id <20050917183159.XFXU28889.fed1rmmtao10.cox.net@[192.168.1.101]> for ; Sat, 17 Sep 2005 14:31:59 -0400 X-Original-Message-ID: <432C611D.5010100@cox.net> X-Original-Date: Sat, 17 Sep 2005 11:31:57 -0700 From: Rick Schrameck User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2 (Macintosh/20050317) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Original-To: Lancair Mailing List Subject: Re: [LML] Major Portion Checklist 8000-38 References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------050900070506010608050005" This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------050900070506010608050005 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mike, It is not that simple. Major portion is not always used as the guide. Please ask Carl to tell you what the FAA has said to him about use of the 8000-38. You are now getting to the meat of the issue, GREAT!! Here are some issues that the FAA is looking at. The Lancair kit for the IV and the IV-P never included the IV-PT as you can see by the appproved list June 24th 2005. The ES-P is also not on the approved list. If you are building a IV-PT or an ES-P you could be in trouble. There are no IV-PT or ES-P kit evaluated and approved. They also did not approve the fast build door for the IV-P. This is where we are all in trouble if the FAA wants too play "hard ball". This is not just an Epic problem. Mike, thanks for your input. This discussion I believe will get us all thinking about how we need to ask the EAA to help us builders. The FAA needs to talk to ALL the kit companies to make sure we are on the same page. Thanks, Rick MikeEasley@aol.com wrote: > The "major portion" calculation is based on a checklist. Checkmarks > are put in each column, one column for the kit manufacturer, one > column for the builder. In some cases you'd have checkmarks in both > columns. You add up the checkmarks. If you have more checkmarks in > the builder column, you have a 51% approved kit. That may sound > like an oversimplification, but that's how it works. > > Form 8000-38 is included at the end of the proposed FAA Order 8130-2. > > There are 18 line items under "propulsion". They include "fabricate > engine", "install engine", "fabricate propeller", "install propeller". > > There another section titled "cockpit/interior". Some line items > include "fabricate instrument panel", "install instrument panel", > "fabricate electrical wiring controls/switches" and "install > electrical wiring controls/switches". > > There aren't any sections for paint or interior. > > My guess is Lancair ran the "checkmarks" at some point on the ES, and > other models and got the kits approved by the FAA. As we all know, we > can buy fastbuild firewalls, fastbuild engines, completed panels, even > electrical harnesses for some models. Those items are listed in the > checklist, so they DO affect the kit manufacturer vs. builder > percentage. Maybe Lancair had a few extra checkmarks in the builder > column when the calculation was done so they could provide engines, > firewalls and panels without losing the 51%. > > After a kit is approved, any changes to the kit require a > reevaluation, running the checklist again. It's my understanding that > the ES Fast-Build kit is approved, but I can't help wondering if the > Millennium Super Fast-Build ES kit was reevaluated. After taking a > good look at the checklist, I'm not sure how we got more checkmarks in > the builder column to be honest with you. > > Mike --------------050900070506010608050005 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mike,

It is not that simple.  Major portion is not always used as the guide.  Please ask Carl to tell you what the FAA has said to him about use of the 8000-38.   You are now getting to the meat of the issue, GREAT!!

Here are some issues that the FAA is looking at.  The Lancair kit for the IV and the IV-P never included the IV-PT as you can see by the appproved list June 24th 2005.  The ES-P is also not on the approved list.  If you are building a IV-PT or an ES-P you could be in trouble.  There are no IV-PT or ES-P kit evaluated and approved.  They also did not approve the fast build door for the IV-P.  This is where we are all in trouble if the FAA wants too play "hard ball". This is not just an Epic problem.

Mike, thanks for your input.  This discussion I believe will get us all thinking about how we need to ask the EAA to help us builders.  The FAA needs to talk to ALL the kit companies to make sure we are on the same page.

Thanks,

Rick


MikeEasley@aol.com wrote:
The "major portion" calculation is based on a checklist.  Checkmarks are put in each column, one column for the kit manufacturer, one column for the builder.  In some cases you'd have checkmarks in both columns.  You add up the checkmarks.  If you have more checkmarks in the builder column, you have a 51% approved kit.  That may sound like an oversimplification, but that's how it works.
 
Form 8000-38 is included at the end of the proposed FAA Order 8130-2.
 
There are 18 line items under "propulsion".  They include "fabricate engine", "install engine", "fabricate propeller", "install propeller".
 
There another section titled "cockpit/interior".  Some line items include "fabricate instrument panel", "install instrument panel", "fabricate electrical wiring controls/switches" and "install electrical wiring controls/switches".
 
There aren't any sections for paint or interior.
 
My guess is Lancair ran the "checkmarks" at some point on the ES, and other models and got the kits approved by the FAA.  As we all know, we can buy fastbuild firewalls, fastbuild engines, completed panels, even electrical harnesses for some models.  Those items are listed in the checklist, so they DO affect the kit manufacturer vs. builder percentage.  Maybe Lancair had a few extra checkmarks in the builder column when the calculation was done so they could provide engines, firewalls and panels without losing the 51%.
 
After a kit is approved, any changes to the kit require a reevaluation, running the checklist again.  It's my understanding that the ES Fast-Build kit is approved, but I can't help wondering if the Millennium Super Fast-Build ES kit was reevaluated.  After taking a good look at the checklist, I'm not sure how we got more checkmarks in the builder column to be honest with you.
 
Mike

--------------050900070506010608050005--