I read through the FAA document and I think any airplane that is built by
someone other than the "builder" may have to either lie or have some detailed
documentation on how the "builder" was involved with every step along the way
with the assistance of the professional builder.
I'm flying a Millennium Fastbuild ES. My flaps, ailerons, wings,
including all the hinges, wing mating, fuel bays, slosh doors, holes for the
fuel probe.... well you get the idea, were completed before I even saw my
kit. The kit companies have used the definition of the "major portion"
rule to complete as much as possible for us. My plane seemed more like 90%
was completed by Lancair. Since the rule isn't based on hours spent, but
the checklist, I can get "credit" for fabricating the landing gear by drilling
out the 3/16" hole to 1/4" and sticking the leg in the pre aligned gear leg
bracket. The kit passed the FAA approval process. I've always felt that my
kit was bending the rules, if not bending the rules, bending the intent of the
rules.
I'm not complaining about my kit, I'm glad it built fast, in less than two
years, not the 6 years that people in the past have to deal with. And I think
the FAA is okay with kits that are as far along as my ES kit was. So
maybe the FAA sees my kit as bending the rule a bit, but that's fine IF if build
the rest.
So the FAA thinking must be that 51% is left when you get your kit.
If you have someone else do anything, that 51% goes down to 50% or 49% and now
the aircraft doesn't qualify.
I spent two weeks at the factory closing my wings, horiz stab, and
elevators, installing windows, the door, flight controls, etc. But I was
standing there every step of the way. At the beginning, I was the helper
for sure, and Kerry was the guy who knew what he was doing. But the
educational benefit helped me build a safer plane. I think that's what the
FAA is intending to happen with "builder assist".
Art and Gail Jensen built there Legacy completely at the factory.
Even in there case, they were there for all the work. The came home for a
couple weeks while Lancair did some work on their plane, but it's the work
that's not listed on the FAA form. So if they had to document their
professional assistance they'd be fine in my opinion.
We all know that the more complex the aircraft, the more expensive the
aircraft, the more likely someone other than the owner is doing large portions
of the work. The FAA knows about all the professional builders out
there. There are two at my little home airport. One does nothing but
build RVs, the other specializes in composites and builds Rutans, Velocities, an
Express, and is working on an ES right now.
Maybe I'm being too simplistic, and many of the professional builders are
personal friends of mine, but the FAA sees the ongoing practice of hiring
someone to build your airplane as being outside the boundaries of the
experimental homebuilt category. As others have commented, that's not the
original intent of the category, to build an airplane of your own design for
education and recreation.
Can you really blame the FAA for cracking down?
Mike Easley