Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2001 05:35:29 -0400
From: Dr Michael A Fopp <70734.101@compuserve.com>
Subject: Crash of Lancair IVP - N424E re: Insurance & John Kerner
Sender: Dr Michael A Fopp <70734.101@compuserve.com>
To: "lancair.list@olsusa.com" <lancair.list@olsusa.com>
Message-ID: <200107240535_MC3-DA2D-2DCE@compuserve.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain;
	 charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Reply-To: lancair.list@olsusa.com

          <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<--->>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
          <<  Lancair Builders' Mail List  >>
          <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<--->>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>
Dear All,
  I have been watching the various mailings on this sad subject and thought
better of making any comment.  However, in the light of the insurance
difficulties that may now loom for US builders/owners, the European
experience may be of help.
  In the UK our homebuilding rules require an Inspector, authorized by but
not necessarily employed by our CAA, to carry out a series of inspections 
during the building process.  Most homebuilts are supervised by the UK's
Popular Flying Association (PFA, -  our equivalent to the EAA) and they
have the designated authority to appoint Inspectors to carry out the
supervision of the builder's work. In the case of my LNC2 there were 27
different stages at which I was required to have my work checked and signed
off. Upon registering the project with the PFA the builder is sent a book
of vouchers and the first flight will not be authorized until the vouchers
have been signed in duplicate, with one set held by the builder as proof of
the inspections being carried out and the other by the PFA to inform their
authority to issue a permit to test fly the aircraft.  After the test scheduled
a Permit to Fly is issued and renewed every year.
  At first sight this sounds very bureaucratic, and to a certain extent it
is. However, it means that a separate and knowledgeable person is always
required to confirm workmanship before any important part is covered up. I am
also a member of EAA and it seems to me that the Technical Counsellor system 
currently available for members could be used to satisfy insurers like 
Avemco that aircraft are being built correctly.  I would urge any builder 
to use process audit systems like these to ensure correct
construction and 
thus demonstrate to any subsequent inquirer (insurance
company or litigant)
that you exercised care, attention and prudence to the
construction of 
your aircraft. If using a "hired gun" the same should
apply so that your
liability, as the "pseudo-builder", is also minimized.
  Our system in the UK may be overly regulated but it does mean that building
quality is maintained through duplicate checks and thus the issues of insurance
and re-sale value are not compromised. I hope this helps to stimulate 
discussion on the wider issue of insurance and construction process audit. 
It is NOT meant to cast any negative assertions on any builder or operator.
Happy landings.....michael
(LNC2 G-FOPP based at Cranfield, UK)
 Dr Michael A Fopp

 michael_fopp@compuserve.com
 Signed in the UK at 10:31 (ZULU) on 24-Jul-01


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
LML website:   http://www.olsusa.com/mkaye/maillist.html
LML Builders' Bookstore:   http://www.buildersbooks.com/lancair

Please send your photos and drawings to marvkaye@olsusa.com.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>