Return-Path: Sender: "Marvin Kaye" To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 11:03:35 -0500 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from [65.32.5.135] (HELO ms-smtp-05.tampabay.rr.com) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.2.5) with ESMTP id 530553 for lml@lancaironline.net; Sat, 13 Nov 2004 09:13:12 -0500 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=65.32.5.135; envelope-from=ckohler1@cfl.rr.com Received: from 34025820001 (255.204.202.68.cfl.rr.com [68.202.204.255]) by ms-smtp-05.tampabay.rr.com (8.12.10/8.12.7) with SMTP id iADECqNv026081 for ; Sat, 13 Nov 2004 09:12:53 -0500 (EST) X-Original-Message-ID: <000301c4c98a$fe8f98f0$6401a8c0@34025820001> From: "Charlie Kohler" X-Original-To: "Lancair Mailing List" References: Subject: Re: [LML] Re: LIVP 40 Hr Test Period...Not Above 17,500'? X-Original-Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 09:13:48 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=response Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 X-Virus-Scanned: Symantec AntiVirus Scan Engine Regarding flights above 18,000 feet during flight test periods. It's my opinion , that FAR 91.305---91.319 and FAA order 8130.2 F do not explicitly prohibit a flight above 18,000 feet. The intent of the order is clear that test flights during this phase will limit flight with in a designated area that will not be over densely populated areas/congested airways or create a hazard to any other air traffic or property/ personnel on the ground. That said, I believe if the geographical area is satisfactory (sparsely populated) and if it is in an area that ATC would approve high altitude testing, --that it would be the basis for a DAR --with the concurrence of the local FAA MIDO/FSDO--to write this flight test area into the operating limitations. I can see no reason why it would not be approved to flight test if all other requirements are met. (Pitot static/altimeter/transponder tests/DME etc. etc.) After all, Space One did it! Strange how some government folks come from the "here's why you can't do it" perspective-- instead of what is the intent of this regulation- and here's how you can do it -and still be in compliance. As an example-- The EAA went nuts several years ago trying to clampdown on several DAR's and ASI's who insisted that an A&P must sign off on the final inspection prior to issuing a airworthiness certificate. They finally wrote it plainly into the A/C 20-27F "not required ." Charlie K. (DAR)