Received-SPF: none
 receiver=logan.com; client-ip=216.211.128.10; envelope-from=joeh@pilgrimtech.com
From: "Joe Hull" <joeh@pilgrimtech.com>
To: "'Rotary motors in aircraft'" <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Subject: RE: [FlyRotary] Re: Engine Run and Static RPM Report
Date: Tue, 2 May 2006 08:19:53 -0700
Message-ID: <003701c66dfb$dcf43a90$cda0389d@redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
In-Reply-To: <list-1088591@logan.com>
Thread-Index: AcZt+iNphmBuMkwZSPCIXZi6TSnl3gAACTDw

> There is a difference between the 51% rule and the requirements for a
> repairman's certificate.  10 people can build an airplane as a group
> and use their combined effort to meet the 51% rule (what ever that
> 51% is).  One and only one of the group can get the repairman's
> certificate even if that person only did a small percentage of the
> total work.

Yep, that's happens quite a bit and the DAR should point that out if the
builders happened to miss that. But if we're talking about buying a
restoration project or a 90% complete project, then some fancy time
accounting that needs to occur if someone other than the original =
builder
wants the repairman's cert.

I personally think that if you put several hundred or thousand hours =
into
working on all the major pieces of an airplane - original or restoration =
-
then you've got the pretty much an equivalent "education" and "building"
experience as the guy who started from scratch. Especially these days =
with
laser cut parts and match-drilled holes where you can snap an airplane
together in a weekend. (like Rusty :-)   If you had to make major =
repairs to
that type of kit plane you wouldn't necessarily have all the "education" =
and
experience to do that either.

Joe Hull
Cozy Mk-IV #991 (In Phase1 Flight Test -=A010.9 hrs flown)=20
Redmond (Seattle), Washington