Ol’ Tattered Wingtips  

by  Doc Mosher

This is a note about the gap between the Pietenpol World and the High-Tech World of most of the rest of aviation.  As a practicing IA (FAA Inspection Authorization) I’m about to start my yearly home-study IA computerized refresher course with the Gleim folks. In February I’ll be attending an IA renewal seminar. Some of that IA training update has to do with the Piet World (wood, steel tube, fabric) within which I live every day as editor of the BPA News. Some of it has to do with the High-Tech World of professional flight and maintenance aviation that I have lived within most of my adult life. The two really do have points of communion.

Aviation regulation had an evolutionary history. The best compromise seemed to be to have a nationwide set of rules and out of that the present FAA emerged.

When we use the term “FAA” today, it covers all the airlines, and all of the expensive and high-tech air traffic control.  Most of the time, we Pietenpol people don’t have much involvement with FAA’s Air Traffic Control system.

In the beginning stages of learning to fly, you were taught the FAA’s system of flight rules, sometimes by hours of ground school study. As you look back on all of that now, you realize that the “FAA flight rules” boiled down to stuff like – don’t overload your airplane, see and be seen, don’t bump into each other, don’t fly low over houses – all common sense. We should all be doing that common sense stuff even if the FAA was not there.

In early aviation ground school, I was raised on CAM #18 (Civil Aeronautics Manual to you youngsters). It laid out the CAA approved methods of repair and alteration of airplanes, and it was the forerunner of today’s FAA regulations. Good stuff, and we should all take it to heart and learn good aviation building and maintenance practice.

If you are doing repair and alteration on airplanes that have a type-certificate (spam cans), it is mandatory to follow FAA’s Advisory Circular 43.13-B and 43.13-2B (these are the successors of CAM 18). If you’re building your own Air Camper, you don’t have to follow these rules, but they are a wealth of good knowledge to know and use. You are going to be in the airplane you build, maybe along with your family members. You should have an innate pride of authorship. Take time and effort to build it right.

Years ago the federal powers often fell into the age old pattern of all regulators. They stoutly resisted having non-type-certificated  (Experimental) airplanes out there flying around and tried to keep them from flying! A few hardy souls schmoozed a few of the more enlightened government officials, and the amateur-building guys gradually proved that their flying would not be dangerous to the public. Today we are the beneficiaries of those early activists.

For several decades now, the FAA has had to work within a financial budget voted by Congress. As each cut came along, and as the FAA was required to stretch its operation budget, the FAA realized that it could not continue to enforce all the myriad regulations that it had on the books. Obviously, ATC had to continue to control the instrument flight airways, so they could not relax on that. Manufacturers continued to build airplanes that would carry the public, and FAA had to oversee that. But one place they thought they might not have to spend so much time, effort and resources was in amateur-built aviation.

Meanwhile there has always been a certain effort (lobbying) by the alphabets (EAA, AOPA) to ease up on onerous regulations against those little putt-putts that pose little or no threat to the general public.

The result is that we of the “Experimental” persuasion live in a virtually regulation-free world, compared to what it could be.  Theoretically we can build our airplanes out of concrete if we want, and if we can get an FAA inspector or DAR to sign the Airworthiness Certificate, we are legal to try to make our airplane fly. The FAA wants us to get our crashes out of the way early and near home, so they make us fly locally for a few hours. And they make sure that we have an FAA-certificated person (A&P mechanic) conduct a yearly “condition inspection” on our home-built airplane. That way, the FAA stays within their budget by passing the responsibility and effort off to others.

Today any pilot still has to have a biennial flight review with a certificated instructor. It’s a good rule, and actually does enhance pilot safety. The other big hurdle was always the FAA “flight physical” by an FAA-designated doctor. Statistics have shown that the third class flight physical is not a guarantee that the pilot will remain physically healthy during its duration. So the FAA today will allow the pilot to self-certify his own fitness to physically fly the airplane – the “driver’s license physical.” It seems to be working.

Except for the visit of an FAA Inspector to grant the Experimental Airworthiness Certificate and its companion Registration Certificate, today it is not unusual for the Pietenpol builder and flier to never even meet an FAA Inspector.

I am very happy to see these cumulative steps toward more freedom of access to American skies. But there is one aspect that we should all understand. With the authority goes a responsibility. When we build an airplane, it should not be a danger to others (like crashing into a schoolyard because of shoddy materials or workmanship). When we fly an airplane, it should not be a danger to others (like not adhering to the immutable laws of aerodynamics and crashing into that schoolyard).

So hone your piloting skills as you fly. Practice good workmanship when you build. Maintain and revel in the freedom that we here in the USA enjoy.    Y’all be careful, y’hear?