--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>

At 04:55 PM 8/8/2003 -0400, you wrote:

>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Pat Hatch" <pat_hatch@msn.com>

>

>Bruce, I am not sure the DAR actually removes anything...I believe the

>standard limitations will read something to the effect "After completion of

>Phase 1 flight testing, unless appropriately equipped for night and /or

>instrument flight in accordance with part 91.205, this aircraft is to be

>operated under day only VFR It is up to you to make sure the aircraft is

>properly equipped for night IFR and you are good to go. I don't believe you

>should have to convince the DAR of anything in this regard.

. . . here's the neat thing about OBAM aircraft

configuration and construction. Take the simple idea

of a self-imposed requirement. "My airplane is fitted

and operated in a manner wherein no single failure

of equipment has a profound influence on the outcome

of any proposed flight."

Now, if one has all-the-eggs-in-one-basket type

of display, it's a relatively simple task to deduce

what alternative equipment and mode of operation will

get you back on the ground without breaking a sweat.

Write a failure mode effects analysis that discusses

exactly what you plan to do in case of failure of

ANY and all pieces of equipment. A few paragraphs that discuss

(1) how you will become aware of the failure, (2) is

the failure pre-flight detectable, (3) is that device

necessary for sweat-free continuation of flight,

(the discussion may stop here where you say, "not

necessary for comfortable continuation of flight)

and (4) what alternatives are supplied for replacing the

lost function if loss of equipment CAN make you

break a sweat.

This is a very simple exercise you should do for

yourself no matter who else may be invited to pass

judgment on your airplane. Believe me, those-who-

are-paid-to-protect-us-from-ourselves will be

surprised if not astounded to be presented with

such a document. It will be a black and white

demonstration that you know more about your airplane

than they do.

This has the effect of -BOTH- cooperating with

the spirit and intent of regulation -AND- ensuring

your personal familiarization and confidence

in the machine you operate. It's easy. You

can do it in the word processor. It can and

should speak to EVERY piece of equipment in

the cockpit and maybe some pieces under the

cowl as well. Treat it sorta like typing

and expanding on your notes after a lecture.

This exercise will go a long way for your

personal confidence and understanding. It'll

blow the socks off any bureaucrat that thinks

he's walking up to just another neophyte that

wants to get in that thing and put daylight

under the wheels.

This will go a long way toward earning their

respect and reducing any resistance they may

have toward turning you and your machine

loose on the rest of us unsuspecting citizens.

Bob . . .