Help me understand FAA certification rules...

stratobee

stratobee

Cleared for Takeoff
Joined
Dec 18, 2011
Messages
1,112
Display Name
Display name:
stratobee
It seems to me like aerobatic aircraft that are certified are a dime a dozen. Extra 300's, Zivko Edge 540's, Pitts and recently the XtremeAir XA42. All FAA and EASA certified. Like it's the easiest thing in the world to certify an Aerobatic aircraft even though the user base and potential market for such must be a fraction of other civilian aircrafts.

Cut to part 23 aircraft. When was the last time anyone certified something there without it taking 10 years and bankrupting the company? Eclipse, Columbia, Swearingen etc - they all went bust trying to bring something to market. Only giants like Cessna and Piper seem to be able to do it, and frankly even they don't do it much because it costs so much. Skycatcher being the latest (and it took years). The new 182 replacement the Cessna NG now shelved indefinitely as well.

Are acrobatics certified in another category that's easier to comply with? How come small aerobatic manufacturers manage to bring certified aircraft to the markets when giants like Vans, Lancair or Cessna can't even do it?

Don't get it.
 
The Edge 540 isn't certified or more correct, it is certified experimental. Aside from the XA42, you are talking about aircraft that are decades old. Both Extra, and Pitts aircraft have been around, and certified for years.
 
Last edited:
GA is flooded to the gills with certified 4 place, single engine airplanes. Tecnam is rolling one out soon, I know there are at least 2 other manufacturers with aircraft in the works. There is a huge demand for aerobatic aircraft, and maybe it is easier for aircraft to hit the EU markets as certified in their aerobatic category, and transfer it over to the US market for part 23 approval. Also, maybe it is easier to build an aircraft to part 23 standards, yet have it waive an experimental flag for some years on the market, then convert it, like the case of the Columbia/Corvalis.
 
stratobee said:
It seems to me like aerobatic aircraft that are certified are a dime a dozen. Extra 300's, Zivko Edge 540's, Pitts and recently the XtremeAir XA42. All FAA and EASA certified. Like it's the easiest thing in the world to certify an Aerobatic aircraft even though the user base and potential market for such must be a fraction of other civilian aircrafts.



Cut to part 23 aircraft. When was the last time anyone certified something there without it taking 10 years and bankrupting the company? Eclipse, Columbia, Swearingen etc - they all went bust trying to bring something to market. Only giants like Cessna and Piper seem to be able to do it, and frankly even they don't do it much because it costs so much. Skycatcher being the latest (and it took years). The new 182 replacement the Cessna NG now shelved indefinitely as well.



Are acrobatics certified in another category that's easier to comply with? How come small aerobatic manufacturers manage to bring certified aircraft to the markets when giants like Vans, Lancair or Cessna can't even do it?



Don't get it.
Click to expand...


I didn't either. Wayne here helped me figure it out. The certifications aren't that hard. It's about demand.

There aren't enough buyers who'd be willing to buy airplanes at the price range necessary to make a profit.

There are however, plenty of buyers of exotic aerobatic aircraft.

The rewrite of Part 23 won't stimulate demand b
 
denverpilot said:
I didn't either. Wayne here helped me figure it out. The certifications aren't that hard. It's about demand.

There aren't enough buyers who'd be willing to buy airplanes at the price range necessary to make a profit.

There are however, plenty of buyers of exotic aerobatic aircraft.

The rewrite of Part 23 won't stimulate demand b
Click to expand...


You got it.

I recall when people were still saying that the ASTM standards and self certification process used in Light Sport was going to revolutionize the industry with low priced aircraft. Now, if you look at what a new CTLS or Sport Cruiser sells for, it's sneaking up on what a similarly equipped DA22 goes for. Even the CubCrafters LSA is $150,000 with VFR avionics. There are SLSA's for right around $100,000, but they're simple tube and fabric airplanes, and the certificated equivalents that were briefly reintroduced were priced similarly.

I'm hoping that SLSA version of the RV-12 will be able to hold its price in the mid 120's. If it can, you might just start seeing these in an increasing number of school's fleets.
 
Inverted said:
Also, maybe it is easier to build an aircraft to part 23 standards, yet have it waive an experimental flag for some years on the market, then convert it, like the case of the Columbia/Corvalis.
Click to expand...

Not really... there is nothing in common with the Lancair Super ES and the Columbia/Corvalis airplane except for a similar size and shape. Everything on the certified plane is different b/c the Super ES could not be certified as-is because it was not designed or built to Part 23 standards.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top