Merlin GT

[lv2plyguitar 172]

Hi Folks.  Randy got me back into the flying business.  Bought a Merlin GT without engine or main landing gear for $500.  I am going to strip it down and rebuild as a parts built experimental.  Does anyone know how to start that process with the FAA? 

 

Randy, The third picture is one I found just searching the internet.  This photo is from 2003. Amazing that is the exact same airplane.  Look at the tail numbers.

 

Alaska Pilots.  Who would you trust locally to build a motor mount for a 0-200 continental.

 

Thanks

Edited 7 Jul 2014 by AVID STOL HH

[akflyer 1427]

Good to see that your back in the game!  That was a darn good find!!  I am not sure who would make an engine mount for you.  I dont know if Atlee would build a one off or not.  If they did I am sure you would pay dearly for it.  Most A&P that are well versed in tube and fabric should be able to built a mount for you.

 

It has already been N numbered so your going to have to make your own data plate and I would make any serial number plate on the plane go away and replace it with your own.  I am assuming your doing this so you can get the repairmans certificate for it?

 

Keep the pics coming of the progress!! 

[lv2plyguitar 172]

Here is a picture of a completed Merlin.

 

 

[Av8r3400 1179]

Depending on the DAR/FISDO will determine your success at a build from parts rebuild.

They may require photos and receipts for all of the major components. The process is full of pitfalls depending on the inspector.

I've been considering the same for my mangy fox. At this time I'm shying away from it.

[marksires 484]

If the airplane is still registered, then you'll need to get it deregistered as 'salvage'.  Then, as you rebuild, you'll need to document everything you do to prove to the FAA that you built 51% of what the aircraft ends up being, then get another complete airworthiness inspection, fly off the 25 or 40 hours of phase 1 testing (depending on what engine you put in).  Then you can get the repairmans certificate.

 

If it is still registered, I'd just rebuild it under the original registration, notify the FSDO of a 'major change' since you are putting a different engine in.  Then you don't need another airworthiness inspection, and you'll only have 5 hours of restricted flying to test the new engine.  You won't be able to get the repairmans certificate, but that just means you can't do the annual condition inspection, you'll have to find an A&P to do that every year.  Note that an IA is not required, any A&P can do the condition inspection.  You can still do all the work on the airplane except the condition inspection.

 

Of course, that assumes you have the logs, the original airworthiness documents, and the operating limitations attached to the airworthiness documents. If not, then salvage and rebuild as a new airplane is the only option.

 

Mark

[1avidflyer 1983]

Find the nearest DAR and discuss it with him.  If you are on the same page from the start, there should be fewer surprises in the future.  I looked up the N # on the FAA website and see the plane was deregistered quite some time ago.  Another possibility would be to search the FAA data base for the same type of plane and if you can find a crashed one that still has it's paperwork you could blend the two into one functioning plane.  That should avoid the DAR and FAA paperwork.  Jim Chuk

[lostman 198]

Looks like a great find, especially for the price! Hope everything goes well with the rebuild for you.

 

Can't believe there was an Airliners picture of your bird.

[EDMO 1078]

I agree that you need to talk descretely to your DAR or the EAA DAR, saying  that you may be in that gray area of uncertainty between repairing and building - If this was a "Kit-built"  amateur-built plane, I would try to contact the original builder to see if they have the original bill of sale, documentation of building, registration signed over to you, etc. - Then you could just do repairs, change engine, and get it airworthy again.

If you "scratch-build", then you have to document every piece, every event, by logs and photos, and fill out FAA form 8xxx, which I cant remember the number for.  You can download it from the FAA site.  This is a slippery slope, but some have done it.

EDMO

[akflyer 1427]

or you can change a few things and call it the "AK kifox killer special" built from scrap parts and assembled in your garage... I think that is your plans.  Then you would register it as what ever you want to call it, chances are, the DAR is not going to know what it really was at one point and your good to go.  I would scrounge the web for builders pictures, print them out as needed and make my own "book" on the build and call it good... you could always see if a local steel supply would give you a ticket for a couple hundred feet of tubing that you forgot to ever pick up and didnt use that no one knew you didnt   I am sure you will find a way to blur the lines and get what you want accomplished.. but I wouldnt bank on him giving you a 25 hr fly off period this time

 

[EDMO 1078]

I think Leni has this "homebuilding" game all figured out.   My money will be riding on the 25 hour Phase I, since you are using a "factory-made" certified aircraft engine that has been used since they quit riding dinosaurs! 

How about "Contisaurus Flyer" for a name!   I like "Bush Hog", or "Bushbaby"???

EdMO

Edited 8 Jul 2014 by Ed In Missouri

[SuberAvid 617]

Just don't call it a "Brush hog"; that's what I pull behind the tractor and you don't want your airplane getting any ideas.

[akflyerbob 41]

If you have a bill of sale from the registered owner

you can do "MAJOR" maintenance and not tell Big Brother a Damn thing

Register with the same N#

 

OF the people, by the people and for the people

[chosack 2]

I am the builder and original owner of this plane and the one who made the last inglorious flight at Lake Hood. When I sold the parts I de-registered the plane with the FAA and the N number, N116CH, is now on my Searey at Merrill. That will make some difference as you go through the maze with the FAA. It looks like the guy I sold the parts to never did any paperwork with the FAA so I am still the last owner on the FAA records. If you need anything from me to help out on the paperwork just let me know. Randy knows how to get in touch with me or me contact info is on the Anchorage EAA Chapter 42 website.

 

Chuck Hosack

[lv2plyguitar 172]

Thanks Chuck.  I will be in touch.

 

Jeff

[lv2plyguitar 172]

Chuck,  Do you know where the seat and belts are for this aircraft?

 

Thanks

 

Jeff

[EDMO 1078]

I believe that there is a way you can change the N - number for an aircraft?   OR, apply for a new N-number.

More so, probably, if the N-number has been assigned to another aircraft.  Contact FAA and only ask that question.

EDMo

But, look again at the photos - is there a different number on the tail than the one Chuck listed?

Edited 8 Jul 2014 by Ed In Missouri

[dholly 718]

I am the builder and original owner of this plane and the one who made the last inglorious flight at Lake Hood. When I sold the parts I de-registered the plane with the FAA and the N number, N116CH, is now on my Searey at Merrill. That will make some difference as you go through the maze with the FAA. It looks like the guy I sold the parts to never did any paperwork with the FAA so I am still the last owner on the FAA records. If you need anything from me to help out on the paperwork just let me know. Randy knows how to get in touch with me or me contact info is on the Anchorage EAA Chapter 42 website.

 

Chuck Hosack

 

^ Proof that it may be a small world but still some good guys left.

[EDMO 1078]

Salute to the "Good Guys" - now, if we could just get this thread put into "Other aircraft you are working on" then maybe we could follow the progress and watch it fly someday.

"Cheechako" (sp?) might be a good, unused name for it?

EdMO

Edited 9 Jul 2014 by Ed In Missouri

[marksires 484]

Airworthiness and registration are two different things.  The N number was deregistered and used on another airplane, no big deal.  If the original airworthiness certificate and operating limits are still around, you can reregister the plane with a new N number, no inspection required.  If you change the engine, you will need to check the op limits, it might require you to notify the FSDO and go back to Phase I for a period of time.  Usually it is 5 hours in the recent op limits, but older op limits weren't very standardized.

 

Mark

[EDMO 1078]

If you have to get an airworthiness inspection on the new plane, then prior to that, go to the EAA or FAA website and copy the approved and improved Operating Limitations as per AC20-27G (I think?) which let you do major modifications with only a logbook entry and no inspections required for changes after the new OpLims are approved by the inspector.

EDMO

Someone reminded me that "Bushbaby" is already a name of a plane.

I don't see how the inspector can not approve your new OpLims per AC2027G since they have already been approved by the FAA.

Edited 9 Jul 2014 by Ed In Missouri

[akflyer 1427]

Me thinks you guys are missing the point.. I am pretty certain that he is not interested in just getting the old airworthiness back.. Ifn I know the man, he is gonna go for a new plane and get the repairmans cert for it.

 

I'm sure he can start a new thread when it comes time to make this a flying aircraft again... or he may choose to keep that on the down low for now so prying eyes of big brother cant find a way to try and hang him

 

[EDMO 1078]

I don't know if the Merlin Kits were approved for the 51% rule, but that should be on the FAA list somewhere.

The info I have been posting about the two FAA forms, OPLIMS and scratchbuilt, would be good for him to have no matter what he does with these parts.

EDMO

[Luked 71]

Hey Ed,

 

I'm planning to go the "built from parts" route too. I guess I need to get my ducks in a row before I get too far on anything. When I started my first homebuilt back in the early nineties (it's the one in my avatar that never got finished), there were no approved kits. Each builder just had to convince the inspector that they built over half of the plane.

 

If I remember correctly the FAA felt that there were too many planes being built by hired guns, so they came up with a form that you had to fill out showing all the tasks that you completed yourself. If the tasks you did added up to more than 51%, you were okay. Is this the form you are thinking of? I guess I need to start looking into the paperwork I will need to do. I think the idea of "51% approved" kits came about at the same time to make it easier for the majority of home builders.

 

Luke D.

[EDMO 1078]

Luke,

     Yes, this is the form for scratch-builts - If you find it on the FAA site, please post the number.  I have a poor copy somewhere in a lot of papers.   I think it is form 8xxx, and starts with longerons and continues thru all the parts you need to build a plane - each part is worth 1 point, or a decimal of a point to you and to the commercial maker if applicable.  For instance, you buy a Grove gear and wheels - Grove gets the whole point for making each of them, but you might get the points for assembly on the next line, and installation on the next.   There are several pages to this - about 19 or 27 if I remember right, and near the end you have to add up each column of points and figure out the percentages in several different ways.  Looks like it might take a few days just to fill out the form and figure out if you did it right?

    They don't count making materials, just take credit for each part you make out of tube, angle, and sheet, etc..

    Be sure and copy the latest OPLims before you are ready for inspection - no need to do it now, and maybe they will be changed before you finish your bird - that has happened to me several times now.

     If you cant find this, I will try to search some more for mine.

EDMO

Edited 9 Jul 2014 by Ed In Missouri

[lv2plyguitar 172]

Hey do you guys knows if I am required to maintain a 0-200 in a certified FAA condition if I put it in the merlin, or does it become experimental like the plane at that point.  I found a 0-200 complete with all accessories through my aircraft mechanic friend.  He says the engine had a very light prop strike.   

 

Thanks