What's new
Van's Air Force

Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.

Operating Limitations for IFR

no7rosman

Active Member
Hello,

I bought a really nice 9A that was supposed to be IFR Certified. It says in the logs the systems were checked by a certified mechanic and it's "certified". However after digging into the regs it appears this must be noted in the Operating Limitations. After looking at the Limitations noticed it says Day VFR Only.

It looks like I need to get a waiver from the "Administrator". Has anyone been through this process? Is this the correct path?

Thanks,
Ross
 
I did this a few months ago. Call the FSDO , explain, submit some paperwork and the original operating limitations, wait a few days, then bask in the glory of having an IFR legal plane.

Really though, pretty painless process.
 
Check the wording

Sometimes at first glance, the day VFR is followed by a statement saying something like ?unless equipped for ifr flight?.

Not sure of the exact wording as my doc is not handy, but I remember having to reread it a couple of times to determine I was ifr certified.

Steve
 
Excellent! Thank You both for a fast response. There is no extra text at the end of mine. :)
 
Last edited:
IFR in a new airplane

I learned in my own RV-9A that there's a lot more to it than just being IFR current in a legal airplane... some of my experience is at http://www.vansairforce.com/community/showthread.php?t=161935.

Friendly words of advice, based on my experience:
* Depending upon what you've got in your panel, there could be a humongous learning curve. I found demonstration videos on youtube, and lots of step by step instructions in the manuals, but nowhere did I find good answers to specific questions on what the avionics were actually doing. Took me about 100 flight hours to get proficient, and from talking to others in the know, that's about right. And I'm not a newbie;
* Even with a simple airframe, the avionics in my -9A are complex enough as to require currency, maybe more than taildragger currency. Or maybe I'm just getting old;
* Always pay close attention to what the avionics are doing. There's lots of ways to get confused, sometimes it's you, sometimes it's the boxes. This is not a slam on the avionics in my plane, it happens even with the software level A avionics in bizjets;
* Work your way up in terms of wind. The RV-9A (with a fixed pitch prop) floats so much that if you increase the approach speed for crosswinds, that just means that you'll float longer in the flare;
* Work your way up in terms of clouds. The -9A, with it's light wing loading and high speed, will take you for a *ride*, even in relatively small cumulus clouds;
* If you fly on autopilot all the time, as I do, make sure that your hand flying skills don't degrade to the point that an autopilot failure is an emergency or worse. I spent the first year with the -9A learning the avionics and autopilot, and then when I went for an IPC, hand flying, it was... choose your own word. First time I ever failed an IPC.

I fly mine at 8 gallons per hour, so I've got 4.5 hours to dry tanks. I plan for two hour legs, so I'm not afraid of big zig zags for weather, even IFR, and besides, you can make quite a detour for only a few gallons at 145 knots. And if you land somewhere and the pumps are broken, you're not stuck if you've still got two hours on board.

Enjoy your IFR!

Ed
 
legal IFR

In addition to the plane being legal as to the equipment in it, the ops limits, and your personal currency, the plane also needs a current transponder check to fly in airspace that requires it, essentially anywhere you would be IFR, and a current pitot static system check. These are not something an AP can sign off but must be done by an instrument shop that has the equipment.

I think an AP signing the log book stating that it is "certified" is meaningless. There is no such thing as an "IFR certified" plane, tho we often use that phrase. The pitot-static system must be checked, "certified," and the transponder checked or "certified."

JMHO
 
While nit-picking -- it's only the Static system. No pitot checking is required.

[And my plane is currently getting the Static system reviewed because the loss is 5 ft/min too high for the signature. Argh!]
 
While talking static systems check for state error by doing a GPS box. No point having a 60' altimeter tolerance and a 140' error due to static error.
 
Best airplane ever

Lots of true wisdom here (not surprising given the source!).

Based on recent experience, let me re-emphasize the point about going for a ride in cumulus. Hand-flying a 9 in cumulus and holding the altitude steady is a pretty high-workload event in my 9A. Much better to grab some oxygen and get over that stuff, if at all possible. Plus, the (nearly miraculous) wing on the 9 seems to really love higher altitudes.

I've met enough people who have bumped their heads in cumulus in RVs that I'm actually thinking about keeping a helmet handy. Not even kidding. Certainly slowing way down is on the agenda whenever cumulus can't be avoided.

Big zigzags for weather are definitely doable given the speed available. Because of typical summertime cumulo-nastiness over WV, I recently returned from Grand Rapids, MI to Richmond, VA, by way of..... Lancaster PA!! It actually didn't add that much time to the trip.


I learned in my own RV-9A that there's a lot more to it than just being IFR current in a legal airplane... some of my experience is at http://www.vansairforce.com/community/showthread.php?t=161935.

Friendly words of advice, based on my experience:
* Depending upon what you've got in your panel, there could be a humongous learning curve. I found demonstration videos on youtube, and lots of step by step instructions in the manuals, but nowhere did I find good answers to specific questions on what the avionics were actually doing. Took me about 100 flight hours to get proficient, and from talking to others in the know, that's about right. And I'm not a newbie;
* Even with a simple airframe, the avionics in my -9A are complex enough as to require currency, maybe more than taildragger currency. Or maybe I'm just getting old;
* Always pay close attention to what the avionics are doing. There's lots of ways to get confused, sometimes it's you, sometimes it's the boxes. This is not a slam on the avionics in my plane, it happens even with the software level A avionics in bizjets;
* Work your way up in terms of wind. The RV-9A (with a fixed pitch prop) floats so much that if you increase the approach speed for crosswinds, that just means that you'll float longer in the flare;
* Work your way up in terms of clouds. The -9A, with it's light wing loading and high speed, will take you for a *ride*, even in relatively small cumulus clouds;
* If you fly on autopilot all the time, as I do, make sure that your hand flying skills don't degrade to the point that an autopilot failure is an emergency or worse. I spent the first year with the -9A learning the avionics and autopilot, and then when I went for an IPC, hand flying, it was... choose your own word. First time I ever failed an IPC.

I fly mine at 8 gallons per hour, so I've got 4.5 hours to dry tanks. I plan for two hour legs, so I'm not afraid of big zig zags for weather, even IFR, and besides, you can make quite a detour for only a few gallons at 145 knots. And if you land somewhere and the pumps are broken, you're not stuck if you've still got two hours on board.

Enjoy your IFR!

Ed
 
Last edited:
I think this is the current way Ops Limits are written, but some DAR here may correct me:

8. After completion of phase I flight testing, unless appropriately equipped for night and/or instrument flight in accordance with FAR 91.205, this aircraft is to be operated under VFR, day only.
 
I think this is the current way Ops Limits are written, but some DAR here may correct me:

8. After completion of phase I flight testing, unless appropriately equipped for night and/or instrument flight in accordance with FAR 91.205, this aircraft is to be operated under VFR, day only.

This is correct.

Good advice here on SLOWING down. Slow is your friend in the RV's and bumpy IMC. I avoid the bumpy stuff whenever I can, even in the RV-10. Slowing down makes for a much better ride for everyone, and only adds a few minutes to the to the total length of the trip.

How much to slow down? I slow down to Va, or just a little above it. 125-135 knots in the RV-10 makes a huge difference in the ride.

Vic
 
I've met enough people who have bumped their heads in cumulus in RVs that I'm actually thinking about keeping a helmet handy. Not even kidding. Certainly slowing way down is on the agenda whenever cumulus can't be avoided.

In my 6, I only sit about 1-2" below the canopy. While I have whacked my head several times, it has always been associated with convective turbulence below the clouds or with the shearing/CAT type. While it is certainly a rocky ride is some of the CU clouds, it has always been the more refined turbulence (arguably tossed around every which way), but not the jarring/violent stuff that introduces my skull to the plexi. By refined, I am referring to the rate of movement and not the total movement.

Larry
 
Last edited:
Good advice here on SLOWING down. Slow is your friend in the RV's and bumpy IMC. I avoid the bumpy stuff whenever I can, even in the RV-10. Slowing down makes for a much better ride for everyone, and only adds a few minutes to the to the total length of the trip.

How much to slow down? I slow down to Va, or just a little above it. 125-135 knots in the RV-10 makes a huge difference in the ride.

Vic


This is great advice. Makes a huge difference in how much you enjoy your flight. :cool:
 
Don't forget this from AIM 5-3-3:

a. The following reports should be made to ATC or FSS facilities without a specific ATC request:

1. At all times:

(e) Change in the average true airspeed (at cruising altitude) when it varies by 5 percent or 10 knots (whichever is greater) from that filed in the flight plan.

Ed
 
Thanks a lot everyone for the good advise. I called the FSDO yesterday and the gentleman didn't know what I was talking about. He took some notes and told me he would get back to me.

Also fairly anxious to get back to the airport and reread the limitations based on one response above. It's possible I missed it. Looks like we have good weather tomorrow...so I plan on spending some time in her.

Thanks again!
 
Don't forget this from AIM 5-3-3:

a. The following reports should be made to ATC or FSS facilities without a specific ATC request:

1. At all times:

(e) Change in the average true airspeed (at cruising altitude) when it varies by 5 percent or 10 knots (whichever is greater) from that filed in the flight plan.

Ed

I always wondered why this existed in the radar environment. I suppose that when this was created/amended that some or all of the radar systems didn't show airspeed, as it does now.
 
I always wondered why this existed in the radar environment. I suppose that when this was created/amended that some or all of the radar systems didn't show airspeed, as it does now.
There are still places in the country where there isn't a radar environment, and even losing communications is part of the deal if you're not high enough to require oxygen. ATC needs to know your speed through there so it can accurately predict your location.
 
There are still places in the country where there isn't a radar environment, and even losing communications is part of the deal if you're not high enough to require oxygen. ATC needs to know your speed through there so it can accurately predict your location.

I understood that and agree it is critical data in the non-radar environment, but why didn't they put the requirement in the section for non-radar, same as position reporting.
 
Airspeed change

Probably because their plans are predicted on your filed speed. If you randomly slow down, they might or might not notice until a problem occurs or one is set to happen in the future. Better just to tell them you're slowing down to prevent them from having to guess what you're doing.
 
IFR

The DAR emailed me a Program Letter (Denver FSDO) to complete that states:

I request airworthiness certification and operating limitations be issued permitting me to operate the aircraft within the following geographical area for flight testing. Initial flights will determine engine reliability and flight control characteristics. A flight test plan has been developed using the guidance in AC 90-89 and is available for review. After phase I flight test completion, I plan to operate the aircraft under VFR conditions only.

I spent a lot of time, effort and $ to not be limited to VFR. What do you suggest?
 
The DAR emailed me a Program Letter (Denver FSDO) to complete that states:

I request airworthiness certification and operating limitations be issued permitting me to operate the aircraft within the following geographical area for flight testing. Initial flights will determine engine reliability and flight control characteristics. A flight test plan has been developed using the guidance in AC 90-89 and is available for review. After phase I flight test completion, I plan to operate the aircraft under VFR conditions only.

I spent a lot of time, effort and $ to not be limited to VFR. What do you suggest?

Change the wording to IFR. When I did my work with the FSDO, they asked if I intended to fly IFR as well as perform aerobatics. I presumed they asked this to put specific wording in the Op Lim's. It seems that some of their language is flexible and they align it with the builders goals/plans

Larry
 
Last edited:
I'll definitely give it a shot. Thought that it was presumptive of them to provide the wording without options. Thanks
 
When flying IFR it is very important to report this speed change asap. Ground speed is displayed but any unexpected changes can lead to separation problems with other aircraft - simply because it was unexpected. Controllers may have already determined that no conflict exists between you and another aircraft operating nearby. Other tasks then take priority. When their attention is then brought back to your flight - an unexpected speed difference exists.
 
When flying IFR it is very important to report this speed change asap. Ground speed is displayed but any unexpected changes can lead to separation problems with other aircraft - simply because it was unexpected. Controllers may have already determined that no conflict exists between you and another aircraft operating nearby. Other tasks then take priority. When their attention is then brought back to your flight - an unexpected speed difference exists.

This makes sense. To be clear, I do report my speed changes as required. I was just curious for the rationale. It makes sense that they want a "heads up" so that they can assume a constant speed without having to look. That said, I sure hope their looking, as they are responsible for ground speed computation in the radar environment and am pretty sure they have tools that alert controllers to converging aircraft and other conflicts. I have heard controllers give a "distance to expected convergence" and I am pretty sure that wasn't computed by hand.

Larry
 
Last edited:
Sometimes at first glance, the day VFR is followed by a statement saying something like ?unless equipped for ifr flight?.

Not sure of the exact wording as my doc is not handy, but I remember having to reread it a couple of times to determine I was ifr certified.

Steve

Steve - This was valuable. Thanks! I went out today and read <b>ALL<b> the documentation and it was further down on the page. Pretty sure I read phase 1 and stopped there.

My instructor was out today and went through everything and gave the ok. Hopefully will start next weekend.

Thanks again everyone. Also for all the IFR advise.
 
I am curious what is in the panel Flight Instruments and Nav your RV9A has?

Of course to fly IFR you must have FAR required specific Flt Instruments (and have pitot
static currently certified for IFR). Experimental EFIS (not TSO'ed) seems to be allowed (or
at least used) a lot for IFR. A question of redundancy would be my concern. In GA planes
"partial panel" is when Vac pump failed and you only had TB or TC to keep wing level, plus
Alt, AS, VS and Power instruments (RPM/MAP) to scan for pitch. Single EFIS, no electrical
redundancy? If IMC with NO attitude instrument reference is a bad thing.

Nav instruments required are only those required for that intended flight. I flew a Piper
Tomahawk actual IFR with just a VOR between two fields all the time, years ago. Both
fields had VOR non precision approach. IFR GPS must be TSO'ed. However I bet many
pilots are driving around IFR w/ their fancy non TSO'ed EFIS and GPS. You must have
GPS NAV source TSO approved for IFR and an up-to-date database or VOR/LOC/GS.

IMHO single pilot hard IFR in a kit plane is sporty. Not required but well advised, an auto-
pilot. There are so many new autopilot options with advance track and altitude capture hold
from different companies. Autopilot is great for reducing work load. You let go of the stick
too long and let an RV roll and pitch down, speed builds quickly. Also now real time weather
via XM or ADSB is available and a blessing. Two things I will have in my RV-7.

PS someone mentioned turbulence? RV on the gauges in turbulence is a challenge to hand
fly, it yaws. Not saying RV's are unstable, they just are not a super stable platform, say like
a C-182. I suspect some of the new autopilots with yaw dampers might be awesome to tame
the tail wag, but to me that is overkill for a little sport plane. If you get into turbulence one
trick is to rest your feet lightly on rudder peddles.
 
Last edited:
Change the wording to IFR. When I did my work with the FSDO, they asked if I intended to fly IFR as well as perform aerobatics. I presumed they asked this to put specific wording in the Op Lim's. It seems that some of their language is flexible and they align it with the builders goals/plans

Larry
+1
Definitely, ask/discuss with the DAR before he/she constructs the Op-Lims. I might call the options selectable, but not really flexible.

My DAR said he had an "app" to construct the final language and we discussed what I expected to be doing with the plane post Phase I.

Also, for the operating area, You might request the radius and if you have ensured it clears certain airspaces, state that so the DAR won't have to check in the apparent frenzy of the Op-Lim construction. I would have worked a little better for me to have done that.
 
My DAR said he had an "app" to construct the final language

Yeah, I could have sworn that with the latest OpLims changes a few years ago, the FAA published a worksheet/work aid to guide the creation of the OpLims. I couldn't find it, though, but I didn't search very hard, either.

Makes sense someone would write an app for it...or even just a set of macros in Word or Excel.
 
+1

My DAR said he had an "app" to construct the final language and we discussed what I expected to be doing with the plane post Phase I.

Yeah, I could have sworn that with the latest OpLims changes a few years ago, the FAA published a worksheet/work aid to guide the creation of the OpLims. I couldn't find it, though, but I didn't search very hard, either.

Makes sense someone would write an app for it...or even just a set of macros in Word or Excel.

Latest version of FAA Order 8130.2 has the LINK to the app.
 
Back
Top