More trivia

[hawg2hawk]

OK, here's another one.

Does anyone have a rational explanation why an L-39, for example, can be registered on an experimental certificate and be legal to carry passengers, and a UH-1 (huey) can only be registered as restricted (public use), no pax?

 

[hawg2hawk]

Where's JAFI when you need him?

 

[hawg2hawk]

How about an irrational explanation?

 

[dseagrav]

How about an irrational explanation?

OK - Hueys are being discriminated against because of their involvement in Vietnam.

 

[bocefus]

The helicopter industry and mainly (Bell) lobbied to prevent this. Same rationale as to why fromer Soviet Bloc aircraft cannot gain standard certification in the US. The AN2/AN3 for instance, would render a lot of aircraft practically obsolete and worthless if it could compete from the same level of certification as a Beaver Otter, Caravan, 206, 185, etc.

 

[JAFI]

I get a private message with just "Where the hell have you been" and a link to this thread. Well, I do not read every thread, only the ones that intrest me, and I post on my time (if I have the time). And a little courtesy goes a long way. So, I will assume what you ment to say is " If you have any information on this topic, would you please give (key word - give) us your thoughts".
If you want the FAA answer, contact the Small Aircraft Certification Office. I do not have the phone number handy but if you call the Wichita FSDO (316-941-1200) they should have the phone number. The Certification office is in the same building.

I can think of several reasons why the certification was done in your example, but they would only be my guess. Call the Certification Office and they can tell you much more.

JAFI

 

[AA717driver]

Helicopters are dangerous and should be banned entirely. How's that? TC