fjetter

Any of you guys done any teaching in experimental aircraft before? I have a potential student looking to finish up his commercial in his own experimental aircraft. I asked him to bring in the a/c logbooks to determine airworthiness etc. Anybody know of things I should look for before I even get in the aircraft with him?

He has stated he has about 400hrs in the aircraft and all other CSEL requirements met, but I'm definetly checking his logbook for that stuff too.

rickair7777

I suggest you dig up the safety stats on experimentals...they are not good when compared to part 23 airplanes (cessna, piper, etc). AOPA publishes the numbers each year.

With that said, I would not set foot in one of those things unless I knew the builder personally and had researched the type. Some types have peculiar issues, others just have bad safety records.

400 hours in the plane is good I suppose.

Are you going to get some advice or hopefully a checkout from an instructor with experience in type? I would definitely not jump in cold turkey and start doing commercial manuevers...

jcaplins

What kind of experimental?
Some are safer than others, but mostly its the pilot that makes them unsafe. Such as doing low level aerobatics to show off. That's just not something people do in a C-172.

I wouldn't hesitate to get in an aircraft because it's "experimental". They term "experimental" nowadays is a bit of a misnomer. most of the experimenting was done years ago, now they are built from kits, with the same engines going into certified aircraft.

There is no legal problem with doing the checkride in an experimental, but check with the DE, he/she may not want to get in one.

fjetter

Good call on the AOPA database. It is a FWP-149D a nearly 60 year old aircraft after doing an N search. I'm more inclined to have him fly in our schools arrow which I know exactly how to fly to pass a commercial checkride rather than trying to guess at speeds/configurations in an aircraft I haven't flown before.

NoyGonnaDoIt

So be too sure about that. The CFI who checked me out in a 172 many years ago decided it would be cool to demonstrate a hammerhead stall.

chongololo

Make sure that there are brakes on the right side.
I have instructed in an experimental without brakes on the right side and it wasn't fun, it was a tailwheel too! I said forget it and the student found another instructor, days later they ground-looped it!
Also, it can be tough to find some performance figures and such since usually there is not much of a POH if any.
Good luck.

Ewfflyer

You hit on another good issue, whether or not the DPE will do the check-ride in the aircraft. A 60yr old experimental would raise a flag for me personally. I'm with the above comment that I'd want to know the history of the aircraft from whom built it, maintained it, etc.. If it's been maintained at a shop, that would make me feel better than owner signed off Mx.

redsox1

thats not an experimental it a post ww2 german built acro/fighter trainer.
i have some time in one very nice built by Focke Wulf and Piaggio. i would google it but very nice plane.

HectorD

The only reason I am flying a 53 year old piper apache geronimo is because I know the owners of the flight school. Its meticulously maintained. I would never fly in a 60 year old, privately owned experimental airplane. Just tell him to finish off in the arrow which is a very simple airplane.

shdw

If you fly power settings you will have less trouble with this whenever you switch from aircraft to aircraft. The speeds will obviously not be the same, but the speed doesn't matter, the performance will be about the same.

IE A faster heavier aircraft like an arrow at will fly faster at the same power setting then say a 172. But the performance say starting a lazy 8, the arrow would be slowed quicker while climbing from the excess weight but would have more momentum from the faster starting speed. This means, at the 45 degree point (highest nose up), both the arrow and the 172 would be at approximately the same speed, amount of climb, and so on and so forth.

As for the experimental I would have an A&P I knew and trusted look it over as well as everything else that was said so far. This would be my final step if I found it was safe after AOPA, history, etc. Good luck either way.