Data Plate vs Real Aircraft

[Aircraft Mech Paul]

Hi all,

I don't know if this question has been asked and answered before. But, here goes. Having worked around the FAA rules and regs pertaining to maintenance for so long. One thing I can say with about a 90% assurance in that the FAA takes the position of using and aircraft's dataplate as the "original" license for that airframe. That being said, I would like to hear comments from folks regarding their thoughts in the field of restoration.

If you start off with only a dataplate...the FAA takes the position that "rebuilding" that particular airframe as a "major repair". But if you start off with a basket case project the FAA takes the same position. So, therefore my full question would be, How do you feel of restoring a basket case project versus a ground up "new build" while making use of only the dataplate to "authenticate" that what you have done is only done a major repair during the "rebuild" process.

I'd like to hear some thoughts on this. A sort of a "Purists View" versus a New Built view with thought given to the folks who reproduced the F3F's, the Me-262's, and the FW-190's, now rolling off their production.

Paul

[bdk]

Uh oh! This discussion usually causes everyone with an opinion to charge their rifles.

Well I'll throw this out based on what I recall to start, and others can correct my errors and assumptions...

If you were to build a "new" aircraft without the dataplate, you just have a homebuilt.

If you do have a dataplate (registration really- the data plate is just a tag that you can also duplicate if it gets damaged), some provenance comes with it, whether real or imagined. You also typically then license in Experimental Exhibition or Limited categories (since the aircraft is then "factory built") to which there are both advantages and disadvantages.

You have to show the FAA a chain of ownership for your registration, else you ARE a homebuilt- unless you build the plane from parts and affix your own serial number and then you are back to Experimental Exhibition or Limited. You just became the manufacturer, but not of a homebuilt.

I'm not sure you can get a new/original airworthiness certificate in the Limited category any more. If you buy the paperwork for a Mustang that became a smoking hole, you can at least get a replacement airworthiness certificate and the original, typically more liberal, limitations that came with it.

In reality, there aren't any of these recreations that aren't flying around with a significant number of original parts. How many people are making new tailwheel forks for Mustangs? It is all a matter of degrees and there are some options- but then the rules change on occasion too.

[Swiss Mustangs]

If you start off with only a dataplate...the FAA takes the position that "rebuilding" that particular airframe as a "major repair".

I consider myself now as proud owner of a P-51D-20-NA

Martin

[mike furline]

So hypothetically, If you secretly recovered a "Navy Fighter", removed the data plate & restored it, it would then be considered a home built and untouchable by the USN?

Regards,
Mike

[Eric Friedebach]

Two different TLAs.

[tom d. friedman]

i'd say the data plate is etched in stone gospel as to the aircraft's origin...

[tom d. friedman]

liken the data plate to dna!!!

[bdk]

So hypothetically, If you secretly recovered a "Navy Fighter", removed the data plate & restored it, it would then be considered a home built and untouchable by the USN?

I believe that the FAA requires an "Amateur Built" aircrat to be at least 51% fabricated by the owner. As long as you can document that to the FAA's satisfaction, I guess so. Stolen property is another matter to be decided in a court of law unrelated to the Airworthiness Certificate.

[bdk]

If you start off with only a dataplate...the FAA takes the position that "rebuilding" that particular airframe as a "major repair".

I consider myself now as proud owner of a P-51D-20-NA

Martin

All you need now is documentation showing the continuous chain of ownership from when the aircraft was released from service and you can register it in the US.

[tom d. friedman]

i'd say that civil aircraft vs military aircraft data plates are pretty much black & white as issues.

[Obergrafeter]

I have the original data plate from a PT-17 Stearman that came off of a fuselage we imported from Mexico. On looking up this planes serial number I find that someone has taken up this serial number and has it registered with a N number. I assume he built it up from parts and thought the original was chopped up. My question is, is this my airplane because I have the data plate? Wouldn't be so cruel but it makes you wonder.

[N3Njeff]

Good question, I am in the same boat with one of my data plates that I bought for a N3N. But I have log books for another so i do have a complete set. Maybe some day I will take on a project.

[bdk]

My question is, is this my airplane because I have the data plate?

Do you have a bill of sale?

[T J Johansen]

I consider myself now as proud owner of a P-51D-20-NA

Martin

Will it be at Legends....

T J

Suppose then, that you have the airplane but no data plate. What do you have then?

Dan