this is a problem I see more and more. excellent older model aircraft with no manufacturer in existence to supply parts etc.

how do we keep them flying safely as the old guys who knew how to maintain them and where to find (or make ) parts die off.

I have a Seabee an old but good aircraft that is increasingly hard to get fixed as the new mechanics want nothing to do with it and parts are very scare.

one solution for making the Seabee much safer to fly is what exists in Canada, Sweden, and perhaps elsewhere is to put them into experimental.

for example the basic problem with the Seabee is the engine has not been built since the 50's and no one is producing parts the only legal stc is to install a GO480 which itself is an outdated boat anchor.

In Canada an enterprising guy has developed a drop in replacement based on the Chevy 350 which works extremely well and uses modern commonly available parts. (http://www.v8seabee.com) but it needs to be put into experimental in order to use his solution, and unless you do an incredibly difficult process of putting it into experimental exhibition in the US it is illegal to fly. But in Canada, the Seabee is put in an experimental category very similar to the conventional experimental category in the US In Canada an the owner can maintain and fly it just like a normal experimental aircraft.

so one solution is to bug your congressman to allow antique non supported aircraft to be put in experimental which was actually proposed in the proposal done on June 5 2013 titled

14 CFR Part 23 Reorganization Aviation Rulemaking Committee
on Recommendations for increasing the safety of small general aviation airplanes certificated to 14 CFR part 23.

I can't think of the guy's name right now, and I don't have any logbooks handy, but there's a fellow in Washington State that's one of the SeaBee gurus, and engineered a very successful conversion of an IO-540 Lycoming. Some version of SuperBee?? Anyway, the last time I saw him, I'd purchased a complete AND completely rebuilt Lycoming TIO-540-A2B, from Columbia Acft Engines, from him as a spare for a Piper Navajo. It was supposed to go into a SeaBee conversion project in Africa, but the government over there ultimately gave them too hard of a time on the import, and he never got to go finish that project. At that time, he lived at Western Airpark, 06WN, near Yelm, WA. His maintenance and conversion hangar was up at Arlington Muni (KAWO), where the big Arlington EAA Fly-In is held every year. Used to be the Oshkosh of the west back in the day. He had four or five SeaBees in his hangars last time I was in there. This was like (7) years ago now. I believe the guy's name is 'Randy' something. He's in all the old SeaBee magazine articles. There's a crap-ton of those things up here. Try this guy to find more about the fellow I'm talking about, who I'm sure knows/knew him... and I'll start looking for his name and #. And sadly you're absolutely right... few in this newer generation want to touch these older airplanes anymore. Good luck and God's speed with it! ~ ME

Bee Sea n'ya,
Bruce Hinds, President
Washington Seaplane Pilots Association
Seabee Club Newsletter
360-769-2311 home
360-710-5793 cell

Perhaps this is the correct Randy?

http://www.seabee.info/rc3_517.htm

Everything over 50 years of age should be automatically in Experimental category. It's the only way forward.

I see a lot of foreign owners for US registered airplanes. Either flying in the US or in other countries.

Sometimes registered to a US corporation which is not really a company just a address with many airplanes registered to it.

Could you as a US citizen get a Canadian license and register your airplane in Canada to use the V8 Bee conversion under their rules?

Probably not. Must be citizen or permanent resident.

However, yes there are plenty of “N” aircraft around the world thanks to some clever holding company schemes.

Got to be a Canadian citizen to register aircraft there. And they aren’t as open with the work around schemes.

The references to putting a Seabee into the experimental category in Canada are, sadly, incorrect.

Firstly, Canada doesn't have an "experimental" category per se - that's a US thing. We have the ability to obtain a Special Certificate of Airworthiness issued under one of several different sub-categories. The one likely being considered here is the Amateur-Built category.

Rules regarding the moving of pre-manufactured certificated aircraft into the Amateur-Built category have changed or at least become much more restrictive in recent years. In order for an aircraft to be classified as Amateur-Built the builder must be able to provide evidence to support their construction of more than 50% of the aircraft. Construction doesn't mean fitting together factory-made parts but rather fabrication of those parts.

With this in mind, the movement of a Seabee from its certified category into the Amateur-Built category would require a very substantial level of effort - far more than just hanging a Corvette engine on it.

I like the idea overall. Just cannot allow them to enact restrictions. For example, experimental air race planes have to be going to an air race, some experimental exhibition airplanes have radius and other restrictions. Experimental exhibition certificates are often issued to foreign built certified planes with no pathway to standard airworthiness certificates. Yaks for example. That aerobatic Baron that is registered experimental is a dedicated airshow plane and can only fly for local practice and traveling to shows. It would blow if a 50 year old airplane went experimental automatically and became a VFR only plane limited to 200 miles.

My bonanza is 53 and I wouldn’t want my planes operational limits limited automatically based on its age. And that sounds just like something our federal government would do.

Great Job, Doug!! THANK YOU. Yep, this is the guy. Randy Komko. I lost my old phone (none of my phones are "Cloud" storage phones) with his #, but I know it's written down somewhere. You can probably find him now though. He might be the answer to your SeaBee woes... if he's still around. ~ ME

Probably not. Must be citizen or permanent resident.

The value of the fleet will plummet. Insurance rates? How do you sell an airplane after some guy decided to buy home depot hardware and put it in critical places on your airplane?

There are two things that need to change:

1. There needs to be a rating below a full blown A&P.

2. The FAA needs to release the data to build replacement parts if the MFG will not support the TC.

Adam,
I own three certified airplanes. The ages are:

82 years old
71 years old
63 years old

I haven't had any problems getting any parts I've needed. Service has not been a problem either. I don't see any advantage to going experimental. If I had an odd ball aircraft like a Seabee, I might think otherwise.

...and part of the experimental category is that you can sign off your own maintenance after you've been approved for it.

Sure, there will be some Home Depot mods made, but I'd much rather have that in the market than the following very real scenario: only two approved A/P's fro my aircraft. One is from pre-1965 that only one retired avionics guy in America can service (more or less), or an already-outdated-STEC that costs $100K installed. Chances of Garmin or TruTrak certifying for a fleet of under 20 is zero. What's worse?

I think the correct category that is referenced here is the owner maintenance category in Canada.

Currently only aircraft with fixed gear and fixed pitch props can be added, but when this category was created, the Seabee was allowed in. I think the Corvette conversion is eligible in this category.

The limitation for USA is that owner maintenance aircraft are allowed in Canada. They cannot cross into USA.

Here’s a list of eligible aircraft models. More can be added if they fit the criteria.

https://tc.canada.ca/en/corporate-servi ... cars#App-h

How would one get signed off as a mechanic for maintaining say a 1972 F33? Wouldn't that person need to know most of what an A&P knows? Engines, flight controls, repairs, electrical, autopilots, etc. are all required for a high performance airplane like a bonanza.

That kind of knowledge can't be learned in a weekend, a week or a month. That's why there are A&P's and IA's.

I think the better answer is that you need to consider how you'll maintain an old and/or low volume certified aircraft before you buy it. If you can't live with the problems of hard to find parts and no real upgrades, don't buy it.