August 2019 | www.sayer.com

ORE recently, Derek (often called “Pops” by his friends) went

on to participate in the construction of a Vans RV-7 kit that

had been purchased by his son, aerobatic champion and

SAA Training Captain, Nigel, in partnership with his aerobatic

colleague, Jason Beamish. Affectionately registered as ZU-

POP, the RV-7 is often seen in the skies and at ying events

countrywide.

Enamoured with the performance of the RV-series aircraft, Derek decided he

wanted one of his own. Together with son Nigel, they bought a partly completed

RV-8 kit. The somewhat better performance of the tandem-seat RV-8 was an

added attraction, so Derek embarked on an 18-month odyssey to build ZU-NDH,

so named using his and Nigel’s initials.

Derek notes that building the RV-8 was more challenging than the RV-7 as the

narrower fuselage made it considerably more difcult to get inside to do much of

the work. Most of the building was done in a carport adjoining his house in Pretoria,

before it was trailered to Eagles Creek airport for nal assembly.

I was privileged to attend the rst ight of the nal masterpiece at Eagles Creek.

After some last-minute tweaks, NDH was started, the engine fully run-up, a quick

taxi test done, and with aerobatic smoke system turned on, took to the air for the

very rst time.

There is an excitement and satisfaction to successfully ying your very own

creation, the product of many hours of hard work, frustration and swearing that

AOPA BRIEFING

CHRIS MARTINUS - PRESIDENT OF AOPA SOUTH AFRICA

HOMEBUILDERS

Derek Hopkins typies the

passionate aviator who has

the skills and drive to build

and y his own aircraft.

Originally a railway engineer,

Derek became enamoured

with aviation, scratch-built

a Teenie-Two VW-powered

aircraft in a bedroom of

his house and went on to

become something of a

legend, both in commercial

and private aviation.

Nigel and Derek collect the part-built RV-8 kit.

www.sayer.com | August 2019

COLUMNS

those who are mere purchasers of aircraft

cannot even begin to understand.

The new engine needed running in,

so the rst ight took over an hour, with

the throttle wide open. After all systems

checked out, Derek couldn’t resist a few rolls

to check out his new toy’s aerobatic abilities.

Nigel then took the beast for up for some

more testing.

After landing, Derek’s smile was so

wide, many of us worried that the top of his

head may fall off!

We wish Derek and Nigel many hours of

pleasure from their creation.

TYPES OF HOMEBUILDERS

There are basically four kinds of aircraft

homebuilders:

First, like the Wright Brothers, there

are those who build their own designs

from scratch. This is the most arduous

path to follow. Not only must every part be

fabricated, but a new design must usually go

through many iterations, tests and failures

before it can be considered successful, if

ever. This is truly the experimental route, but

is where ingenuity and new concepts enter

aviation.

Second, there are those who scratch

build an aircraft from plans. This is a much

safer and coherent approach, since the

aircraft design is usually well-tested and

there is already a community of builders

whose experience and advice are available.

The third and most popular option is

the now-ubiquitous kit aircraft. Today’s

kits dramatically reduce the time, effort

and skills required to successfully build a

ying aircraft. Most kits have much of the

fabrication done, and in the case of the

RVs, all holes are pre-punched and almost

all the parts required, aside from paint, are

available from the kit manufacturer. This is

the speediest way to build your own aircraft

and since there is a great deal of uniformity

the effort required to build it is well known, in

addition to there being support from the kit

manufacturer.

Fourth, there are the ‘factory assisted’

builds offered by many kit manufacturers.

However, it is more popular now to have a

business build your aircraft for you. Such

‘production-built’ aircraft are permitted in

South Africa under current regulations and

so-called ‘chequebook builders’ benet from

having quality aircraft built by experienced

organisations. However, the cost is little

different to fully certied aircraft and usually

higher than acquiring a good used type-

certied aircraft.

REGULATIONS, DAMNED

REGUL ATIONS

The regulatory structure relevant to

non type-certied aircraft (NTCA) has

ballooned since the days of the old CAA

LS/1 document which governed NTCA.

Today’s NTCA regulations eclipse those

applicable to certied aircraft in complexity

– and in degree of confusion. Most of these

regulations were motivated by industry

players, production aircraft builders,

maintainers, ‘governing bodies’, ‘inspectors’

and other entities seeking to prot from

the popularity of this sector of the aviation

market.

Little notice has been taken of the needs

of the grass-roots aspirant aircraft owner and

considerable effort has gone into creating

regulations that not only benet CAA and

its ofcials and cronies, but also make the

entire prospect of aircraft ownership less

attractive to the consumer.

Although the original idea and regulations

were designed to accommodate those who

wish to build and maintain an aircraft at their

own risk, regulatory structures were built on

the premise that homebuilders needed to be

protected from themselves. This resulted in

Aero Club developing its ‘Approved Person’

(AP) scheme in which APs would inspect

and sign off a NTCA for a fee. This evolved

to include insurance to cover APs and

aircraft owners ‘for their own good’.

More than a decade ago, an

organisation named the Recreation Aviation

Administration of SA (RAASA) was formed

by CAA and Aero Club for reasons which

are both inscrutable and suspicious. Its

existence was contrary to many statutory

laws, it may have been a ruse to launder CAA

funds and added another layer of complexity

and cost to an already unwieldy heap of

purposeless regulations. Nevertheless,

RAASA survived for a considerable time

on the basis of claiming that they provided

better service than that provided by CAA.

RAASA was closed down at the end of

March this year by CAA which has taken

over its functions. AOPA South Africa has

been carefully watching this development for

the past few months. It is to be expected

that there would be a few glitches during the

transition and things seem to be foundering.

Nobody seems to know what is going on and

the AP scheme has collapsed.

Recently CAA held an AP workshop

meeting attended by AOPA and other parties

in which it was proposed that an AP panel will

be established to appoint APs and delineate

Derek at work on the RV-8 in his front yard.

August 2019 | www.sayer.com

their functions. The concept is that this will

be a fair and consultative committee much

along the lines of CARCom. It was pointed

out that some APs were now inspecting and

signing out as many as six aircraft a day,

making a tidy prot.

Although the idea seems positive, AOPA

has misgivings that it will devolve into the

same farce that CARCom has become,

where interested and affected parties are

forcibly excluded from such consultations

and rules are applied and regulations

promulgated despite the committee’s

recommendations. For example, CARCom

chairperson Mmanare Mamabolo last year

openly stated that proposed regulations

regarding unlicensed airelds would be

recommended for promulgation by the

Minister despite unanimous opposition from

adversely affected parties. She further

went on to say that “the Minister will sign

everything we send to him”.

With this arrogance and the dubious

structure of such a panel, we fear things

could go the same way for the APs.

IMPLEMENTATION OF

REGUL ATIONS

On another note, many of you

may have heard of some of the

bizarre requirements CAA is now

enforcing regarding aviation medicals.

Many pilots with marginal hearing, monocular

vision, missing limbs and other disabilities,

who have been safely ying on existing

protocols, are now being required to submit

(at great expense) to specialist procedures to

prove the cause of their particular disability.

The fact that pilots are able to pass ight

tests which show that their disabilities do not

affect their ying abilities is unacceptable to

CAA’s medical department. CAA medics

are insisting on hugely expensive tests. For

example, a 200-hour commercial pilot who

has never own anything more complex than

a Cessna 182 would be required by CAA to

perform a hearing test in Comair’s Boeing

737 simulator, overseen by a CAA doctor

(who has no ying experience), at a cost of

around R15 000.

In a terrifyingly totalitarian move, CAA

has now threatened designated aviation

medical examiners (DAMEs) that should

they deign to speak out against these

oppressive measures or disparage any

other DAME, they will be relieved of their

DAME accreditation.

Another area where CAA is out of touch

with reality is where it is requiring freelance

commercial pilots to do their renewals on

actual aircraft, even though simulators are

available and have always been permitted.

For example, it is unacceptable for a King

Air pilot to do a renewal on a simulator

unless it is a ‘full movement’ simulator. This

is causing consternation among operators

of such aircraft, since pilots are unable to

maintain currency and are dropping out of

the local industry.

AOPA’S FUNCTION

AOPA South Africa is an independent

association of aircraft owners and pilots

whose purpose is to promote and protect

general aviation in South Africa. As

such, AOPA provides a protective buffer

between vulnerable aviation enthusiasts

and professionals against an often bullying

CAA and also regularly takes steps to set

aside decisions or regulations which are

detrimental to your legitimate pursuits.

Join AOPA today to obtain such

protection. Enquiries to chris@aopa.co.za

Airborne.

Joyous arm waving after a successful maiden ight.

Pre-rst-ight

hugs from son

Nigel and Wife

Maureen.