Randy, a CFI from Kansas, asks: Is it true that if an airplane is completely destroyed, except for the data plate, that you can completely rebuild it, and it’s the “same” airplane?
So once upon a time I bought an aircraft engine that had “all logs since new.” Three dog-eared engine logbooks documented the nearly seven decades of the engine’s life since the early 1950s in faded cursive, blocky print, and printed labels, as various mechanics over the years documented their interactions with the powerplant. It was a fascinating life story.
It started off with routine stuff. Oil changes, compression checks, and such. There’s a top overhaul, then, in December 1958, parts started being replaced — in that case, all the engine bearings and the right-hand exhaust. In January 1960 the first of several fuel pumps was replaced. In August 1963, a month before I was born, the starter was replaced. In December 1973 all four exhaust valves were replaced.
In July 1978 the #2 cylinder was too worn out to overhaul and was replaced. In June of 1982 the left exhaust was replaced. In August 1990 the #4 cylinder… and on it went, later the #1 and #3 cylinders. The camshaft was retired and replaced with a serviceable one. The oil pump, too. The cam gears — which had worn and chipped teeth — were next, followed by the connecting rods, then the crankshaft itself.
At this point in my review of the logs, I’m thinking: Wow, there’s not that much of the original engine left!
And then, turning the page, I came to the February 2009 entry, which states, “crankcase unserviceable, replaced with DivCo overhauled case.”
At that point I realized that there was absolutely nothing left of the original engine. Except the data plate.
And yet, legally, it was still the “same” engine. So by that logic, you would think you could do the same with an entire airplane.
And there are certainly cases of rare warbirds being dug out of fields, pulled up from the bottom of lakes, rescued from swamps, and fully restored to flying condition, some using a paltry percentage of the original parts, which apparently is called a “data-plate restoration” in the biz.
In fact, a while back someone on eBay listed a Hurricane data plate for $7,500. Yes you read that right. More than seven-K for a flimsy little piece of metal. The ad copy read, “Restoring a World War II Hurricane? This data plate is just what you need to legitimize your restoration.”
It sold, but the listing only shows “best offer accepted,” so I don’t know for how much.
But does a data plate really “legitimize” a restoration?
And even if it did, is it… you know… ethical?
Well, to both questions, if you like food fights, I invite you to visit the online warbird discussion boards, where there’s quite a bit of debate about this issue — a level of debate that’s hotter than the combat that downed the wrecked warbirds in the first place!
Some folks say this is legit, but not right. Others say that it’s ethical, but illegal. Still others say that it’s both legal and ethical, while some maintain that it’s both illegal and unethical. And most of these folks are well-respected experts in the community, not just a bunch of hangar trolls with nothing better to do than snipe at each other online.
But not so fast, surely the FAA must have something to say about this, right?
Well, it took some digging, but in the somewhat obscure Order 8100.19, a National Policy document from 2018, the FAA gives guidance on destroyed and scrapped aircraft.
If you work your way through the 19-page document, you’ll learn that the FAA does not consider an aircraft to be repairable if all primary structures of the aircraft must be replaced. The Feds would regard this as a “replacement” aircraft, not a repaired/restored aircraft.
And while they are open to replacement of some major components of an aircraft, they flat out say that if “only the aircraft identification plate is reusable,” then the airplane is considered “destroyed” and not eligible for repair.
The concern? A data plate certifies that the airplane conforms to the type certificate, but if nothing of the original airplane exists, that’s pretty hard to do.
That, plus the fact that 14 CFR § 45.13 (e) bans moving a data plate from one plane to another, which is sorta what you’d be doing if you build a whole new airplane under the data plate.
All of that said, if you were trying to recreate some super-rare aircraft — for which no example existed in the world, but you had a data plate — would the FAA let you do it?
Probably. But don’t pull a Red Bull-style plane swap. Get them on board from Day One, and if they say no, don’t just go out and do it.
Instead, keep asking until they get tired of you and say “yes.”
Interesting topic. In general, and with some subsequent limitations by mandate, aircraft may be repaired indefinitely. Spar to tailwheel, all can be replaced.
Warbirds frequently replace wings, fuselage, and flight controls throughout their active lifespans making original identification difficult, if not impossible
Attachment of serial number plates to major structures has been the tradition for many airplanes, including warplanes, but it’s not an airworthiness issue if one elevator does not match the other by serial number. The configuration and conformance to Type Certification is what does.
Anyway, engine overhaul people have been rebuilding air-cooled engines around data plates for decades. There is no limit to the number of parts found replaceable and no rule that says what must remain original.
Trading or selling data plates is not encouraged and is only found in some accessory overhauls stations where “core” components are assembled from junk parts to be sold on the open market or rebuilt for commercial sale.
For all the good effort intended by 8100.19, the FAA knows policy you cannot verify or enforce is empty but they need something when the inevitable egregious example of “mixed bag” airplanes are presented for an Airworthiness Certificate.
This argument/disagreement, is going on big time in the antique and classic car field. You can fine fire walls from Camaro’s with the only thing left is the Vin plate. Companys make replacement body parts and enough to build a fresh or “new” car.
I taught Hot Air Ballooning for Balloon Excelsior in California for several years. Brent the owner was also a Balloon Repair Station. He built many “New” Balloons using only the Data Plate.
Did not find a direct answer but found this at the start of an order
1. Purpose of This Order. This order establishes policy, delegates authority, and assigns responsibility to ensure each organization complies with agency policy on directives.
2. Audience. All Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) employees and managers who approve or write policy.
My take is an order is an official way to do things as prescribed by the FAA deity. My view from the end of the bar.
Just curious……… you quote an FAA ORDER………. as a Certified pilot / airman…… I would not know what an FAA order is………… I state this because if I am to be cited by the FAA it will be a FAR or FARs that they will present in their documentation…….
Are not FAA Orders internal communications from the FAA to their employees? Kind of like Advisory Circulars…… Advisory in nature, nonregulatory….
So if you do not mind and have the time would you expound on what the heck an FAA Order is and what legal basis it has to certified airmen…???
Thanks
Sure thing, W. According to the FAA’s Guidance page “FAA orders and notices are issued by the FAA as guidance material for FAA personnel. While FAA personnel are the primary audience for orders/notices, the aviation industry may use orders/notices as reference and the general public may find particular orders/notices of interest. ” So it’s the FAA’s way of telling the staff how the rules should be enforced, etc. I think it is safe to think of them sorta like internal letters of interpretation, rather than like internal ACs. So you are correct that you wouldn’t be cited for violation of an order, but an order might tell an inspector how to view a reg. Does that make sense?
Thanks Bill PS Do you use the american or french pronunciation for your family name, an inquiring mind 😉