Also, think about things which you can’t see. Think of an externally restored aircraft under contract to a large museum.
The company WILL put out a quality product at the end of the restoration – a fine example of a rare type, 100% authentic, etc. There is no doubt that the restorers are of suitable quality. The main difference between a static restoration and a flyable one is the certificate of conformity of all the parts.
Companies such as LAS provide the industry with consumables complete with CofC. They charge industry rates, BUT each rivet that they supply can be traced back to manufacturer.
I could supply a box of rivets which would be the exact same item, but without the CofC at 1/3 the price.
For the CAA to issue a permit for flight, each part used must have tracability to the manufacturer.
If I had a restoration company speciallising in STATIC restorations, I would have no problems using the non-CofC consumables to keep costs down. If that aircraft was to fly again, all of the non original parts would have to be individually inspected and probably replaced with airworthy, tracable items, to the original drawings with the consent of the design authority.
In short, no matter how pristine a static aircraft looks, it will still have to be stripped to the bare bones before being allowed to fly.
Sign In
