Privateer Amphibian’s Part 23 Regulatory Maze-WHAT’S UP???

Privateer Amphibian’s READY for FAA certification
Share this article: FacebooktwitterlinkedinFacebooktwitterlinkedin

Congress mandated that FAA make Small Aircraft Certification less burdensome

 Privateer Amphibian has had a difficult experience with MIDO

Plane adds safety and has basic design


The  founders of  Privateer Amphibian appear to have fallen prey to exactly the burdensome FAA certification that Congress intended to reform. The above plane is based on the aerodynamics of a proven design[1] and has been engineered to INCREASE the safety of amphibious the aircraft


  • The fuselage is built with carbon fiber composite material to make it lightweight, strong and resistant to corrosion
  • The aircraft has a wet wing design and has a low wing configuration to reduce drag.
  • A counterweight in the airfoil for elevators and ailerons to neutralize flutter and has two sponsors and twin tails.
  • A closed propeller design mounted on the rear which increases efficiency and thrust for takeoff and sailing.
  • The shroud blades will also make the turbine quiet by dampening the acoustic profile.
  • The aircraft is equipped with a retractable three-wheel landing gear, which allows conventional landing and taxi on the runway.
  • The maximum takeoff distance at maximum weight is 1,200 ft above water and 960 ft on land.
  • The cockpit is equipped with an instrument and radio panel supplied by Garmin. It has controls with an electro-mechanical design and triple redundant.

Congress in 2013 enacted the Small Airplane Revitalization Act of 2013. The bill’s findings could not have been clearer (see also the Bill’s fact sheet):

the establishment of a regulatory regime for small airplanes that will improve safety and reduce the regulatory cost burden for the Federal Aviation Administration and the aviation industry.

It took the FAA 3 years to issue the final Part 23. The FAA office responsible for certification (AIR-1) felt it necessary to establish a new strategic statement and a bold revision of its organization—a Aircraft Certification Process and Review ARC Section 312 Implementation Plan January 2015 (

AIR Strategic Plan


A very long story shortened here, airworthiness would no longer be determined using a checklist. Now, the FAA staff would collaborate  to set engineering performance standards relevant to the untested aspects of the proposed new aircraft design. The field was used to the prescriptive criteria and may not have had the technical background for the creation of individuated airworthiness criteria.


Mr. Meekins’ account of his work with the FAA Manufacturing District Office may reflect his subjective view of that experience. Entrepreneurs have had difficulties dealing with staff whose tolerance for risk is institutionally low. But as his story evolves, it seems that Congress’ intentions to lessen the regulatory maze of small aircraft certification did not reach the Orlando office.  

Part 23 maze







Privateer Amphibian Provides Update

Futuristic Seaplane Reportedly Faces Bureaucratic Ambivalence, Difficulty

Privateer amphibian

The Privateer Amphibian, a clean-sheet design made to improve amphibious aircraft for enhanced safety on and off the water, has seen delays in its flight testing program owing to a number of bureaucratic requirements and agency decisions that have led to an exasperated crew and increasing costs of compliance for the fledgling company. 

John MeekinsThe Amphibian came into being by entrepreneur and inventor John Meekins’ quest to purchase a modern seaplane for his waterfront property. After test flying several aircraft, he found each to have some measure of compromise in safety or performance unsuited to the modern era. Many seaplanes are little more than a standard aircraft with large floats attached in place of their traditional landing gear, the market for purpose-built “flying boats” long gone from the aviation industry. Meekins saw a niche unserved by current offerings, embarking on the Amphibian with retired Boeing Configuration and Structures engineer Bill Husa to design a suitable prototype.

The Amphibian boasts a low center of gravity, vital for operation in wavy, unstable waters to prevent flipping in adverse conditions.Privateer model


The hull layout is sleek and steerable, designed to stabilize the plane during its takeoff and landing roll, while its encased engines and smooth undercarriage were found to be so stable the test plane could land on snow or grass with the gear up. The design is promising, bringing together a series of domestic producers and firms to create the test aircraft in 2018. Throughout 2020 and beyond, however, Privateer has faced considerable trouble in their dealings with the local FAA Orlando Office. 

Meekins briefed investors in a short memo, detailing the delays experienced in the aircraft’s testing regimen. Beginning after their Airworthiness Certificate was granted in 2018, they conducted 20+ successful test flights and racked up 27 hours in the air. As the cert reached expiration in 2019, the FAA notified the company that it was granted in the wrong category and demanded the company start the process from scratch in order to receive another temporary one. The company complied, and began working with the Manufacturing Inspection District Office, only to be told they would require Privateer to make an Aircraft Inspection Program (AIP) for their prototype. “We felt this to be an onerous requirement simply because this aircraft is a one-of-a-kind proof of concept prototype that is in reality still being developed. We subsequently contracted, at considerable expense, with a company that specializes in composing FAA approved manuals,” said Meekins.

Privateer in front of hangarThat issue saw the company through 2019, when the travails of 2020 began writ large, and the FAA’s mechanisms appeared to grind to a halt. Privateer followed the requirements, noting the futility of creating a large body of manuals and procedures for an aircraft that will likely change by the week as it is developed. “We have been required to detail and document every minute detail of this aircraft and create a maintenance program for many years in the future, although this aircraft has a very limited lifespan and will have many differences in its final form. These overly burdensome requirements have cost us a great deal of time and money, yet we have attempted to comply,” Meekins said. Now, the company is asking for input from its supporters on where to turn next, pondering whether the process would be better done by a larger or more experienced flight test specialist.

Meekins is looking for solutions, saying in closing:We still  hold out hope that we can prevail but also have come to the realization that we may need to look elsewhere for assistance in completing our flight test program to prove the viability of this revolutionary aircraft.” 

[1] The new amphibian design envisioned by John Meekins and refined and engineered by the late Bill Husa bears more than a passing resemblance to the North American F-82 Twin Mustang

North American F-82 Twin Mustang.





FAA Orlando MIDO



Share this article: FacebooktwitterlinkedinFacebooktwitterlinkedin

2 Comments on "Privateer Amphibian’s Part 23 Regulatory Maze-WHAT’S UP???"

  1. Look at the qualifying of the Orlando MIDO staff; education and experience. Consider who has been involved in a certification program like Boeing, Douglas, Cessna, Beach, or Bell. You will find their back ground curiously lacking. To enter into a certification program with no knowledge, skill, or ability leaves the only alternative, NO!

  2. Seems like requirements for a experimental ticket and 91.409 have been around for a couple of decades. Surely when they fly the airplane being an experimental, first of type they do some sort of post flight inspection as well as regular (100 hour type checks). Seems like one would just document that approach submit to the FAA MIDO/FSDO for acceptance and proceed.

Leave a comment