At 01:39 27 March 2019, Bob Kuykendall wrote:
On Tuesday, March 26, 2019 at 1:15:04 PM UTC-7, Michael Opitz
wrote:

...but it is a single seater, and I don't use it for=20
commercial or ride purposes, so the Experimental ticket
doesn't=20
really hinder me at all except for writing the annual program
letter.

Just so.=20

But for a ~$150k two-seater that operators expect to pay its own
way with
i=
ncome from commercial operations such as rides and instruction, I
figure
th=
at this is kind of a big deal. The interest/opportunity cost on the
financi=
ng alone burns the better part of a thousand dollars each month,
and the
le=
nders probably want hull coverage as well.

--Bob K.



Absolutely - no question about it. But, if it's a question of it being
a paperweight or flying, (even if not able to produce commercial
revenue) then this might be a way to get it into the air for now.
I know that there are some clubs that don't charge for member
instruction, and are using Experimental licensed two-seaters for
that purpose. As long as the TCDS is written to grandfather those
serial numbers in, then this could be a way to get it airborne for
now. I would also agree with the advice to perform all maintenance,
etc IAW STD airworthiness certificate specs, so that it will be easy
to change over to the STD certificate when it becomes available.

This type of process has been used by the major glider
manufacturers for years. How else do you think that they can roll
the first few of a new type off the line and have them flying in a
WGC a few weeks later?

Before my D-2b, I had one of the first DG-300's and also one of the
first ASW-24's, and a Discus-B, all of which were too early for the
JAR 22 process to have made it's way across the Atlantic yet, so
they were also licensed as Experimental for the same reason.

RO