I wonder what the insurance companies think.
In my experience, I've found their opinion of whether
a particular type of flight is covered to be far more
important
than anything the FAA comes up with.

If I had an accident, by far my biggest concern isn't
whether I'm legal, but whether I am insured.

To give you an idea of the impact of insurance,
a friend is selling a Lancair IVP (pressurized
piston driven 360hp mach .5 single) for
less than what a 20 year old A36 Bonanza
sells for. The difference: the experimental IVP is
almost totally uninsurable...

Look at Cessna 310 price/perfomance vs. insurability
and you come to the same conclusion.

At 17:00 12 May 2005, Andy wrote:
Todd, I think we are all in agreement that a motor
glider is a powered
aircraft. The area that needs to be interpreted is
whether a pilot
with a glider rating (there is no FAA motor glider
rating) has a rating
for a powered aircraft. If that pilot does, then do
all glider pilots
have a rating for powered aircraft? If not, then is
the authorization
by grandfathering or endorsement to be considered a
rating. (I am
qualified to fly tail wheel airplanes but I don't have
a tail wheel
rating because there isn't one.) I hope Greg will post
the answer is he
ever gets one.

To answer 5Z - I don't think there is any doubt that
an airship is a
powered aircraft so yes, a pilot with glider and an
airship ratings
would meet the letter of 61.69.

Andy


Mark J. Boyd