FAA

Thanks Jim and Judy.

I was aware that FARs (you win Todd) could be incorporated into
authorization letters by reference. I was not aware that
the FAA was more stringent these days, although it does not surprise me.

Incidentally, lest anyone think that I don't support safety issues that are
usually well stated here, I must add that I do.
My purpose with this thread was to define the limits of regulation and the
beginning of common sense.
I don't think that anyone should ever lose their life in a glider and I
support any efforts to reduce the possibility.

As a long time power pilot and a not-so-long-time glider pilot, I enjoy the
byplay on this forum and hope it continues.
We can always learn something new.

Thanks again.

Allan


"Judy Ruprecht" wrote in message
...
At 04:06 20 August 2003, Adp wrote:
Judy, I've already said my mea culpas.

Yes, I saw that, Allan - thanks! (I only wish I'd come
up with the AC 21.17-2 cite before Todd. Ain't he clever?)

Please tell me how 14 CFR 91.205, which requires a
standard airworthiness certificate, can apply to experimental
aircraft.

Well, 91.319(a)-(d) outline basic operating limitations
for aircraft issued Experimental airworthiness certificates
and 91.319(e) provides for unspecified 'additional
limitations.' As Jim Phoenix mentioned, the aircraft
was issued its airworthiness certificate when FAA policy/procedure
guidance encouraged inspectors to include 'Instruments
and equipment listed in FAR 91.205' in the Operating
Limitations for individual aircraft. Many (most?) inspectors
also slapped on a 'Day VFR Only' limitation, although
at present, 91.319(d)(2) allows some leeway.

In reality, the VFR instrumentation/equipment listed
in 91.205(b) isn't a very demanding. Given a gear handle
with 'up' and 'down' placards as standard equipment,
the only extraneous item (compared to my POH) is the
compass.

It seems to me, though, that irrespective of how any
glider may end up subject to 91.205(c) and/or (d) -
for night flying and IFR, respectively - these are
far more stringent requirements than many/most gliders'
POH contemplate.

Finally on the topic of Experimental gliders, there
used to be some wide variances in the limitations issued
by various FSDO offices, particularly in terms of the
'proficiency areas' within which the aircraft are permitted
to operate. Thanks to Jim Short's determined efforts,
this important certification issue has steadily improved
in the last 10 years. Jim's 2002 piece 'Glider Importing
and Sample Program Letter,' posted on the Government
News section of SSA's website, is - or should be -
required reading for current and prospective owners
of Experimental gliders!

Judy