Converting a USA C of A from Standard to Experimental

On Dec 5, 11:16*am, Steve Leonard wrote:
On Dec 5, 7:34*am, JJ Sinclair wrote:



Ahhhhh................. reg-mongers arise..................it must be
wintertime in the US!
Merry Christmas,
JJ

Not a reg-monger, JJ. *Just one who has to live with them day in and
day out. *And just like I said, "You get exactly what you paid for
with anything you read on RAS." I discovered just after hitting "Send"
that I was in fact looking at 8130.2G. *8130.2F is still in effect
until April of 2011.

But, it is wintertime here in the US, that is for sure!

Steve Leonard

You are right about the effectivity.

The current version appears to be 8130.2F change 5

8130.2G includes the following:

104. Cancellation. FAA Order 8130.2F, Airworthiness Certification of
Aircraft and Related
Products, dated November 5, 2004, is cancelled upon the effective date
of this order.
105. Effective Date. This order is effective April 16, 2011.

Among the many changes are

b. Incorporates changes to chapter 4, section 10, Certification and
Operation of Aircraft
Under the Experimental Purpose(s) of Exhibition and Air Racing.
c. Incorporates numerous changes originating from input through the
directive feedback
system. Areas affected are throughout this order and include light-
sport aircraft (LSA).

It looks to me as thought the changes are in our favor. A major
change seems to be the group definitions and gliders are no longer
lumped in with aerobatic powered aircraft.

Group 1 used to include a requirement for a 300nm radius proficiency
area. It seems it will not when the new order comes into effect.

Got to keep the FDSO guys away until April then if there any issues
come up get new operating limitations based of rev G!

To the original poster. If you decide to go experimental - wait until
April 16 next year!

Andy

On Dec 2, 10:57*pm, RAS56 wrote:

4. Who do I talk to at the FAA to accomplish this and what's needed in
the way of paperwork?

5. Anything else to make me smarter on this topic?
Well, there's the new rule, effective on April 16, 2011, at
http://www.faa.gov/regulations_polic...umentID/324850
and the old rule, at
http://www.faa.gov/regulations_polic...cumentID/14171

On Dec 6, 5:04*am, danlj wrote:
On Dec 2, 10:57*pm, RAS56 wrote:

4. Who do I talk to at the FAA to accomplish this and what's needed in
the way of paperwork?

5. Anything else to make me smarter on this topic?

Well, there's the new rule, effective on April 16, 2011, athttp://www.faa..gov/regulations_policies/orders_notices/index.cfm/go/d...
and the old rule, athttp://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/orders_notices/index.cfm/go/d...


One more question regarding a conversion like this. What might it do
to the resale value of the glider? Any input would be appreciated.

Paul G

On 12/6/2010 9:40 AM, gliderman wrote:
On Dec 6, 5:04 am, wrote:
On Dec 2, 10:57 pm, wrote:

4. Who do I talk to at the FAA to accomplish this and what's needed in
the way of paperwork?

5. Anything else to make me smarter on this topic?

Well, there's the new rule, effective on April 16, 2011, athttp://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/orders_notices/index.cfm/go/d...
and the old rule, athttp://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/orders_notices/index.cfm/go/d...


One more question regarding a conversion like this. What might it do
to the resale value of the glider? Any input would be appreciated.

Paul G

Replies to this question should be interesting! Here's one...

Assuming that whatever a person does to the ship's hardware once it's
converted to the Experimental category is 'essentially trivial' (as in,
doesn't tinker with primary structure), a reasonable answer is 'very little.'
For examples you can go as far back as Wil Schuemann's Diamant and
'Schuemannized Libelle' from the early 1970's. More recent examples would be
(eventually) ATC-ed German ships imported prior to obtaining reciprocal U.S.
licensing.

That noted, conversion likely *will* reduce the potential pool of buyers,
since there seems (to me, anyway) to be a proportion of U.S. pilots who simply
*never* will consider purchasing an experimentally licensed glider.

Regards,
Bob - never owned a non-experimental, post-1-26 sailplane - W.

another consideration is how restrictive the experimental operating
limitations are.

many experimental - racing/exhibition operating limitaitons from "back
in the day" are quite unrestrictive and literally worth their weight
in unobtanium.

however if you take your Ka6 or otherwise semi-common type certified
glider and put it into the experimental - racing/exhibition category
in the modern era it will have restrictions that involve faxing FSDO's
annual letters and getting special permission to operate more than X
miles from home. These in and of itself aren't too tough to deal with
but as a buyer why would I want the hassle when there are plenty of
other non-restricted gliders out there available to buy?

I own 3 experimental - amatuer builts which I thoroughly enjoy.
However the restrictions on them are no where near as restrictive as
experimental - racing/exhibition.

Just a reminder that Operating Limitations are a NEGOTIATED document
with the FSDO.

You do not have to accept their first draft suggestion.

Also be sure to get Experimental Exhibition/Racing as it allows more
freedom than one or the other alone.

With my OP Lims the FSDO and I negotiated the REMOVAL of the Program
letter requirement
added Aerobatics as specified in the POH and my area of operation
expanded to "Not densely Populated areas" except for
landing/takeoff (Marked in yellow on Sectionals).

Just for the record my FSDO was very receptive to any suggestions that
made sense or proved to be a common practice.

They even did the inspection saving me the cost of a DAR.

It was easy and quick (1 month) to get it all done and I was
pleasantly surprised after hearing other horror stories in dealing
with the FAA.

On Dec 6, 9:45*am, Tony wrote:
another consideration is how restrictive the experimental operating
limitations are.

many experimental - racing/exhibition operating limitaitons from "back
in the day" are quite unrestrictive and literally worth their weight
in unobtanium.

however if you take your Ka6 or otherwise semi-common type certified
glider and put it into the experimental - racing/exhibition category
in the modern era it will have restrictions that involve faxing FSDO's
annual letters and getting special permission to operate more than X
miles from home. *These in and of itself aren't too tough to deal with
but as a buyer why would I want the hassle when there are plenty of
other non-restricted gliders out there available to buy?

I own 3 experimental - amatuer builts which I thoroughly enjoy.
However the restrictions on them are no where near as restrictive as
experimental - racing/exhibition.

And to the question of limiting the pool of potential buyers..
Any buyer.. if he does his research and wants your experimental glider
will buy it.

However, if he does his research, he will find that he may have to
reaccomplish the CofA with updated Operating Limitations when he moves
the glider to a new location. Unless he is already on your airport.

We had some club members that bought a glider in KY and moved it west.
Then they found the Operating Limitations were written for the glider
being based in Penn. The entire time the glider was in KY, that owner
had not updated the Cof A or the Ops Limits, nor had he faxed in an
annual Program Letter as required. The entire time the glider was in
KY. It was flying illegally without a valid CofA.. and the A&P signing
off the "condition inspections" did not catch it.

They moved it west, had to reaccomplish the Cof A inspections and
Operating Limitations at an additional cost of about $500 to the DAR
and was issued a new CofA. Yes, the FSDO can process the Operations
Limitations and CofA, if they are used to dealing with gliders and
understand what they are doing. If not.. you can hand walk them
through it, with a little pain and frustration.

If the purchaser does his research and knows.. then it is not an
issue. He knows what he is up against.

Personally, an older experimental glider with the less restrictive
Operating Limitations are worth they weight in Gold. So are gliders
with Standard Certificates that do not have "Operating Limitations",
such as some of the newer 304CZ models.

Yes, an A&P can sign off the experimental "annual condition
inspection". An IA is required for a standard CofA.

T

On 12-7-2010 03:56, T wrote:


Yes, an A&P can sign off the experimental "annual condition
inspection". An IA is required for a standard CofA.

T

Is there a huge cost difference between an A&P doing the inspection
versus an IA doing it?

On Dec 7, 5:06*am, Scott wrote:

Is there a huge cost difference between an A&P doing the inspection
versus an IA doing it?

The issue is most likely to be availability. Not all A&P have an
Inspection Authorization but all with IA must be either Airframe or
Powerplant rated or both. You only need one with Airframe approval
for an experimental (exhibition and/or racing) sailplane condition
inspection if it is not self launch or sustainer equipped.

If you have lots of people available with an Airframe rating the
chances of finding one with a good price are better. I have use the
same person to inspect my ASW-28 since 2004. In 2004 he was only
airframe approved. Over the years he added Powerplant and then
Inspection Authorization. His prices have increased but I don't think
that was due to his increased qualifications. The advantage to me of
his increased ratings is that he now also inspects by airplane.

Andy

I own 3 experimental - amatuer builts which I thoroughly enjoy.
However the restrictions on them are no where near as restrictive as
experimental - racing/exhibition.

So I wonder if I "substantially modify" a certified glider (such as
adding winglets or Schuemannizing,) might I be able to successfully
argue that it belongs in the amatuer built category?

Paul G