Buying a Glider

Not true, mine is standard ser no 27031 early 27.

It seems, and I am certainly not an expert, that a particular glider being experimental or standard has to do more with the first owner's "preference" when first imported. Or maybe how the local FSDO handles things (or how much they know/care about gliders).

I once owned a DG-101G which was standard. A sister ship on my gliderport a few serial numbers away was experimental. I looked up all the DG-100/101's on the FAA web site and there was zero rhyme or reason on whether they were standard or experimental.

Within the glider community, unlike GA it would seem, there appears to be no prejudice for or against standard versus experimental. Very, very, very few gliders were hand-build by individuals which to many in the non-glider aviation realm is the definition of "experimental".

I will leave it to others to explain their feelings on the pros/cons of standard versus experimental.

John OHM Ω

There a many misunderstandings about expimentals. I'm not the expert either, but I am often amazed by the owners that think they can legally experiment with changes to an experimental glider.

An experimental glider has to be maintained per its operating limitations instructions, which usually says per manufacturers instructions.

Experimental homebuilt is a different animal than experimental aircraft that are manufactured.

I have a PIK 20 with an experimental certificated, and I do an annual for the owner of a standard certificated PIK 20.
As mentioned before, I depends on how it was certified when imported.

On Sunday, May 5, 2019 at 10:19:22 AM UTC-4, wrote:
There a many misunderstandings about expimentals. I'm not the expert either, but I am often amazed by the owners that think they can legally experiment with changes to an experimental glider.

An experimental glider has to be maintained per its operating limitations instructions, which usually says per manufacturers instructions.

Experimental homebuilt is a different animal than experimental aircraft that are manufactured.

I have a PIK 20 with an experimental certificated, and I do an annual for the owner of a standard certificated PIK 20.
As mentioned before, I depends on how it was certified when imported.

If one is intending to do modifications it is much easier to do in the experimental category. Such changes likely require moving the ship back to Phase 1 flight test until test requirements are flown off, then returning to phase 2 flight ops.
I have moved ships to experimental from standard for this purpose and then left in experimental.
UH

On Sunday, May 5, 2019 at 7:19:22 AM UTC-7, wrote:

...I am often amazed by the owners that think they can legally experiment with changes to an experimental glider...

To expand slightly on this:

It depends entirely on what sort of "experimental" we're talking about, and the operating limitations attached to the airworthiness certificate for the specific glider in question.

First off are experimental amateur-built sailplanes such as the ones I promote, make kits for, and train people to fabricate and assemble. For these, experimentation is definitely baked into the boilerplate text of the operating limitations issued by FAA and designated inspectors. Anybody can legally work on them, and major repairs, modifications, and alterations are relatively straightforward.

As for experimental, exhibition and experimental, racing, the operating limitations are much less uniform than for amateur-built, and much more subject to the discretion of the inspector and context of the issuance. And they are definitely negotiable. For some they say that the aircraft must be maintained per the manufacturer's instructions. But for some others this proviso is omitted, or has actually been removed in an amended re-issuance of the operating limitations.

Thanks, Bob K.

"Within the glider community, unlike GA it would seem, there appears to be no prejudice for or against standard versus experimental"

One prejudice could be that an experimental glider should not be used by commercial operators or club training/casual use.

On Sunday, May 5, 2019 at 7:23:36 AM UTC-7, wrote:

One prejudice could be that an experimental glider should not be used by commercial operators...

That's not prejudice, that's the law spelled out in 14CFR. Aircraft without standard airworthiness certificates can be used for commercial operations only under certain narrowly-defined circumstances.

...or club training/casual use.

That's a bit murkier. Depending on the structure of the club, it may be possible to make experimental aircraft available for club member use. But it's usually not worth the trouble.

--Bob K.

"That's not prejudice,"
Yep, poor choice of word. I was tired that night.

Not to pick nits but most DARs will include in a ship's operating limitations boilerplate that-- with exception of the builder (who receives a repairman's certificate limited to repairs, inspections and mods that specific aircraft only)-- annual condition inspections, repairs or modifications are to be performed by someone holding at least an A&P certificate (standard certificated aircraft require an A&P with Inspection Authorization for annuals and major repairs or mods). The FAA does allow pilot/owners to do some common maintenance items, like lubrication, brake servicing, or tire changes. In case someone else hasn't already pointed it out, the FAR's place responsibility for aircraft airworthiness on the owner, not the maintainer, so keep up with researching service bulletins and airworthiness directives-- your A&P will thank you come annual time.

Larry Ruggiero, pilot/A&P

On Tuesday, May 7, 2019 at 6:37:00 PM UTC-7, Larry Ruggiero wrote:
Not to pick nits but most DARs will include in a ship's operating limitations boilerplate that-- with exception of the builder (who receives a repairman's certificate limited to repairs, inspections and mods that specific aircraft only)-- annual condition inspections, repairs or modifications are to be performed by someone holding at least an A&P certificate (standard certificated aircraft require an A&P with Inspection Authorization for annuals and major repairs or mods)...

For amateur-built experimental aircraft, the annual condition inspection must indeed be signed off by the holder of the Repairman Certificate or by an A&P mechanic. But the official FAA guidance for inspectors and DARs is to issue operating limitations with no restrictions on who can do maintenance, modifications, or repairs. Anybody can work on an amateur-built experimental.

The only unique privilege conferred by the Repairman Certificate is the dubious privilege of signing off on the condition inspection. And I say dubious because I think it is better to bring in an impartial (or at least less partial) set of eyes to inspect work in which you have an emotional investment that might cloud your judgement.

--Bob K, EAA Technical Counselor