If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Weird Experimental Certificate wording - Normal?
I have an ASW-17 and the aircraft is registered under
an experimental certificate and has special operating limitations. They read, in part, 'All flights shall be conducted within the geographic area described as follows: Within 300 mile radius of a sanctioned glider meet or contest. Profficiency flights may be conducted in the vicinity of fly-ins or airshows.' Is this common for Experimental Certificates for our sailplanes? Thanks, Noel |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Noel Luneau wrote: I have an ASW-17 and the aircraft is registered under an experimental certificate and has special operating limitations. They read, in part, 'All flights shall be conducted within the geographic area described as follows: Within 300 mile radius of a sanctioned glider meet or contest. Profficiency flights may be conducted in the vicinity of fly-ins or airshows.' Is this common for Experimental Certificates for our sailplanes? Thanks, Noel |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
I own a Russia and that is the wording that my certificate has. I send
a letter to FSDO each spring listing where I plan on flying outside of that 300 mile limit. Easy to do when I can fax the letter. Larry Johnson Noel Luneau wrote: I have an ASW-17 and the aircraft is registered under an experimental certificate and has special operating limitations. They read, in part, 'All flights shall be conducted within the geographic area described as follows: Within 300 mile radius of a sanctioned glider meet or contest. Profficiency flights may be conducted in the vicinity of fly-ins or airshows.' Is this common for Experimental Certificates for our sailplanes? Thanks, Noel |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
The current FAA Order 8130.2F has the following boilerplate for ops
limitations issued to gliders under experimental, exhibition and racing: 8130.2F 11/5/2004 Page 178 (34) All proficiency/practice flights must be conducted within the geographical area described in the applicant's program letter and any modifications to that letter, but that area will not be more than 300 nautical miles from the aircraft's home base airport. Proficiency flights are limited to a nonstop flight that begins and ends at the aircraft's home base airport. An alternate airport selection is not permitted for this aircraft. However, an exception is permitted for proficiency flying outside of the area stated above for organized formation flying, training, or pilot checkout in conjunction with a specific event listed in the applicant's program letter (or amendments). The program letter should indicate the location and dates for this proficiency flying. (Applicability: Group IV) (35) Proficiency flights are authorized without geographical restrictions when conducted in preparation for participation in sanctioned meets and pursuant to qualify for Federal Aeronautique International (FAI) or Soaring Society of America (SSA) awards. These flights may only take place as defined in the applicant's program letter, and prior to the specific FAI or SSA event. The pilot in command must submit a description of the intended route and/or geographical area intended to be flown to the local FSDO. (Applicability: Group I, gliders only) So, it looks like your Ops Limitations were kind of messed up a bit, or were issued a while back. See your local FSDO for corrected or updated limitations. You can access the 8130.2F online by going to faa.gov and searching for 8130.2F or search for Orders. Jim Noel Luneau wrote: I have an ASW-17 and the aircraft is registered under an experimental certificate and has special operating limitations. They read, in part, 'All flights shall be conducted within the geographic area described as follows: Within 300 mile radius of a sanctioned glider meet or contest. Profficiency flights may be conducted in the vicinity of fly-ins or airshows.' Is this common for Experimental Certificates for our sailplanes? Thanks, Noel |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Sure would be nice if the SSA could lobby the FAA to eliminate the
requirement for program letters for gliders that are factory built, if not all experimental gliders. Enlighten me please, what's the point beyond "it's just the rule, dumb..." or "it's always been this way" or etc. Seems like it would save the FAA some $$ in not having to deal with the letters coming in and we'd not have to submit them. Why do they care where we might go fly? Besides all that, there is no enforcement for all practical purposes. Mark Noel Luneau wrote: I have an ASW-17 and the aircraft is registered under an experimental certificate and has special operating limitations. They read, in part, 'All flights shall be conducted within the geographic area described as follows: Within 300 mile radius of a sanctioned glider meet or contest. Profficiency flights may be conducted in the vicinity of fly-ins or airshows.' Is this common for Experimental Certificates for our sailplanes? Thanks, Noel |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
"Mark Zivley" wrote in message om... Sure would be nice if the SSA could lobby the FAA to eliminate the requirement for program letters for gliders that are factory built, if not all experimental gliders. Enlighten me please, what's the point beyond "it's just the rule, dumb..." or "it's always been this way" or etc. The "Experimental" certification that most US gliders have is explicitly, for the purpose of "Exhibition and Racing". Given this fact, it seems reasonable to me that the FAA might ask us to substantiate that this is in fact what we are doing with these aircraft. (Remember, we never go for "pleasure flights" in these aircraft; we are maintaining proficiency for our exhibition and racing activities). Given that the annual program letter takes about five minutes to prepare and send in, I think that we've got the best side in this deal. Please don't rock the boat; if the FAA really wants to cut down on their workload, my fear is that they could eliminate the "Experimental, Exhibition and Racing" category altogether. Those who really object to the program letter can always buy an aircraft with a standard airworthiness certificate. By the way, and someone correct me if I'm wrong, I don't think that homebuilts (Experimental, Amateur Built airworthiness) have a program letter requirement. They do have other restrictions, however. Also, thanks for reminding me to submit my 2005 program letter. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Yes, they do have a program letter. All experimentals do - except for some
"show compliance" experimental certificates. See excerpt from the 8130.2F: 11/5/2004 8130.2F Page 161 153. ISSUANCE OF EXPERIMENTAL AMATEUR-BUILT OPERATING LIMITATIONS. etc., etc. At the FSDO, your Ops Limitations come from a boilerplate generator in the computer. The Inspector simply fills in the variables in the Word template. Any variation from the Order (8130.2F) must be justified and approved through the FSDO and AVR chain of command. A lengthy and perhaps not always successful endeavour I can tell you, unless you have some very good reason for requesting what they call "non-standard language". It has been done. Jim. "Michael McNulty" wrote in message snip By the way, and someone correct me if I'm wrong, I don't think that homebuilts (Experimental, Amateur Built airworthiness) have a program letter requirement. They do have other restrictions, however. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Also, because I did not answer the specific question - the experimental
amateur built do have a program letter requirement in phase 1. (The basis for the program letter is in CFR 21.193) Jim "Michael McNulty" wrote in message news:FanDd.51992$Cl3.43474@fed1read03... "Mark Zivley" wrote in message om... Sure would be nice if the SSA could lobby the FAA to eliminate the requirement for program letters for gliders that are factory built, if not all experimental gliders. Enlighten me please, what's the point beyond "it's just the rule, dumb..." or "it's always been this way" or etc. The "Experimental" certification that most US gliders have is explicitly, for the purpose of "Exhibition and Racing". Given this fact, it seems reasonable to me that the FAA might ask us to substantiate that this is in fact what we are doing with these aircraft. (Remember, we never go for "pleasure flights" in these aircraft; we are maintaining proficiency for our exhibition and racing activities). Given that the annual program letter takes about five minutes to prepare and send in, I think that we've got the best side in this deal. Please don't rock the boat; if the FAA really wants to cut down on their workload, my fear is that they could eliminate the "Experimental, Exhibition and Racing" category altogether. Those who really object to the program letter can always buy an aircraft with a standard airworthiness certificate. By the way, and someone correct me if I'm wrong, I don't think that homebuilts (Experimental, Amateur Built airworthiness) have a program letter requirement. They do have other restrictions, however. Also, thanks for reminding me to submit my 2005 program letter. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Look at what JJ submitted for his program letter. It's great that he's
not tied to anything, but it really doesn't say anything of value. My point is why not eliminate the paperwork. I'm not trying to rock the boat, but what practical information did the FAA get and they could have elminated the hassle of receiving the letter and we'd not have to submit them. Michael McNulty wrote: "Mark Zivley" wrote in message om... Sure would be nice if the SSA could lobby the FAA to eliminate the requirement for program letters for gliders that are factory built, if not all experimental gliders. Enlighten me please, what's the point beyond "it's just the rule, dumb..." or "it's always been this way" or etc. The "Experimental" certification that most US gliders have is explicitly, for the purpose of "Exhibition and Racing". Given this fact, it seems reasonable to me that the FAA might ask us to substantiate that this is in fact what we are doing with these aircraft. (Remember, we never go for "pleasure flights" in these aircraft; we are maintaining proficiency for our exhibition and racing activities). Given that the annual program letter takes about five minutes to prepare and send in, I think that we've got the best side in this deal. Please don't rock the boat; if the FAA really wants to cut down on their workload, my fear is that they could eliminate the "Experimental, Exhibition and Racing" category altogether. Those who really object to the program letter can always buy an aircraft with a standard airworthiness certificate. By the way, and someone correct me if I'm wrong, I don't think that homebuilts (Experimental, Amateur Built airworthiness) have a program letter requirement. They do have other restrictions, however. Also, thanks for reminding me to submit my 2005 program letter. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Mark,
The paper work we have is a direct result of an accident where the pilot of an experimental (exhibition & racing) licenced F-86, didn't want to use the fuel it would take to taxi to the long runway, so he used the short runway, went off the end, through a fence, across Freeport Blvd and came to rest in an ice cream parlor, full of kids. A gigantic hue and cry was heard, "Let's shut down these nuts flying those EXPERIMENTAL things". I don't mind sending in a couple of program letters, if it means we can continue to fly our birds. JJ Mark Zivley wrote: Look at what JJ submitted for his program letter. It's great that he's not tied to anything, but it really doesn't say anything of value. My point is why not eliminate the paperwork. I'm not trying to rock the boat, but what practical information did the FAA get and they could have elminated the hassle of receiving the letter and we'd not have to submit them. Michael McNulty wrote: "Mark Zivley" wrote in message om... Sure would be nice if the SSA could lobby the FAA to eliminate the requirement for program letters for gliders that are factory built, if not all experimental gliders. Enlighten me please, what's the point beyond "it's just the rule, dumb..." or "it's always been this way" or etc. The "Experimental" certification that most US gliders have is explicitly, for the purpose of "Exhibition and Racing". Given this fact, it seems reasonable to me that the FAA might ask us to substantiate that this is in fact what we are doing with these aircraft. (Remember, we never go for "pleasure flights" in these aircraft; we are maintaining proficiency for our exhibition and racing activities). Given that the annual program letter takes about five minutes to prepare and send in, I think that we've got the best side in this deal. Please don't rock the boat; if the FAA really wants to cut down on their workload, my fear is that they could eliminate the "Experimental, Exhibition and Racing" category altogether. Those who really object to the program letter can always buy an aircraft with a standard airworthiness certificate. By the way, and someone correct me if I'm wrong, I don't think that homebuilts (Experimental, Amateur Built airworthiness) have a program letter requirement. They do have other restrictions, however. Also, thanks for reminding me to submit my 2005 program letter. |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Homebuilt Aircraft Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) | Ron Wanttaja | Home Built | 0 | October 1st 04 02:31 PM |
PA-32 on Experimental Certificate | Mike Granby | Owning | 3 | July 21st 04 03:04 AM |
Homebuilt Aircraft Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) | Ron Wanttaja | Home Built | 2 | February 2nd 04 11:41 PM |
"I Want To FLY!"-(Youth) My store to raise funds for flying lessons | Curtl33 | General Aviation | 7 | January 9th 04 11:35 PM |
Homebuilt Aircraft Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) | Ron Wanttaja | Home Built | 1 | January 2nd 04 09:02 PM |