Those of us flying sailplanes licensed Experimental Exhibition or some
variant of this, and having limitations requiring submission of a
program letter to our local FSDO can expect changes in how these are
being handled.
I have been contacted by my local "helper" and requested to make some
specific changes: Intersting that I own the majority of the affected
gliders in his district (Saddle Brook NJ)as far as I can tell.
1) They want specific dates for the sanctioned events we are
attending. Not general month, but dates.
2) I was told that if my flights for records or proficiency exceeded
the defined radius from home base, they expect to be informed in
advance. He indicated that these would be approved, but they want to
know. He said "what if you hit a runway light in Alabama outside the
300 mile radius while under my oversight?"
3) From other info I have been picking up, it would be wise to list
the SSA supported OLC contest as a specific activity.
4) Also list practice for all activities (badges, records, OLC,
pending competitions) as acivities covered on the activity letter.
I was told that they have had specifiec training related to the
increased level of oversight
that is coming, but do not know of an advisory circular affecting
this.
FWIW
UH

I received a phone call yesterday from my local FSDO asking whether I
had a copy of my program letter. When I replied to the affirmative,
they asked me to mail them a copy. I wonder what happened to the one I
filed with them last year ... ?

~ted/2NO

On Apr 15, 3:23*pm, Tuno > wrote:
> I wonder what happened to the one I
> filed with them last year ... ?

I am required to submit a new one every year.

If someone is actually going to read them I may have to be a bit more
careful what I say and when I send it in.

For SDL FSDO, after the established contract retired, it appeared that
no one cared anymore. I have never received an FAA approval of a
program letter, or even any acknowledgement it had been received. I
file the fax transmission reports for CYA.

Andy

On Apr 15, 4:51*pm, Andy > wrote:
> On Apr 15, 3:23*pm, Tuno > wrote:
>
> > I wonder what happened to the one I
> > filed with them last year ... ?
>
> I am required to submit a new one every year.
>
> If someone is actually going to read them I may have to be a bit more
> careful what I say and when I send it in.
>
> For SDL FSDO, after the established contract retired, it appeared that
> no one cared anymore. *I have never received an FAA approval of a
> program letter, or even any acknowledgement it had been received. *I
> file the fax transmission reports for CYA.
>
> Andy

When I had my operating limitations and airworthiness last done with
an experimental/racing glider I brought into the region, Denver FSDO
supplied a form 'program letter' which I complete and send in
annually. Including the SSA-OLC contest would be consistent with FAA
Order 8130.2F and a prudent action.

Frank Whiteley

UH and all,

At my last annual condition inspection, the A&P/IA mechanic told me to
keep copies of the program letter and not rely on just the one in the
cockpit. He said if I lost the letter, it would be a real big ordeal
to get it replaced. So now, I have several copies scattered about. I
guess I'll scan it, too, and keep a digital copy.

My program letter is from 1980 and it states the glider is certified
for "exhibition and air racing." Good thing it doesn't mention that I
have to actually win at air racing...

One bizarre statement in the program letter is the statement that I
have to have a placard that states, among other stuff, that "Maximum
gross weight 1,100 lbs". Where the heck the FAA got this number beats
the crap out of me because LS states the max is 752 lbs.

And the other gem, "The person operating this aircraft shall advise
each person carried of the experimental nature of this aircraft."
Last time I looked, there was still just one seat...

The last sentence is "A parachute shall be worn by the pilot." Always
have and always will.

Back when this program letter was written, they didn't require the
annual notification to the local FSDO office about the where-abouts of
the aircraft.

Ray

On Apr 15, 7:48*pm, rlovinggood > wrote:
> UH and all,
>
> At my last annual condition inspection, the A&P/IA mechanic told me to
> keep copies of the program letter and not rely on just the one in the
> cockpit. *He said if I lost the letter, it would be a real big ordeal
> to get it replaced. *So now, I have several copies scattered about. *I
> guess I'll scan it, too, and keep a digital copy.
>
> My program letter is from 1980 and it states the glider is certified
> for "exhibition and air racing." *Good thing it doesn't mention that I
> have to actually win at air racing...
>
> One bizarre statement in the program letter is the statement that I
> have to have a placard that states, among other stuff, that "Maximum
> gross weight 1,100 lbs". *Where the heck the FAA got this number beats
> the crap out of me because LS states the max is 752 lbs.
>
> And the other gem, "The person operating this aircraft shall advise
> each person carried of the experimental nature of this aircraft."
> Last time I looked, there was still just one seat...
>
> The last sentence is "A parachute shall be worn by the pilot." *Always
> have and always will.
>
> Back when this program letter was written, they didn't require the
> annual notification to the local FSDO office about the where-abouts of
> the aircraft.
>
> Ray

Ray
What you have is the earlier variant. The stuff you mention are ther
limitations which are part of the airworthiness certificate. DON'T
lose them. At that time, these were permanent and no activity letter
was required.
The newer ones(since the jet crashed into the mall out \West, require
us to describe where we will fly and get it approved. Be glad you
don't have to have that hassle.
And don'y even think about the gross weight trick in Club- We'll be
watchin'
UH'

Hank,

My program letter sent on January 5, 2009 to The Teterboro FSDO
doesn't specifically mention the OLC. Does it make sense to send an
update or just let sleeping dogs lie (pun intended).

1LK

On Apr 15, 6:09*pm, wrote:
> Those of us flying sailplanes licensed Experimental Exhibition or some
> variant of this, and having limitations requiring submission of a
> program letter to our local FSDO can expect changes in how these are
> being handled.
> I have been contacted by my local "helper" and requested to make some
> specific changes: Intersting that I own the majority of the affected
> gliders in his district (Saddle Brook NJ)as far as I can tell.
> 1) They want specific dates for the sanctioned events we are
> attending. Not general month, but dates.
> 2) I was told that if my flights for records or proficiency exceeded
> the defined radius from home base, they expect to be informed in
> advance. He indicated that these would be approved, but they want to
> know. He said "what if you hit a runway light in Alabama outside the
> 300 mile radius while under my oversight?"
> 3) From other info I have been picking up, it would be wise to list
> the SSA supported OLC contest as a specific activity.
> 4) Also list practice for all activities (badges, records, OLC,
> pending competitions) as acivities covered on the activity letter.
> I was told that they have had specifiec training related to the
> increased level of oversight
> that is coming, but do not know of an advisory circular affecting
> this.
> FWIW
> UH

On Apr 16, 8:24*am, Raphael Warshaw > wrote:
> Hank,
>
> My program letter sent on January 5, 2009 to The Teterboro FSDO
> doesn't specifically mention the OLC. *Does it make sense to send an
> update or just let sleeping dogs lie (pun intended).
>
> 1LK
>
> On Apr 15, 6:09*pm, wrote:
>
>
>
> > Those of us flying sailplanes licensed Experimental Exhibition or some
> > variant of this, and having limitations requiring submission of a
> > program letter to our local FSDO can expect changes in how these are
> > being handled.
> > I have been contacted by my local "helper" and requested to make some
> > specific changes: Intersting that I own the majority of the affected
> > gliders in his district (Saddle Brook NJ)as far as I can tell.
> > 1) They want specific dates for the sanctioned events we are
> > attending. Not general month, but dates.
> > 2) I was told that if my flights for records or proficiency exceeded
> > the defined radius from home base, they expect to be informed in
> > advance. He indicated that these would be approved, but they want to
> > know. He said "what if you hit a runway light in Alabama outside the
> > 300 mile radius while under my oversight?"
> > 3) From other info I have been picking up, it would be wise to list
> > the SSA supported OLC contest as a specific activity.
> > 4) Also list practice for all activities (badges, records, OLC,
> > pending competitions) as acivities covered on the activity letter.
> > I was told that they have had specifiec training related to the
> > increased level of oversight
> > that is coming, but do not know of an advisory circular affecting
> > this.
> > FWIW
> > UH- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Let sleeping dogs lie- but watch for signs of active fleas.
UH