(USA) FSDO inspections of Experimental gliders

[Tuno]

I was recently contacted by my local FSDO (Scottsdale AZ) with a
request to do a ramp inspection of my glider.

He explained that starting this year, he is required to do "a ramp
inspection and records review of every aircraft that is operating on
an air racing and/or exhibition special airworthiness certificate".

I have yet to hear of any other glider owner receiving such a request
so I thought I would bring it up here. Has anyone else received a
similar request?

-ted/2NO

[Mike the Strike]

On Jan 5, 8:55*am, Tuno > wrote:
> I was recently contacted by my local FSDO (Scottsdale AZ) with a
> request to do a ramp inspection of my glider.
>
> He explained that starting this year, he is required to do "a ramp
> inspection and records review of every aircraft that is operating on
> an air racing and/or exhibition special airworthiness certificate".
>
> I have yet to hear of any other glider owner receiving such a request
> so I thought I would bring it up here. Has anyone else received a
> similar request?
>
> -ted/2NO

My glider is operating with the same certificate and Scottsdale is
also my local FSDO, but no word from them yet.

It sounds like they don't have enough stuff to keep them busy.

Mike

[glidergeek]

On Jan 5, 7:55*am, Tuno > wrote:
> I was recently contacted by my local FSDO (Scottsdale AZ) with a
> request to do a ramp inspection of my glider.
>
> He explained that starting this year, he is required to do "a ramp
> inspection and records review of every aircraft that is operating on
> an air racing and/or exhibition special airworthiness certificate".
>
> I have yet to hear of any other glider owner receiving such a request
> so I thought I would bring it up here. Has anyone else received a
> similar request?
>
> -ted/2NO

It's just you Ted. They put a PHX sectional chart up on a wall
highlighted all the locations of glider owners in the Metro area.
Blindfolded one inspector put him in the vertigo chair, spun him and
then pointed him at the chart. And he picked lucky you.

[Todd]

Several years ago I (finally) got my Operating Limitations updated to
reflect the new home base. A multi-year process getting kicked back
and forth between CLE and DTW FSDO. (I live in OH, Glider lives in
MI). The process was quite friendly but drawn out. After a few email
back and forth to tweak the Op-Limitations, we got it
done...except....he really wanted to see the glider. We met one day
at KADG and he did a full body cavity search of my ship. All the
paperwork, all the placards, read the POH cover to cover. Fortunately
I have a really good A&P-IA (thanks Matt/Y70) and that stuff was all
ok.

In the end I am not sure what we accomplished other than wasting over
half a day of my time for the inspection and a nice spring day trip
for the FAA Inspector from KCLE to KADG (140 miles each way) at
taxpayer expense that could have been handled by an inspector from
KDTW FSDO 40 miles away.

Yup, they are overworked.

[glider[_2_]]

It not so easy to defend the FAA, but I'll bet the Inspector wanted
to get out of the office. I can certainly understand that since it can
be a zoo inside.
Not all FAA people are helpful and have a "Can-do" attitude but my
experince has always been positive with the Atlanta office.
Our friends in Europe and the UK have it much worse than we have in
the States.
GA



On Jan 5, 3:39*pm, Todd > wrote:
> Several years ago I (finally) got my Operating Limitations updated to
> reflect the new home base. *A multi-year process getting kicked back
> and forth between CLE and DTW FSDO. (I live in OH, Glider lives in
> MI). *The process was quite friendly but drawn out. *After a few email
> back and forth to tweak the Op-Limitations, we got it
> done...except....he really wanted to see the glider. *We met one day
> at KADG and he did a full body cavity search of my ship. *All the
> paperwork, all the placards, read the POH cover to cover. *Fortunately
> I have a really good A&P-IA (thanks Matt/Y70) and that stuff *was all
> ok.
>
> In the end I am not sure what we accomplished other than wasting over
> half a day of my time for the inspection and a nice spring day trip
> for the FAA Inspector from KCLE to KADG (140 miles each way) at
> taxpayer expense that could have been handled by an inspector from
> KDTW FSDO 40 miles away.
>
> Yup, they are overworked.

[Tuno]

I have received a few offline replies to my OP. One was a report from
another state that there was no national directive on this, but
another had a forwarded reply from the FSDO of yet another state
saying that yes, indeed, they had been "... reviewing all Experimental
Exhibition and or Air Racing Special Certificate of Airworthiness &
Operating limitations for accuracy/completeness, as well as ensuring
that annual program letters have been submitted and meet the
requirements spelled out in FAA Order 8130-2F w/change 4. Now we are
required to perform at least an annual Ramp inspection of each
aircraft in the above referenced category."

(I do not have the name of the author of the quote, so I hope that [s]
he and the person who forwarded it to me don't mind my posting it
here.)

If there are any glider owner/operators who have been through this
process already (and it would be very recently), I hope you will share
your experiences with us here. I'm not anticipating trouble or
surprises, but it will help all of us to be both prepared and
cooperative!

~ted/2NO/

[Herb]

On Jan 5, 3:16*pm, glider > wrote:
> * It not so easy to defend the FAA, but I'll bet the Inspector wanted
> to get out of the office. I can certainly understand that since it can
> be a zoo inside.
> *Not all FAA people are helpful and have a "Can-do" attitude but my
> experince has always been positive with the Atlanta office.
> *Our friends in Europe and the UK have it much worse than we have in
> the States.
> *GA
>
> * On Jan 5, 3:39*pm, Todd > wrote:
>
> > Several years ago I (finally) got my Operating Limitations updated to
> > reflect the new home base. *A multi-year process getting kicked back
> > and forth between CLE and DTW FSDO. (I live in OH, Glider lives in
> > MI). *The process was quite friendly but drawn out. *After a few email
> > back and forth to tweak the Op-Limitations, we got it
> > done...except....he really wanted to see the glider. *We met one day
> > at KADG and he did a full body cavity search of my ship. *All the
> > paperwork, all the placards, read the POH cover to cover. *Fortunately
> > I have a really good A&P-IA (thanks Matt/Y70) and that stuff *was all
> > ok.
>
> > In the end I am not sure what we accomplished other than wasting over
> > half a day of my time for the inspection and a nice spring day trip
> > for the FAA Inspector from KCLE to KADG (140 miles each way) at
> > taxpayer expense that could have been handled by an inspector from
> > KDTW FSDO 40 miles away.
>
> > Yup, they are overworked.

As a German Ex-Pat I certainly agree with glider. Had nothing but
positive experiences with US bureaucrats, including FAA/FSDO. When I
got the (experimental) airworthiness cert for my LS8 in 2001 from the
Greensboro NC FSDO, they came with two inspectors to our gliderclub,
admitting they had never seen a glider! After about 2-3 hours of
deliberate and slow proceedings they issued the papers on the spot, no
charge, no expenses, declined my offer of lunch. Nice guys, too...
Herb, J7

[JJ Sinclair]

On Jan 6, 12:17*pm, Tuno > wrote:
> I have received a few offline replies to my OP. One was a report from
> another state that there was no national directive on this, but
> another had a forwarded reply from the FSDO of yet another state
> saying that yes, indeed, they had been "... reviewing all Experimental
> Exhibition and or Air Racing Special Certificate of Airworthiness &
> Operating limitations for accuracy/completeness, as well as ensuring
> that annual program letters have been submitted and meet the
> requirements spelled out in FAA Order 8130-2F w/change 4. Now we are
> required to perform at least an annual Ramp inspection of each
> aircraft in the above referenced category."
>
> (I do not have the name of the author of the quote, so I hope that [s]
> he and the person who forwarded it to me don't mind my posting it
> here.)
>
> If there are any glider owner/operators who have been through this
> process already (and it would be very recently), I hope you will share
> your experiences with us here. I'm not anticipating trouble or
> surprises, but it will help all of us to be both prepared and
> cooperative!
>
> ~ted/2NO/

Ted,
Not so long ago, all homebuilts got an annual FAA inspection. Have
your paper work up to snuff including Registration cert, Airworthiness
cert, log book showing current Inspection, AD's etc, Flight manual,
Maint manual, W&B with min/max pilot weights displayed, O2 bottle
current, chute re-pack current, EXPERIMENTAL sign properly displayed
in cockpit, ASI properly marked, N number properly displayed, etc.
E-mail me for the check list I use

[BT]

Our older Experimental Gliders do not require annual Program Letters.
Previous discussion on RAS

"Tuno" > wrote in message
...
>I have received a few offline replies to my OP. One was a report from
> another state that there was no national directive on this, but
> another had a forwarded reply from the FSDO of yet another state
> saying that yes, indeed, they had been "... reviewing all Experimental
> Exhibition and or Air Racing Special Certificate of Airworthiness &
> Operating limitations for accuracy/completeness, as well as ensuring
> that annual program letters have been submitted and meet the
> requirements spelled out in FAA Order 8130-2F w/change 4. Now we are
> required to perform at least an annual Ramp inspection of each
> aircraft in the above referenced category."
>
> (I do not have the name of the author of the quote, so I hope that [s]
> he and the person who forwarded it to me don't mind my posting it
> here.)
>
> If there are any glider owner/operators who have been through this
> process already (and it would be very recently), I hope you will share
> your experiences with us here. I'm not anticipating trouble or
> surprises, but it will help all of us to be both prepared and
> cooperative!
>
> ~ted/2NO/

[Guy[_7_]]

Guess what guys...I got the same thing from the Reno FSDO.
However, they directed me to FAX their office several documents
instead of a physical ramp check.
At least as of tonight.

Guy Acheson "DDS"

[Tuno]

*DING* Reno would be in the state mentioned in my second post.

Hopefully my FSDO will adopt the fax/virtual approach. He's got a long
uphill drive to where my gilder is these days.

2NO

[LOV2AV8]

On Jan 6, 8:47*pm, Tuno > wrote:
> *DING* Reno would be in the state mentioned in my second post.
>
> Hopefully my FSDO will adopt the fax/virtual approach. He's got a long
> uphill drive to where my gilder is these days.
>
> 2NO

I thought the point of a ramp check was to catch you operating the
aircraft? I'm not required to have all the documentation in my glider
except when flying it. What would be their enforcement action? Are
they just following up on program letters?

Randy "AV8"

[BT]

everything you would FAX they should have on file any way.
Unless he wants proof of the last condition inspection.

TZ

"Guy" > wrote in message
...
> Guess what guys...I got the same thing from the Reno FSDO.
> However, they directed me to FAX their office several documents
> instead of a physical ramp check.
> At least as of tonight.
>
> Guy Acheson "DDS"