FAA Operating Limitations

[rlovinggood]

My glider has an old Experimental Operating Limitations letter from
the FAA, dated 16 APR 1980. Among other things, it states:

"No person may exceed the designer's or builder's recommended limits
as follows: Maximum gross weight 1,100 lbs..."

Eleven Hundred Pounds? Where did that come from??? My aircraft
manual states the maximum weight of 752 lbs for my LS1-d. NOT ELEVEN
HUNDRED POUNDS!

The Operating Limitations continue,
"...And maximum airspeed in smooth air 121 knots..."

Back to the aircraft manual, the limit is 130 knots.

Why would the FAA, back in 1980, have different limits than the
manufacturer? How could they come up with a weight that is almost 1.5
times greater than what LS said? At 752 lbs, my wing loading (using
9.75 sq meters = 104.95 sq. ft) is 7.2 lbs/sq.ft. and at 1,100 lbs,
the loading is 10.5 lbs/sq. ft.

Don't worry, I don't fly with water and I'm not going over 752 lbs.
Just wondering if anyone might know where the FAA found their numbers.

Thanks,
Ray Lovinggood
Carrboro, North Carolina, USA

[jcarlyle]

Just guessing, but I'd bet that the FAA got its numbers from the
manufacturer. When I was looking for moment arms for my ASW-19, the
best source turned out to be the TCDS and not the flight manual. An
email to Schleicher confirmed that the FAA numbers were correct for
the 19.

Is there any chance that your Operating Limitations letter was
"adopted" from a ketter fir an earlier model of the LS1? Would the max
gross and the Vne you quoted be correct for the first version?

-John

rlovinggood wrote:
> My glider has an old Experimental Operating Limitations letter from
> the FAA, dated 16 APR 1980. Among other things, it states:
>
> "No person may exceed the designer's or builder's recommended limits
> as follows: Maximum gross weight 1,100 lbs..."
>
> Eleven Hundred Pounds? Where did that come from??? My aircraft
> manual states the maximum weight of 752 lbs for my LS1-d. NOT ELEVEN
> HUNDRED POUNDS!
>
> The Operating Limitations continue,
> "...And maximum airspeed in smooth air 121 knots..."
>
> Back to the aircraft manual, the limit is 130 knots.
>
> Why would the FAA, back in 1980, have different limits than the
> manufacturer? How could they come up with a weight that is almost 1.5
> times greater than what LS said? At 752 lbs, my wing loading (using
> 9.75 sq meters = 104.95 sq. ft) is 7.2 lbs/sq.ft. and at 1,100 lbs,
> the loading is 10.5 lbs/sq. ft.
>
> Don't worry, I don't fly with water and I'm not going over 752 lbs.
> Just wondering if anyone might know where the FAA found their numbers.
>
> Thanks,
> Ray Lovinggood
> Carrboro, North Carolina, USA

[[email protected]]

On Jan 26, 8:35*am, rlovinggood > wrote:
> My glider has an old Experimental Operating Limitations letter from
> the FAA, dated 16 APR 1980. *Among other things, it states:
>
> "No person may exceed the designer's or builder's recommended limits
> as follows: *Maximum gross weight 1,100 lbs..."
>
> Eleven Hundred Pounds? *Where did that come from??? *My aircraft
> manual states the maximum weight of 752 lbs for my LS1-d. *NOT ELEVEN
> HUNDRED POUNDS!
>
> The Operating Limitations continue,
> "...And maximum airspeed in smooth air 121 knots..."
>
> Back to the aircraft manual, the limit is 130 knots.
>
> Why would the FAA, back in 1980, have different limits than the
> manufacturer? *How could they come up with a weight that is almost 1.5
> times greater than what LS said? *At 752 lbs, my wing loading (using
> 9.75 sq meters = 104.95 sq. ft) is 7.2 lbs/sq.ft. and at 1,100 lbs,
> the loading is 10.5 lbs/sq. ft.
>
> Don't worry, I don't fly with water and I'm not going over 752 lbs.
> Just wondering if anyone might know where the FAA found their numbers.
>
> Thanks,
> Ray Lovinggood
> Carrboro, North Carolina, USA

Sometimes- back in the "olden days", the FAA would issue limitations
on Ex gliders that were not the same as the manufacturer's info.That's
why they were called experimental. Gross weight was one that could be
"flexible". A lower max speed would be consistent with higher gross
weight. It is quite possible that whoever got the original
airworthiness and associated limitations asked for different limits
and it was granted.
I had an ASW-20C with limitations of 1157 lb gross(like 20B) just by
asking for it.
Ah the good old days!
UH

[rlovinggood]

> Sometimes- back in the "olden days", the FAA would issue limitations
> on Ex gliders that were not the same as the manufacturer's info.That's
> why they were called experimental. *Gross weight was one that could be
> "flexible". A lower max speed would be consistent with higher gross
> weight. It is quite possible that whoever got the original
> airworthiness and associated limitations asked for different limits
> and it was granted.
> I had an ASW-20C with limitations of 1157 lb gross(like 20B) just by
> asking for it.
> Ah the good old days!
> UH- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Thanks UH. That, unfortunately, makes sense. Some years back, pre-
DG intervention, I did ask LS what the max weight and CG limits were
for my specific glider and they responded with the same information as
already printed in the aircraft's manual. Not the 1,100 lbs, but the
752 lbs.

So it's possible that a previous owner could have done this? I'll
have to check the logbook and see who owned it at that time.

It's sort of odd that I'm limited to 752 lbs, per LS and 121 knots per
the FAA. A "mix and match" duo of limitations.

Oh, as far as I'm concerned, flying this glider is "the good old
days." :-)

Ray Lovinggood
Carrboro, North Carolina, USA

[Tony[_5_]]

On Jan 26, 10:10*am, rlovinggood > wrote:
> > Sometimes- back in the "olden days", the FAA would issue limitations
> > on Ex gliders that were not the same as the manufacturer's info.That's
> > why they were called experimental. *Gross weight was one that could be
> > "flexible". A lower max speed would be consistent with higher gross
> > weight. It is quite possible that whoever got the original
> > airworthiness and associated limitations asked for different limits
> > and it was granted.
> > I had an ASW-20C with limitations of 1157 lb gross(like 20B) just by
> > asking for it.
> > Ah the good old days!
> > UH- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> Thanks UH. *That, unfortunately, makes sense. *Some years back, pre-
> DG intervention, I did ask LS what the max weight and CG limits were
> for my specific glider and they responded with the same information as
> already printed in the aircraft's manual. *Not the 1,100 lbs, but the
> 752 lbs.
>
> So it's possible that a previous owner could have done this? *I'll
> have to check the logbook and see who owned it at that time.
>
> It's sort of odd that I'm limited to 752 lbs, per LS and 121 knots per
> the FAA. *A "mix and match" duo of limitations.
>
> Oh, as far as I'm concerned, flying this glider is "the good old
> days." *:-)
>
> Ray Lovinggood
> Carrboro, North Carolina, USA

you could always contact the FSDO and ask to get your operating
limitations changed to reflect the manufacturers recommendations. of
course that would lead to a complete re-issue of the op lims which
could change your situation with regard to a program letter and stuff
like that.

[mattm[_2_]]

On Jan 26, 11:52*am, Tony > wrote:
> On Jan 26, 10:10*am, rlovinggood > wrote:
>
>
>
> > > Sometimes- back in the "olden days", the FAA would issue limitations
> > > on Ex gliders that were not the same as the manufacturer's info.That's
> > > why they were called experimental. *Gross weight was one that could be
> > > "flexible". A lower max speed would be consistent with higher gross
> > > weight. It is quite possible that whoever got the original
> > > airworthiness and associated limitations asked for different limits
> > > and it was granted.
> > > I had an ASW-20C with limitations of 1157 lb gross(like 20B) just by
> > > asking for it.
> > > Ah the good old days!
> > > UH- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > Thanks UH. *That, unfortunately, makes sense. *Some years back, pre-
> > DG intervention, I did ask LS what the max weight and CG limits were
> > for my specific glider and they responded with the same information as
> > already printed in the aircraft's manual. *Not the 1,100 lbs, but the
> > 752 lbs.
>
> > So it's possible that a previous owner could have done this? *I'll
> > have to check the logbook and see who owned it at that time.
>
> > It's sort of odd that I'm limited to 752 lbs, per LS and 121 knots per
> > the FAA. *A "mix and match" duo of limitations.
>
> > Oh, as far as I'm concerned, flying this glider is "the good old
> > days." *:-)
>
> > Ray Lovinggood
> > Carrboro, North Carolina, USA
>
> you could always contact the FSDO and ask to get your operating
> limitations changed to reflect the manufacturers recommendations. of
> course that would lead to a complete re-issue of the op lims which
> could change your situation with regard to a program letter and stuff
> like that.

Ray, considering the origin of that glider I'm not surprised that
there's a high
weight limit on it. An historical question for everyone: was there a
wing loading
limit in standard class in world championships in the early 1970's? I
know there
was one for US contests until recently, but this wing loading is
higher than that.

-- Matt

[rlovinggood]

On Jan 26, 11:52*am, Tony > wrote:
> On Jan 26, 10:10*am, rlovinggood > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > > Sometimes- back in the "olden days", the FAA would issue limitations
> > > on Ex gliders that were not the same as the manufacturer's info.That's
> > > why they were called experimental. *Gross weight was one that could be
> > > "flexible". A lower max speed would be consistent with higher gross
> > > weight. It is quite possible that whoever got the original
> > > airworthiness and associated limitations asked for different limits
> > > and it was granted.
> > > I had an ASW-20C with limitations of 1157 lb gross(like 20B) just by
> > > asking for it.
> > > Ah the good old days!
> > > UH- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > Thanks UH. *That, unfortunately, makes sense. *Some years back, pre-
> > DG intervention, I did ask LS what the max weight and CG limits were
> > for my specific glider and they responded with the same information as
> > already printed in the aircraft's manual. *Not the 1,100 lbs, but the
> > 752 lbs.
>
> > So it's possible that a previous owner could have done this? *I'll
> > have to check the logbook and see who owned it at that time.
>
> > It's sort of odd that I'm limited to 752 lbs, per LS and 121 knots per
> > the FAA. *A "mix and match" duo of limitations.
>
> > Oh, as far as I'm concerned, flying this glider is "the good old
> > days." *:-)
>
> > Ray Lovinggood
> > Carrboro, North Carolina, USA
>
> you could always contact the FSDO and ask to get your operating
> limitations changed to reflect the manufacturers recommendations. of
> course that would lead to a complete re-issue of the op lims which
> could change your situation with regard to a program letter and stuff
> like that.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Tony,
No. Don't want to go there! I'll keep the letter as is. With this
particular Operating Limitations, there is NO program letter
required. That's the one beauty of this old letter, of which I have
multiple copies, both soft and hard, scattered around, in case I loose
one...

Ray

[JS]

ABSOLUTELY NOT!
NEVER replace any "good old days" Operating Limitations. The new
ones (or more likely tens) will create vast sucking sounds. They are
designed to keep you well grounded.
Jim

On Jan 26, 8:52*am, Tony > wrote:
>
> you could always contact the FSDO and ask to get your operating
> limitations changed to reflect the manufacturers recommendations. of
> course that would lead to a complete re-issue of the op lims which
> could change your situation with regard to a program letter and stuff
> like that.

[Tony[_5_]]

On Jan 26, 12:44*pm, JS > wrote:
> ABSOLUTELY NOT!
> * NEVER replace any "good old days" Operating Limitations. The new
> ones (or more likely tens) will create vast sucking sounds. They are
> designed to keep you well grounded.
> Jim

true in most cases, especially with non amatuer built gliders that
require a program letter and stuff. however on my experimental-amatuer
built Cherokee II I was actually able to gain more flexibilty in terms
of required instrumentation by getting new operating limitations
issued last spring. everything else was the same except the very
friendly folks at the Wichita FSDO issued them using the standard
wording that all experimental amatuer built aircraft should get, that
is there are no instrument requirements as long as you are flying Day
VFR. The last guy had given it operating limitations which restrained
it to the 91.209 (I think) AIRPLANE instrument requirements.

But based on what I've seen on RAS and what I've heard I bet I'm about
the only glider guy in the country who has called the FSDO asking them
to give me new operating limitations.

[jcarlyle]

You'd lose that bet, Tony - I'm another glider guy who called his FSDO
asking them to give him new operating limits. My op limits were dated
June 2002, and specified a home base airport. Had I stuck with these
op limits, I would have had a 3,000 mile (one way) drive to fly my
glider for proficiency!

Surprisingly, the new op limits are more permissive than the old op
limits. If I wanted, I could install appropriate instruments and fly
IFR now, whereas the old limits were for VFR flight only. I am also
now allowed to carry passengers, as long as it's not for hire. Neither
are of interest (or practical, for that matter), but it just goes to
show that new op limits are not <always> bad.

-John

Tony wrote:
> true in most cases, especially with non amatuer built gliders that
> require a program letter and stuff. however on my experimental-amatuer
> built Cherokee II I was actually able to gain more flexibilty in terms
> of required instrumentation by getting new operating limitations
> issued last spring. everything else was the same except the very
> friendly folks at the Wichita FSDO issued them using the standard
> wording that all experimental amatuer built aircraft should get, that
> is there are no instrument requirements as long as you are flying Day
> VFR. The last guy had given it operating limitations which restrained
> it to the 91.209 (I think) AIRPLANE instrument requirements.
>
> But based on what I've seen on RAS and what I've heard I bet I'm about
> the only glider guy in the country who has called the FSDO asking them
> to give me new operating limitations.

[Tony[_5_]]

On Jan 26, 3:16*pm, jcarlyle > wrote:
> You'd lose that bet, Tony - I'm another glider guy who called his FSDO
> asking them to give him new operating limits. My op limits were dated
> June 2002, and specified a home base airport. Had I stuck with these
> op limits, I would have had a 3,000 mile (one way) drive to fly my
> glider for proficiency!
>
> Surprisingly, the new op limits are more permissive than the old op
> limits. If I wanted, I could install appropriate instruments and fly
> IFR now, whereas the old limits were for VFR flight only. I am also
> now allowed to carry passengers, as long as it's not for hire. Neither
> are of interest (or practical, for that matter), but it just goes to
> show that new op limits are not <always> bad.
>
> -John
>
>
>
> Tony wrote:
> > true in most cases, especially with non amatuer built gliders that
> > require a program letter and stuff. however on my experimental-amatuer
> > built Cherokee II I was actually able to gain more flexibilty in terms
> > of required instrumentation by getting new operating limitations
> > issued last spring. *everything else was the same except the very
> > friendly folks at the Wichita FSDO issued them using the standard
> > wording that all experimental amatuer built aircraft should get, that
> > is there are no instrument requirements as long as you are flying Day
> > VFR. *The last guy had given it operating limitations which restrained
> > it to the 91.209 (I think) AIRPLANE instrument requirements.
>
> > But based on what I've seen on RAS and what I've heard I bet I'm about
> > the only glider guy in the country who has called the FSDO asking them
> > to give me new operating limitations.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

was that 'home base' for any flight or just Phase I flight testing?

[jcarlyle]

Both Phase I flight testing and all subsequent proficiency flights had
to be within 300 nm of the home base airport. You could fly without
geographic restriction at specific events, provided you identified
where and when in the annual program letter or in a fax to the FSDO.

-John

Tony wrote:
> was that 'home base' for any flight or just Phase I flight testing?

[BT[_3_]]

A lot of the Ops Limits issued since that magical date that required annual
program letters also had geographical limitations.
So if you bought such a glider and moved it across the country, a new Ops
Limitation letter would be requried.
BT

"jcarlyle" > wrote in message
...
> Both Phase I flight testing and all subsequent proficiency flights had
> to be within 300 nm of the home base airport. You could fly without
> geographic restriction at specific events, provided you identified
> where and when in the annual program letter or in a fax to the FSDO.
>
> -John
>
> Tony wrote:
>> was that 'home base' for any flight or just Phase I flight testing?

[Westbender]

Ray,

My Operating Limitations were also published in 1980. It has no
reference at all to weight or speed limits. Although it does say "this
aircraft shall not be operated for glider towing or parachute jumping
operations". I don't mind giving up the parachute jumping part. :o)


Dave


On Jan 26, 7:35*am, rlovinggood > wrote:
> My glider has an old Experimental Operating Limitations letter from
> the FAA, dated 16 APR 1980. *Among other things, it states:
>
> "No person may exceed the designer's or builder's recommended limits
> as follows: *Maximum gross weight 1,100 lbs..."
>
> Eleven Hundred Pounds? *Where did that come from??? *My aircraft
> manual states the maximum weight of 752 lbs for my LS1-d. *NOT ELEVEN
> HUNDRED POUNDS!
>
> The Operating Limitations continue,
> "...And maximum airspeed in smooth air 121 knots..."
>
> Back to the aircraft manual, the limit is 130 knots.
>
> Why would the FAA, back in 1980, have different limits than the
> manufacturer? *How could they come up with a weight that is almost 1.5
> times greater than what LS said? *At 752 lbs, my wing loading (using
> 9.75 sq meters = 104.95 sq. ft) is 7.2 lbs/sq.ft. and at 1,100 lbs,
> the loading is 10.5 lbs/sq. ft.
>
> Don't worry, I don't fly with water and I'm not going over 752 lbs.
> Just wondering if anyone might know where the FAA found their numbers.
>
> Thanks,
> Ray Lovinggood
> Carrboro, North Carolina, USA

[vontresc]

So if you bail out will the FAA violate you for violating your
Operating Limitations???? :-)

Pete

On Jan 27, 1:01*pm, Westbender > wrote:
> Ray,
>
> My Operating Limitations were also published in 1980. It has no
> reference at all to weight or speed limits. Although it does say "this
> aircraft shall not be operated for glider towing or parachute jumping
> operations". I don't mind giving up the parachute jumping part. *:o)
>
> Dave
>
> On Jan 26, 7:35*am, rlovinggood > wrote:
>
>
>
> > My glider has an old Experimental Operating Limitations letter from
> > the FAA, dated 16 APR 1980. *Among other things, it states:
>
> > "No person may exceed the designer's or builder's recommended limits
> > as follows: *Maximum gross weight 1,100 lbs..."
>
> > Eleven Hundred Pounds? *Where did that come from??? *My aircraft
> > manual states the maximum weight of 752 lbs for my LS1-d. *NOT ELEVEN
> > HUNDRED POUNDS!
>
> > The Operating Limitations continue,
> > "...And maximum airspeed in smooth air 121 knots..."
>
> > Back to the aircraft manual, the limit is 130 knots.
>
> > Why would the FAA, back in 1980, have different limits than the
> > manufacturer? *How could they come up with a weight that is almost 1.5
> > times greater than what LS said? *At 752 lbs, my wing loading (using
> > 9.75 sq meters = 104.95 sq. ft) is 7.2 lbs/sq.ft. and at 1,100 lbs,
> > the loading is 10.5 lbs/sq. ft.
>
> > Don't worry, I don't fly with water and I'm not going over 752 lbs.
> > Just wondering if anyone might know where the FAA found their numbers.
>
> > Thanks,
> > Ray Lovinggood
> > Carrboro, North Carolina, USA- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

[Westbender]

Yes, apparently I have to go down with the ship....


On Jan 27, 1:26*pm, vontresc > wrote:
> So if you bail out will the FAA violate you for violating your
> Operating Limitations???? :-)
>
> Pete
>
> On Jan 27, 1:01*pm, Westbender > wrote:
>
>
>
> > Ray,
>
> > My Operating Limitations were also published in 1980. It has no
> > reference at all to weight or speed limits. Although it does say "this
> > aircraft shall not be operated for glider towing or parachute jumping
> > operations". I don't mind giving up the parachute jumping part. *:o)
>
> > Dave
>
> > On Jan 26, 7:35*am, rlovinggood > wrote:
>
> > > My glider has an old Experimental Operating Limitations letter from
> > > the FAA, dated 16 APR 1980. *Among other things, it states:
>
> > > "No person may exceed the designer's or builder's recommended limits
> > > as follows: *Maximum gross weight 1,100 lbs..."
>
> > > Eleven Hundred Pounds? *Where did that come from??? *My aircraft
> > > manual states the maximum weight of 752 lbs for my LS1-d. *NOT ELEVEN
> > > HUNDRED POUNDS!
>
> > > The Operating Limitations continue,
> > > "...And maximum airspeed in smooth air 121 knots..."
>
> > > Back to the aircraft manual, the limit is 130 knots.
>
> > > Why would the FAA, back in 1980, have different limits than the
> > > manufacturer? *How could they come up with a weight that is almost 1.5
> > > times greater than what LS said? *At 752 lbs, my wing loading (using
> > > 9.75 sq meters = 104.95 sq. ft) is 7.2 lbs/sq.ft. and at 1,100 lbs,
> > > the loading is 10.5 lbs/sq. ft.
>
> > > Don't worry, I don't fly with water and I'm not going over 752 lbs.
> > > Just wondering if anyone might know where the FAA found their numbers..
>
> > > Thanks,
> > > Ray Lovinggood
> > > Carrboro, North Carolina, USA- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -