Another program letter question .....

[Ron Gleason]

My plane is registered experimental and I have not been sending the
annual program letter to the local FSDO. I plan on starting but have
a couple of questions:

1 - The original airworthy certificate was issued by the Reno NV FSDO
and the first two owners sent the letter there. I am in the SLC UT
area and am wondering if I can/should send the letter to the Reno FSDO
or do I need to send it to the SLC FSDO?

2 - If I send it to the local SLC FSDO should I include a copy of the
original paperwork?

I will be contacting the SLC FSDO next week but wanted to solicit
opinions here first

Thanks in advance

Ron Gleason

[JJ Sinclair]

On Feb 13, 5:03*am, Ron Gleason > wrote:
> My plane is registered experimental and I have not been sending the
> annual program letter to the local FSDO. *I plan on starting but have
> a couple of questions:
>
> 1 - The original airworthy certificate was issued by the Reno NV FSDO
> and the first two owners sent the letter there. *I am in the SLC UT
> area and am wondering if I can/should send the letter to the Reno FSDO
> or do I need to send it to the SLC FSDO?
>
> 2 - If I send it to the local SLC FSDO should I include a copy of the
> original paperwork?
>
> I will be contacting the SLC FSDO next week but wanted to solicit
> opinions here first
>
> Thanks in advance
>
> Ron Gleason

My operating limitations say, "I must inform the Fedarallies when the
aircraft is moved to another area". Give the local FSDO a call, Ron.
JJ

[BT[_3_]]

Depending if the Operating Limitation and Airworthy Certificate was issued
after 1993(?).
You could be in violation of the operating limitation if operating in UT as
the glider is not longer "based" at it's original airport.
And in violation of not sending the Program letter.

Be prepared to have the FSDO complete a new Operating Limitation, inspect
the aircraft and require the annual program letter.
Many times they will want a recent "condition inspection" completed by an
A&P before they inspect it. Recent may mean less that 6 months ago, or even
less than 3 months ago.
BT

"Ron Gleason" > wrote in message
...
> My plane is registered experimental and I have not been sending the
> annual program letter to the local FSDO. I plan on starting but have
> a couple of questions:
>
> 1 - The original airworthy certificate was issued by the Reno NV FSDO
> and the first two owners sent the letter there. I am in the SLC UT
> area and am wondering if I can/should send the letter to the Reno FSDO
> or do I need to send it to the SLC FSDO?
>
> 2 - If I send it to the local SLC FSDO should I include a copy of the
> original paperwork?
>
> I will be contacting the SLC FSDO next week but wanted to solicit
> opinions here first
>
> Thanks in advance
>
> Ron Gleason

[[email protected]]

On Feb 13, 8:14*am, "BT" > wrote:
> Depending if the Operating Limitation and Airworthy Certificate was issued
> after 1993(?).
> You could be in violation of the operating limitation if operating in UT as
> the glider is not longer "based" at it's original airport.
> And in violation of not sending the Program letter.
>
> Be prepared to have the FSDO complete a new Operating Limitation, inspect
> the aircraft and require the annual program letter.
> Many times they will want a recent "condition inspection" completed by an
> A&P before they inspect it. Recent may mean less that 6 months ago, or even
> less than 3 months ago.
> BT
>
> "Ron Gleason" > wrote in message
>
> ...
>
>
>
> > My plane is registered experimental and I have not been sending the
> > annual program letter to the local FSDO. *I plan on starting but have
> > a couple of questions:
>
> > 1 - The original airworthy certificate was issued by the Reno NV FSDO
> > and the first two owners sent the letter there. *I am in the SLC UT
> > area and am wondering if I can/should send the letter to the Reno FSDO
> > or do I need to send it to the SLC FSDO?
>
> > 2 - If I send it to the local SLC FSDO should I include a copy of the
> > original paperwork?
>
> > I will be contacting the SLC FSDO next week but wanted to solicit
> > opinions here first
>
> > Thanks in advance
>
> > Ron Gleason- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Just sent in my program letter to Reno. They replied to me asking
where my glider was based, they also wanted me to call them. My call
to them went very well, they wanted a ramp check done when I moved the
glider to the airport, this will be done in a few months as the
airport is snowed in. In answering my questions they informed me they
have 3 years to do all the ramp checks for experimental aircraft and
they have hundreds in their area to do. They will be checking if the
program letter is in the glider along with registration,
airworthiness, operating manual, weight and balance, current charts
for the area, parachute pack current and new plastic license. Probably
missing some items but Reno was very accommodating, they just have
many aircraft to inspect. Tom VN

[BT[_3_]]

If you glider is "based" where it is according to the Operating
Limitations, and you just happen to have it at home for the weather.
Then fine.
Some people may have a glider with an operating limitation "based" at
airport X in State Y. But the now live in state N and operate (based) out of
airport Z.
People who have bought and moved gliders across the country will have to
redo their Operating Limitations and get a new Airworthiness Certificate.

Parachute pack date and current charts have nothing to do with "checking all
experimental aircraft in the area".
Neither does the plastic pilot certificate.
But they can cover all of that in the "ramp check".
I'm not flying today, I did not bring my parachute and charts.
The parachute is not part of the "glider".. you said you wanted to see the
glider.
BT

> wrote in message
...
> On Feb 13, 8:14 am, "BT" > wrote:
>> Depending if the Operating Limitation and Airworthy Certificate was
>> issued
>> after 1993(?).
>> You could be in violation of the operating limitation if operating in UT
>> as
>> the glider is not longer "based" at it's original airport.
>> And in violation of not sending the Program letter.
>>
>> Be prepared to have the FSDO complete a new Operating Limitation, inspect
>> the aircraft and require the annual program letter.
>> Many times they will want a recent "condition inspection" completed by an
>> A&P before they inspect it. Recent may mean less that 6 months ago, or
>> even
>> less than 3 months ago.
>> BT
>>
>> "Ron Gleason" > wrote in message
>>
>> ...
>>
>>
>>
>> > My plane is registered experimental and I have not been sending the
>> > annual program letter to the local FSDO. I plan on starting but have
>> > a couple of questions:
>>
>> > 1 - The original airworthy certificate was issued by the Reno NV FSDO
>> > and the first two owners sent the letter there. I am in the SLC UT
>> > area and am wondering if I can/should send the letter to the Reno FSDO
>> > or do I need to send it to the SLC FSDO?
>>
>> > 2 - If I send it to the local SLC FSDO should I include a copy of the
>> > original paperwork?
>>
>> > I will be contacting the SLC FSDO next week but wanted to solicit
>> > opinions here first
>>
>> > Thanks in advance
>>
>> > Ron Gleason- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> Just sent in my program letter to Reno. They replied to me asking
> where my glider was based, they also wanted me to call them. My call
> to them went very well, they wanted a ramp check done when I moved the
> glider to the airport, this will be done in a few months as the
> airport is snowed in. In answering my questions they informed me they
> have 3 years to do all the ramp checks for experimental aircraft and
> they have hundreds in their area to do. They will be checking if the
> program letter is in the glider along with registration,
> airworthiness, operating manual, weight and balance, current charts
> for the area, parachute pack current and new plastic license. Probably
> missing some items but Reno was very accommodating, they just have
> many aircraft to inspect. Tom VN
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

[Morgan[_2_]]

After reading the posting on the SSA site regarding program letters I
sent in one for the plane I own with a partner. According to the old
letter it was based in Minden. I simply wrote up a new version,
basing out of Avenal and listed several places that I might want to go
fly in 2010 such as the Great Basin or Euphrata. The FSDO just wanted
to see copies of the log book and of the original airworthiness
certificate. Once we brought them the airworthiness cert and log
book, they gave us a new airworthiness cert for the Fresno FSDO and a
fresh program letter. It was pretty painless.

They do want to perform a ramp inspection, but I haven't scheduled
that yet. There are several of us that need the ramp inspection,
we'll probably try to get everyone to schedule their inspection on the
same day to keep things efficient and to keep from having too much
time to spend on any one aircraft nitpicking.

Morgan

[Fred[_4_]]

On Feb 13, 8:03*am, Ron Gleason > wrote:
> My plane is registered experimental and I have not been sending the
> annual program letter to the local FSDO. *I plan on starting but have
> a couple of questions:
>
Several of the notes in this thread mention the FSDO saying "they have
to inspect all the experimental gliders in their area"-- is this a new
reg or something or just a current emphasis by the FAA/

Fred

>
1 - The original airworthy certificate was issued by the Reno NV FSDO
> and the first two owners sent the letter there. *I am in the SLC UT
> area and am wondering if I can/should send the letter to the Reno FSDO
> or do I need to send it to the SLC FSDO?
>
> 2 - If I send it to the local SLC FSDO should I include a copy of the
> original paperwork?
>
> I will be contacting the SLC FSDO next week but wanted to solicit
> opinions here first
>
> Thanks in advance
>
> Ron Gleason

[[email protected]]

On Feb 17, 8:10*pm, Fred > wrote:
> On Feb 13, 8:03*am, Ron Gleason > wrote:> My plane is registered experimental and I have not been sending the
> > annual program letter to the local FSDO. *I plan on starting but have
> > a couple of questions:
>
> Several of the notes in this thread mention the FSDO saying "they have
> to inspect all the experimental gliders in their area"-- is this a new
> reg or something or just a current emphasis by the FAA/
>
> Fred
>
>
>
> 1 - The original airworthy certificate was issued by the Reno NV FSDO
>
>
>
> > and the first two owners sent the letter there. *I am in the SLC UT
> > area and am wondering if I can/should send the letter to the Reno FSDO
> > or do I need to send it to the SLC FSDO?
>
> > 2 - If I send it to the local SLC FSDO should I include a copy of the
> > original paperwork?
>
> > I will be contacting the SLC FSDO next week but wanted to solicit
> > opinions here first
>
> > Thanks in advance
>
> > Ron Gleason- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -


According to Reno FSDO they have received an edict for the Western-
Pacific Region to inspect all experimental exhibition aircraft. They
have three years to complete the inspections. This is for all
experimental exhibition aircraft not just gliders. They were not sure
if this edict was nationwide. As I stated before they are mainly
looking at the aircraft logs for maintenance but being a ramp
inspection I will be ready for everything. The program letters are due
yearly and can be updated during the year. When asked what would
happen if they didn't like my program letter they said they would just
have me do another one. No big deal. VN

[Ron Gleason]

A follow up to my questions and what occurred when I contacted the
SLC FSDO.

First off let me state that the process has been straight forward, the
FSDO office and person I worked with was knowledgeable and completed
the work swiftly, and everything was done via telephone to start and
then handled via email and USPS.

Details:

I contacted the SLC FSDO via telephone and explained my situation.
They took the information and stated someone would call me back.
Within 24 hours I received a call back, explained the situation, and
provided him the details of my plane. He stated he would do some
research, see what was on file in OK and get back to me. He asked my
preferred method of contact and agreed that email would be best!
Within 2 days I had an email reply stating what had to done and links
to the required forms. Since my plane moved from NV to UT and a
different FSDO a new airworthiness certificate needed to be issued
along with a new limitations letter. I had to fill out form 8130-6
Application for US Airworthiness certificate and create a program
letter to accompany the application. This was done and within 10 days
I had my new airworthiness certificate, operating limitations letter
and sticker for my maintenance log book.

The only major difference I can see with the operating limitations
letter is that I have to perform 'flight testing'. This is described
as 'This aircraft must be operated for at least 5 hours with at least
10 takeoffs and landing (to a full stop), and all operations must be
conducted with 30 miles nautical miles of my home airport avoiding all
mountainous terrain.'

No inspections are required as pictures were requested and satisfied
the inspector. I inquired about experimental aircraft needing
inspections and he had not heard anything about that but he did state
that the FSDO offices are not at the top of the information chain.

All in all it was a pleasant experiment, I have my program letter on
file and I will have spend a few bucks doing 10 takeoff and landings
before I can fly somewhere other than my home airport.

Question - I tried to find the definition of 'mountainous terrain' on
the FAA website and was unsuccessful. Does anyone know where the FAA
defines mountainous terrain?

Ron Gleason
DG303 Acro N303MR

On Feb 13, 6:03*am, Ron Gleason > wrote:
> My plane is registered experimental and I have not been sending the
> annualprogramletterto the local FSDO. *I plan on starting but have
> a couple of questions:
>
> 1 - The original airworthy certificate was issued by the Reno NV FSDO
> and the first two owners sent theletterthere. *I am in the SLC UT
> area and am wondering if I can/should send theletterto the Reno FSDO
> or do I need to send it to the SLC FSDO?
>
> 2 - If I send it to the local SLC FSDO should I include a copy of the
> original paperwork?
>
> I will be contacting the SLC FSDO next week but wanted to solicit
> opinions here first
>
> Thanks in advance
>
> Ron Gleason

[Andy[_1_]]

On Mar 10, 2:18*pm, Ron Gleason > wrote:
> A follow up to my questions and what occurred when I contacted *the
> SLC FSDO.

> The only major difference I can see with the operating limitations
> letter is that I have to perform 'flight testing'. *This is described
> as 'This aircraft must be operated for at least 5 hours with at least
> 10 takeoffs and landing (to a full stop), and all operations must be
> conducted with 30 miles nautical miles of my home airport avoiding all
> mountainous terrain.'

This requirement seems very strange. To the best of my knowledge this
sort of flight test phase is usually only applied to experimental
amateur built and restricts operation over populated areas during the
initial flights. I had not such flight test phase defined when I was
issued my experimental cert for my new ASW 28.

In my case though the operating limitations say they apply after
completion of the flight test phase but no flight test phase is
defined. They also reference the 300nm restriction relative to the
home base airport but no home base airport is defined.

I really don't think they have a very rigorous or consistent process,
but if you are happy with what they gave you don't rock the boat.

BTW I think avoiding mountainous terrain is good advice for all of
us. Keep at least half a wingspan away!

Andy

[[email protected]]

On Mar 10, 5:19*pm, Andy > wrote:
> On Mar 10, 2:18*pm, Ron Gleason > wrote:
>
> > A follow up to my questions and what occurred when I contacted *the
> > SLC FSDO.
> > The only major difference I can see with the operating limitations
> > letter is that I have to perform 'flight testing'. *This is described
> > as 'This aircraft must be operated for at least 5 hours with at least
> > 10 takeoffs and landing (to a full stop), and all operations must be
> > conducted with 30 miles nautical miles of my home airport avoiding all
> > mountainous terrain.'
>
> This requirement seems very strange. *To the best of my knowledge this
> sort of flight test phase is usually only applied to experimental
> amateur built and restricts operation over populated areas during the
> initial flights. * I had not such flight test phase defined when I was
> issued my experimental cert for my new ASW 28.
>
> In my case though the operating limitations say they apply after
> completion of the flight test phase but no flight test phase is
> defined. *They also reference the 300nm restriction relative to the
> home base airport but no home base airport is defined.
>
> I really don't think they have a very rigorous or consistent process,
> but if you are happy with what they gave you don't rock the boat.
>
> BTW I think avoiding mountainous terrain is good advice for all of
> us. *Keep at least half a wingspan away!
>
> Andy

Every Ex glider I've had has had a requirement for flight test phase
and logbbok entry indicating that glider was found to be controllable
and had "normal flight characteristics through the entire flight
envelope - language paraphrased.
UH

[Andy[_1_]]

On Mar 10, 3:42*pm, wrote:
> On Mar 10, 5:19*pm, Andy > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Mar 10, 2:18*pm, Ron Gleason > wrote:
>
> > > A follow up to my questions and what occurred when I contacted *the
> > > SLC FSDO.
> > > The only major difference I can see with the operating limitations
> > > letter is that I have to perform 'flight testing'. *This is described
> > > as 'This aircraft must be operated for at least 5 hours with at least
> > > 10 takeoffs and landing (to a full stop), and all operations must be
> > > conducted with 30 miles nautical miles of my home airport avoiding all
> > > mountainous terrain.'
>
> > This requirement seems very strange. *To the best of my knowledge this
> > sort of flight test phase is usually only applied to experimental
> > amateur built and restricts operation over populated areas during the
> > initial flights. * I had not such flight test phase defined when I was
> > issued my experimental cert for my new ASW 28.
>
> > In my case though the operating limitations say they apply after
> > completion of the flight test phase but no flight test phase is
> > defined. *They also reference the 300nm restriction relative to the
> > home base airport but no home base airport is defined.
>
> > I really don't think they have a very rigorous or consistent process,
> > but if you are happy with what they gave you don't rock the boat.
>
> > BTW I think avoiding mountainous terrain is good advice for all of
> > us. *Keep at least half a wingspan away!
>
> > Andy
>
> Every Ex glider I've had has had a requirement for flight test phase
> and logbbok entry indicating that glider was found to be controllable
> and had "normal flight characteristics through the entire flight
> envelope - language paraphrased.

Not mine. Maybe SDL FSDO accepted the factory flight test as
satisfying that requirment. Like I said, not consistent.

Andy

[Tuno]

For anyone starting a list from Tom's post, also add:

Operating Limitations
Dataplate requirement exemption (2):
- original
- letter of extension
Logbook (the glider's, of course)
Insurance (not required, but good to keep a copy in the glider)

The dataplate exemption and extension are available at the SSA web
site:
http://www.ssa.org/myhome.asp?mbr=6789819598&show=blog&id=372&archive=3/1/2002

..02NO