FAA Small AIrcraft Directorate Position on Experimental AirworthinessCertificates

[NG]

I spoke with the head of the FAA Small Aircraft Directorate for
gliders yesterday regarding Experimental Airworthiness Certificates
for gliders. In at least several states and particularly Arizona all
gliders are having their Experimental Airworthiness certificates
reviewed. Due to an issue causing my DG505 to have its Standard
Airworthiness certificate recently revoked, which I further lost on
Federal appeal in front of the NTSB (see my posting June 8th 2010),
due to bad paperwork supplied by AMS Flight, d.o.o., I was caused to
engage the FAA in this dialogue.

I was informed by the head of the FAA Small Aircraft Directorate for
gliders that he recently had conversations with his supervisors in
Washington, D.C. and that in order to obtain or retain an Experimental
Airworthiness certificate the glider must be engaged in "racing" and
"preparation for racing". He said an agenda of racing events must be
supplied to the FAA at the local FSDO level at the time of issuance or
revision of paperwork. I was told that the Experimental Airworthiness
Certificate was NOT meant to be used for "fun flying".

I asked if badge flying would be considered as a type of racing. He
said that one could attempt to engage the local FSDO with this to see
if in their judgement it would be valid, but he would not commit one
way or the other. Having recently engaged the FAA in federal court I
have found that they can be a bit of a sticky wicket. You may want to
look at the code on the definition of Experimental Certification if
you plan on obtaining or maintaining this type of certification. An
electronic version of the code is easily reached online.

Neil AZ

[Tony[_5_]]

Worth noting that this applies to Experimental - Exhibition
certification, not Experimental - Amateur Built

[Fred[_4_]]

On Jun 15, 9:17*pm, NG > wrote:
> I spoke with the head of the FAA Small Aircraft Directorate for
> gliders yesterday regarding Experimental Airworthiness Certificates
> for gliders. *In at least several states and particularly Arizona all
> gliders are having their Experimental Airworthiness certificates
> reviewed. *Due to an issue causing my DG505 to have its Standard
> Airworthiness certificate recently revoked, which I further lost on
> Federal appeal in front of the NTSB (see my posting June 8th 2010),
> due to bad paperwork supplied by AMS Flight, d.o.o., I was caused to
> engage the FAA in this dialogue.
>
> I was informed by the head of the FAA Small Aircraft Directorate for
> gliders that he recently had conversations with his supervisors in
> Washington, D.C. and that in order to obtain or retain an Experimental
> Airworthiness certificate the glider must be engaged in "racing" and
> "preparation for racing". *He said an agenda of racing events must be
> supplied to the FAA at the local FSDO level at the time of issuance or
> revision of paperwork. *I was told that the Experimental Airworthiness
> Certificate was NOT meant to be used for "fun flying".
>
> I asked if badge flying would be considered as a type of racing. *He
> said that one could attempt to engage the local FSDO with this to see
> if in their judgement it would be valid, but he would not commit one
> way or the other. *Having recently engaged the FAA in federal court I
> have found that they can be a bit of a sticky wicket. *You may want to
> look at the code on the definition of Experimental Certification if
> you plan on obtaining or maintaining this type of certification. *An
> electronic version of the code is easily reached online.
>
> Neil AZ

This sounds scary for us that have not flown in a contest for 15
years.
Fred TX

[Morgans[_2_]]

"Fred" > wrote

> This sounds scary for us that have not flown in a contest for
> 15 years.

How about Experimental Developmental, or whatever that is for when you
invent a dodad for the glider, and are testing and refining the dodad?
Could that be made to fly, so to speak?
--
Jim in NC

[Frank Whiteley]

On Jun 15, 8:17*pm, NG > wrote:
> I spoke with the head of the FAA Small Aircraft Directorate for
> gliders yesterday regarding Experimental Airworthiness Certificates
> for gliders. *In at least several states and particularly Arizona all
> gliders are having their Experimental Airworthiness certificates
> reviewed. *Due to an issue causing my DG505 to have its Standard
> Airworthiness certificate recently revoked, which I further lost on
> Federal appeal in front of the NTSB (see my posting June 8th 2010),
> due to bad paperwork supplied by AMS Flight, d.o.o., I was caused to
> engage the FAA in this dialogue.
>
> I was informed by the head of the FAA Small Aircraft Directorate for
> gliders that he recently had conversations with his supervisors in
> Washington, D.C. and that in order to obtain or retain an Experimental
> Airworthiness certificate the glider must be engaged in "racing" and
> "preparation for racing". *He said an agenda of racing events must be
> supplied to the FAA at the local FSDO level at the time of issuance or
> revision of paperwork. *I was told that the Experimental Airworthiness
> Certificate was NOT meant to be used for "fun flying".
>
> I asked if badge flying would be considered as a type of racing. *He
> said that one could attempt to engage the local FSDO with this to see
> if in their judgement it would be valid, but he would not commit one
> way or the other. *Having recently engaged the FAA in federal court I
> have found that they can be a bit of a sticky wicket. *You may want to
> look at the code on the definition of Experimental Certification if
> you plan on obtaining or maintaining this type of certification. *An
> electronic version of the code is easily reached online.
>
> Neil AZ

Download yourself a copy of FAA Order 8130.2 with Chg 5.

Read Section 10 for comprehension. Everything that applies to ALL and
Group I applies to you.

See para 161b(35).

(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)

I could spend two life times becoming more proficient and chasing FAI
and SSA Awards. Let's see, there's badges, records, diplomas,
competition, and the OLC. Much too much to race for to only fly for
fun. Soaring is a wonderful sport, isn't it? One real concern, check
with your life insurance underwriter about flying gliders and
experimental aircraft.

We'll be looking for your flights on OLC.

Happy racing,

Frank Whiteley

[Bob Kuykendall]

On Jun 15, 7:29*pm, Tony > wrote:
> Worth noting that this applies to Experimental - Exhibition
> certification, not Experimental - Amateur Built

Thanks, you beat me to it.

Bob K.

[NG]

Thanks Frank and Bob:

The FAA small aircraft directorate did refer me to document 8130.2 F
and 8100.8C regarding these same issues. I will study them as you
have also suggested.

Thanks!

Neil

[T8]

On Jun 15, 11:05*pm, Frank Whiteley > wrote:
> On Jun 15, 8:17*pm, NG > wrote:
>
>
>
> > I spoke with the head of the FAA Small Aircraft Directorate for
> > gliders yesterday regarding Experimental Airworthiness Certificates
> > for gliders. *In at least several states and particularly Arizona all
> > gliders are having their Experimental Airworthiness certificates
> > reviewed. *Due to an issue causing my DG505 to have its Standard
> > Airworthiness certificate recently revoked, which I further lost on
> > Federal appeal in front of the NTSB (see my posting June 8th 2010),
> > due to bad paperwork supplied by AMS Flight, d.o.o., I was caused to
> > engage the FAA in this dialogue.
>
> > I was informed by the head of the FAA Small Aircraft Directorate for
> > gliders that he recently had conversations with his supervisors in
> > Washington, D.C. and that in order to obtain or retain an Experimental
> > Airworthiness certificate the glider must be engaged in "racing" and
> > "preparation for racing". *He said an agenda of racing events must be
> > supplied to the FAA at the local FSDO level at the time of issuance or
> > revision of paperwork. *I was told that the Experimental Airworthiness
> > Certificate was NOT meant to be used for "fun flying".
>
> > I asked if badge flying would be considered as a type of racing. *He
> > said that one could attempt to engage the local FSDO with this to see
> > if in their judgement it would be valid, but he would not commit one
> > way or the other. *Having recently engaged the FAA in federal court I
> > have found that they can be a bit of a sticky wicket. *You may want to
> > look at the code on the definition of Experimental Certification if
> > you plan on obtaining or maintaining this type of certification. *An
> > electronic version of the code is easily reached online.
>
> > Neil AZ
>
> Download yourself a copy of FAA Order 8130.2 with Chg 5.
>
> Read Section 10 for comprehension. *Everything that applies to ALL and
> Group I applies to you.
>
> See para 161b(35).
>
> (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)
>
> I could spend two life times becoming more proficient and chasing FAI
> and SSA Awards. *Let's see, there's badges, records, diplomas,
> competition, and the OLC. *Much too much to race for to only fly for
> fun. *Soaring is a wonderful sport, isn't it? *One real concern, check
> with your life insurance underwriter about flying gliders and
> experimental aircraft.
>
> We'll be looking for your flights on OLC.
>
> Happy racing,
>
> Frank Whiteley

One wonders what this is really all about. So far, it appears easily
dealt with. But restive bureaucracies are always a concern.

Am I correct in my understanding that none of this applies to exp -
air racing certificated aircraft licensed before 1992 -- that is,
those of us without annual program letter requirements?

-T8

[Frank Whiteley]

On Jun 16, 8:00*am, T8 > wrote:
> On Jun 15, 11:05*pm, Frank Whiteley > wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Jun 15, 8:17*pm, NG > wrote:
>
> > > I spoke with the head of the FAA Small Aircraft Directorate for
> > > gliders yesterday regarding Experimental Airworthiness Certificates
> > > for gliders. *In at least several states and particularly Arizona all
> > > gliders are having their Experimental Airworthiness certificates
> > > reviewed. *Due to an issue causing my DG505 to have its Standard
> > > Airworthiness certificate recently revoked, which I further lost on
> > > Federal appeal in front of the NTSB (see my posting June 8th 2010),
> > > due to bad paperwork supplied by AMS Flight, d.o.o., I was caused to
> > > engage the FAA in this dialogue.
>
> > > I was informed by the head of the FAA Small Aircraft Directorate for
> > > gliders that he recently had conversations with his supervisors in
> > > Washington, D.C. and that in order to obtain or retain an Experimental
> > > Airworthiness certificate the glider must be engaged in "racing" and
> > > "preparation for racing". *He said an agenda of racing events must be
> > > supplied to the FAA at the local FSDO level at the time of issuance or
> > > revision of paperwork. *I was told that the Experimental Airworthiness
> > > Certificate was NOT meant to be used for "fun flying".
>
> > > I asked if badge flying would be considered as a type of racing. *He
> > > said that one could attempt to engage the local FSDO with this to see
> > > if in their judgement it would be valid, but he would not commit one
> > > way or the other. *Having recently engaged the FAA in federal court I
> > > have found that they can be a bit of a sticky wicket. *You may want to
> > > look at the code on the definition of Experimental Certification if
> > > you plan on obtaining or maintaining this type of certification. *An
> > > electronic version of the code is easily reached online.
>
> > > Neil AZ
>
> > Download yourself a copy of FAA Order 8130.2 with Chg 5.
>
> > Read Section 10 for comprehension. *Everything that applies to ALL and
> > Group I applies to you.
>
> > See para 161b(35).
>
> > (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)
>
> > I could spend two life times becoming more proficient and chasing FAI
> > and SSA Awards. *Let's see, there's badges, records, diplomas,
> > competition, and the OLC. *Much too much to race for to only fly for
> > fun. *Soaring is a wonderful sport, isn't it? *One real concern, check
> > with your life insurance underwriter about flying gliders and
> > experimental aircraft.
>
> > We'll be looking for your flights on OLC.
>
> > Happy racing,
>
> > Frank Whiteley
>
> One wonders what this is really all about. *So far, it appears easily
> dealt with. *But restive bureaucracies are always a concern.
>
> Am I correct in my understanding that none of this applies to exp -
> air racing certificated aircraft licensed before 1992 -- that is,
> those of us without annual program letter requirements?
>
> -T8

The precise pre-/post-moratorium dates are in the order. Section 10,
para 155d.

d. Experimental Airworthiness Certification Moratorium. On July 9,
1993, a moratorium
was established because of a dramatic increase in applications for
special airworthiness certificates
and SFAs for non-U.S.-manufactured aircraft that did not hold TCs
issued under § 21.29. The
moratorium was lifted on August 18, 1993, with interim guidance
provided to certificate these aircraft.
Although the moratorium was established for non-U.S.-manufactured
aircraft, this policy will be used
when issuing a special airworthiness certificate for the experimental
purpose(s) of exhibition or air
racing, regardless of the country of manufacture.

Para 155e gives the pre-moratorium exemption

e. Effectivity. Aircraft that received original airworthiness
certification before July 9, 1993, are
NOT affected by this order unless the original airworthiness
certification purpose changes, for example,
from R&D to exhibition. Those aircraft, except for purpose changes,
will not be affected until the FAA
works with the public to determine the best strategy to certificate
all experimental exhibition and/or air
racing aircraft in accordance with the new policy. The policy
established in this order will not be used
in these cases unless specifically requested by the applicant.

Frank Whiteley

[kirk.stant]

> This sounds scary for us that have not flown in a contest for 15
> years.
> Fred TX-

This is obviously a dastardly plot by the SRA to force all the owners
of nice, new, shiny racing gliders to show up at races and compete,
thereby injecting new life in the (soon to be) growing sport of glider
racing! A Red Bull sponsorship, along with a TV show on ESPN (and hot
chicks in bikinis) is sure to follow....

For those who still insist on not showing up at contests, just list
all the SSA and local contest dates on your program letter, filling in
any blank dates with whatever badge legs you still need, and finally
declaring a random OLC task as a backup on any remaining free days.
Remember to keep a day free every other year for your flight review,
then update the list daily (based on the latest wx forecast and size
of the Gulf Oil Spill) to your friendly neighborhood FSDO, who will be
ecstatic at your level of compliance - promotion for sure!

Or, if any of you proud owners of a nice new ASG-29 or LS-10 don't
feel up to keeping your paperwork straight with the Feds, I'll be
happy to trade you my nice pre-moratorium 3-diamond LS6, which still
does not need a full time secretary to stay legal and in which you can
still fly for fun...

This sure makes me proud to be an American - home of the best
bureaucracy money can buy!

Kirk
66
"Racing to Fly, Flying to Race"

[Nyal Williams[_2_]]

On Jun 16, 1:43*pm, "kirk.stant" > wrote:
> > This sounds scary for us that have not flown in a contest for 15
> > years.
> > Fred TX-
>
> This is obviously a dastardly plot by the SRA to force all the owners
> of nice, new, shiny racing gliders to show up at races and compete,
> thereby injecting new life in the (soon to be) growing sport of glider
> racing! *A Red Bull sponsorship, along with a TV show on ESPN (and hot
> chicks in bikinis) is sure to follow....
>
> For those who still insist on not showing up at contests, just list
> all the SSA and local contest dates on your program letter, filling in
> any blank dates with whatever badge legs you still need, and finally
> declaring a random OLC task as a backup on any remaining free days.
> Remember to keep a day free every other year for your flight review,
> then update the list daily (based on the latest wx forecast and size
> of the Gulf Oil Spill) to your friendly neighborhood FSDO, who will be
> ecstatic at your level of compliance - promotion for sure!
>
> Or, if any of you proud owners of a nice new ASG-29 or LS-10 don't
> feel up to keeping your paperwork straight with the Feds, I'll be
> happy to trade you my nice pre-moratorium 3-diamond LS6, which still
> does not need a full time secretary to stay legal and in which you can
> still fly for fun...
>
> This sure makes me proud to be an American - home of the best
> bureaucracy money can buy!
>
> Kirk
> 66
> "Racing to Fly, Flying to Race"

If clubs organized weekly races around a small triangle, O&R, etc. and
if the SSA would sanction all club races, and if all owners listed all
SSA sanctioned races the problem would be virtually solved. All
glider pilots should join a club.

[Andy[_1_]]

On Jun 16, 11:55*am, Nyal Williams > wrote:

> If clubs organized weekly races around a small triangle, O&R, etc. and
> if the SSA would sanction all club races, and if all owners listed all
> SSA sanctioned races the problem would be virtually solved. *All
> glider pilots should join a club.

I don't think any of that is required. Just buy the cheapest logger
acceptable to OLC and submit a log for every flight you make. OLC is
a contest and every flight is either an entry in that contest or
practice for that contest.

This solution has motivated at least one local pilot to buy a logger.

Andy

[Frank Whiteley]

On Jun 16, 12:55*pm, Nyal Williams > wrote:
> On Jun 16, 1:43*pm, "kirk.stant" > wrote:
>
>
>
> > > This sounds scary for us that have not flown in a contest for 15
> > > years.
> > > Fred TX-
>
> > This is obviously a dastardly plot by the SRA to force all the owners
> > of nice, new, shiny racing gliders to show up at races and compete,
> > thereby injecting new life in the (soon to be) growing sport of glider
> > racing! *A Red Bull sponsorship, along with a TV show on ESPN (and hot
> > chicks in bikinis) is sure to follow....
>
> > For those who still insist on not showing up at contests, just list
> > all the SSA and local contest dates on your program letter, filling in
> > any blank dates with whatever badge legs you still need, and finally
> > declaring a random OLC task as a backup on any remaining free days.
> > Remember to keep a day free every other year for your flight review,
> > then update the list daily (based on the latest wx forecast and size
> > of the Gulf Oil Spill) to your friendly neighborhood FSDO, who will be
> > ecstatic at your level of compliance - promotion for sure!
>
> > Or, if any of you proud owners of a nice new ASG-29 or LS-10 don't
> > feel up to keeping your paperwork straight with the Feds, I'll be
> > happy to trade you my nice pre-moratorium 3-diamond LS6, which still
> > does not need a full time secretary to stay legal and in which you can
> > still fly for fun...
>
> > This sure makes me proud to be an American - home of the best
> > bureaucracy money can buy!
>
> > Kirk
> > 66
> > "Racing to Fly, Flying to Race"
>
> If clubs organized weekly races around a small triangle, O&R, etc. and
> if the SSA would sanction all club races, and if all owners listed all
> SSA sanctioned races the problem would be virtually solved. *All
> glider pilots should join a club.

Unfortunately, premises liability insurance is not in effect during
air meets, thus event insurance is required (perhaps this could be
negotiated). FAI and SSA do make awards on OLC performances, as does
this SSA state governor. I'm not sure internal club racing is an
issue, but sanctions do raise the question.

Sanction fees (if any) could perhaps apply to your 2010 racing series
and it would get a discount on your event insurance, if they would
accept your proposal. Have to look at the details.

Nice idea, but we haven't hosted the Rocky Mountain Soaring Contest
since we discovered this as it was attended by pilots from several
locations. The cost of the additional fees could be charged to the
competing pilots. With enough participation, it could be about the
cost of an aerotow.

Frank Whiteley

[Frank Whiteley]

On Jun 16, 1:18*pm, Frank Whiteley > wrote:
> On Jun 16, 12:55*pm, Nyal Williams > wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Jun 16, 1:43*pm, "kirk.stant" > wrote:
>
> > > > This sounds scary for us that have not flown in a contest for 15
> > > > years.
> > > > Fred TX-
>
> > > This is obviously a dastardly plot by the SRA to force all the owners
> > > of nice, new, shiny racing gliders to show up at races and compete,
> > > thereby injecting new life in the (soon to be) growing sport of glider
> > > racing! *A Red Bull sponsorship, along with a TV show on ESPN (and hot
> > > chicks in bikinis) is sure to follow....
>
> > > For those who still insist on not showing up at contests, just list
> > > all the SSA and local contest dates on your program letter, filling in
> > > any blank dates with whatever badge legs you still need, and finally
> > > declaring a random OLC task as a backup on any remaining free days.
> > > Remember to keep a day free every other year for your flight review,
> > > then update the list daily (based on the latest wx forecast and size
> > > of the Gulf Oil Spill) to your friendly neighborhood FSDO, who will be
> > > ecstatic at your level of compliance - promotion for sure!
>
> > > Or, if any of you proud owners of a nice new ASG-29 or LS-10 don't
> > > feel up to keeping your paperwork straight with the Feds, I'll be
> > > happy to trade you my nice pre-moratorium 3-diamond LS6, which still
> > > does not need a full time secretary to stay legal and in which you can
> > > still fly for fun...
>
> > > This sure makes me proud to be an American - home of the best
> > > bureaucracy money can buy!
>
> > > Kirk
> > > 66
> > > "Racing to Fly, Flying to Race"
>
> > If clubs organized weekly races around a small triangle, O&R, etc. and
> > if the SSA would sanction all club races, and if all owners listed all
> > SSA sanctioned races the problem would be virtually solved. *All
> > glider pilots should join a club.
>
> Unfortunately, premises liability insurance is not in effect during
> air meets, thus event insurance is required (perhaps this could be
> negotiated). *FAI and SSA do make awards on OLC *performances, as does
> this SSA state governor. *I'm not sure internal club racing is an
> issue, but sanctions do raise the question.
>
> Sanction fees (if any) could perhaps apply to your 2010 racing series
> and it would get a discount on your event insurance, if they would
> accept your proposal. *Have to look at the details.
>
> Nice idea, but we haven't hosted the Rocky Mountain Soaring Contest
> since we discovered this as it was attended by pilots from several
> locations. *The cost of the additional fees could be charged to the
> competing pilots. *With enough participation, it could be about the
> cost of an aerotow.
>
> Frank Whiteley

http://www.coloradosoaring.org/awards.htm

[jb92563]

There are about as many "interpretations" of the written regulations
as there are FAA staff.

Its very frustrating and confusing for us mere mortals to know what
applies to our own circumstances..

I just went through a revision of my Special Airworthiness Cert,
because when I bought the plane it was Experimental - Exhibition but
my operating limits where not the same date as the Certificate(Lost
the correct copy) so to be legal I needed to revise/update my
paperwork.

Apparently that just because you filled in the paperwork and a DAR
sent it to KS does not mean that he properly requested it to appear in
the FAA archives.

My several hard copy Special Airwothiness Cetificates had not been in
the FAA records for many years even though I had a hard copy
certificate in my hands(Without matching OPs Limits unfortunately).

In reapplying for a new Special Airworthyness Certificate It was a
surprisingly painless process with the FSDO rep coming out to look
over the subject and together we negotiated the Operating Limits to
our mutual satisfaction, PLUS I added the Air Racing to the Cert. and
now have Experimental - Exhibition/Air Racing

So now when I'm not at a contest or practising racing, then Im
practising for exhibiting(Aerobatics) or exhibiting my aircraft.

Since Im supposed to fly over sparsely populated areas, my exhibitions
are likely to gophers ;-) but I'm not required to list names.

There are no geographical limitations unless I take it to Phase 1
flight testing for 5 hours due to a major modification.

I beleive that Neil's case is probably a "Special" one where there
must be some extenuating circumstances that we don't understand, and
hence the
resistance from the FAA in helping him get AW Certicate.

Or he could be dealing with someone who does not interpret like some
others and probably needs to go elsewhere to get a satisfactory
resolution.

Elevating it to a highly visisble case was probably counter productive
as taking to someone else for another interpretation would have been
easier before.


On Jun 15, 7:17*pm, NG > wrote:
> I spoke with the head of the FAA Small Aircraft Directorate for
> gliders yesterday regarding Experimental Airworthiness Certificates
> for gliders. *In at least several states and particularly Arizona all
> gliders are having their Experimental Airworthiness certificates
> reviewed. *Due to an issue causing my DG505 to have its Standard
> Airworthiness certificate recently revoked, which I further lost on
> Federal appeal in front of the NTSB (see my posting June 8th 2010),
> due to bad paperwork supplied by AMS Flight, d.o.o., I was caused to
> engage the FAA in this dialogue.
>
> I was informed by the head of the FAA Small Aircraft Directorate for
> gliders that he recently had conversations with his supervisors in
> Washington, D.C. and that in order to obtain or retain an Experimental
> Airworthiness certificate the glider must be engaged in "racing" and
> "preparation for racing". *He said an agenda of racing events must be
> supplied to the FAA at the local FSDO level at the time of issuance or
> revision of paperwork. *I was told that the Experimental Airworthiness
> Certificate was NOT meant to be used for "fun flying".
>
> I asked if badge flying would be considered as a type of racing. *He
> said that one could attempt to engage the local FSDO with this to see
> if in their judgement it would be valid, but he would not commit one
> way or the other. *Having recently engaged the FAA in federal court I
> have found that they can be a bit of a sticky wicket. *You may want to
> look at the code on the definition of Experimental Certification if
> you plan on obtaining or maintaining this type of certification. *An
> electronic version of the code is easily reached online.
>
> Neil AZ

[Nyal Williams[_2_]]

On Jun 16, 3:18*pm, Frank Whiteley > wrote:
> On Jun 16, 12:55*pm, Nyal Williams > wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Jun 16, 1:43*pm, "kirk.stant" > wrote:
>
> > > > This sounds scary for us that have not flown in a contest for 15
> > > > years.
> > > > Fred TX-
>
> > > This is obviously a dastardly plot by the SRA to force all the owners
> > > of nice, new, shiny racing gliders to show up at races and compete,
> > > thereby injecting new life in the (soon to be) growing sport of glider
> > > racing! *A Red Bull sponsorship, along with a TV show on ESPN (and hot
> > > chicks in bikinis) is sure to follow....
>
> > > For those who still insist on not showing up at contests, just list
> > > all the SSA and local contest dates on your program letter, filling in
> > > any blank dates with whatever badge legs you still need, and finally
> > > declaring a random OLC task as a backup on any remaining free days.
> > > Remember to keep a day free every other year for your flight review,
> > > then update the list daily (based on the latest wx forecast and size
> > > of the Gulf Oil Spill) to your friendly neighborhood FSDO, who will be
> > > ecstatic at your level of compliance - promotion for sure!
>
> > > Or, if any of you proud owners of a nice new ASG-29 or LS-10 don't
> > > feel up to keeping your paperwork straight with the Feds, I'll be
> > > happy to trade you my nice pre-moratorium 3-diamond LS6, which still
> > > does not need a full time secretary to stay legal and in which you can
> > > still fly for fun...
>
> > > This sure makes me proud to be an American - home of the best
> > > bureaucracy money can buy!
>
> > > Kirk
> > > 66
> > > "Racing to Fly, Flying to Race"
>
> > If clubs organized weekly races around a small triangle, O&R, etc. and
> > if the SSA would sanction all club races, and if all owners listed all
> > SSA sanctioned races the problem would be virtually solved. *All
> > glider pilots should join a club.
>
> Unfortunately, premises liability insurance is not in effect during
> air meets, thus event insurance is required (perhaps this could be
> negotiated). *FAI and SSA do make awards on OLC *performances, as does
> this SSA state governor. *I'm not sure internal club racing is an
> issue, but sanctions do raise the question.
>
> Sanction fees (if any) could perhaps apply to your 2010 racing series
> and it would get a discount on your event insurance, if they would
> accept your proposal. *Have to look at the details.
>
> Nice idea, but we haven't hosted the Rocky Mountain Soaring Contest
> since we discovered this as it was attended by pilots from several
> locations. *The cost of the additional fees could be charged to the
> competing pilots. *With enough participation, it could be about the
> cost of an aerotow.
>
> Frank Whiteley

Frank,

If I remember the reg correctly, it did not suggest who sanctions such
events. What is a legal sanction? Is it a bond or does it require
insurance? Is a sanction, in fact, a requirement? How does this work
for OLC races?