FES selflaunch [Archive] - AviationBanter

Darryl Ramm

February 28th 11, 02:13 AM

On Feb 27, 3:42*pm, Walt Connelly <Walt.Connelly.
> wrote:
> silentpilot;763779 Wrote:
>
> > On Feb 27, 5:31*am, LimaZulu wrote:-
> > I would like to inform you that we made first self-launch with FES
> > installed on Silent 2 sailplane.
> > You can fiind video of this important moment
> > on:http://www.front-electric-sustainer.com
> > Regards,
> > Luka Znidarsic-
>
> > looks very interesting!!!!
>
> While I am fascinated by the self launcher, the sustainer and the like,
> I have long been curious as to why a glider with a motor doesn't require
> an "airplane, single engine, land" license to fly. *Just curious. *
>
> Walt
>
> --
> Walt Connelly

Because its not a ASEL aircraft. What do you would think would happen
if you set loose a typical power pilot in a self launch motorglider?

Having a background with a power ticket can help a lot but so does
some common sense. The quality of checkouts for a self launch
endorsement vary, and especially if done in a touring style
motorglider need some thought in applciation to a single seater
retracting mast type self launcher with basic operation and emergency
procedures. The user community you often find around particular
motorglider types is a huge asset.

Darryl

bildan

February 28th 11, 04:16 AM

On Feb 27, 7:13*pm, Darryl Ramm > wrote:

>
> Because its not a ASEL aircraft. What do you would think would happen
> if you set loose a typical power pilot in a self launch motorglider?

What would happen if you set him loose in a sea plane, a twin or a
jet? It's at least arguable the skill gap between single engine land
and any of those is comparable to that between a pure glider and a
self-launcher yet they each require a specific rating.

Some motorgliders easily approach the complexity and work load of
flying a light twin.

I think Walt has a good question.

Bill Daniels

Bruce Hoult

February 28th 11, 09:33 AM

On Feb 28, 5:16*pm, bildan > wrote:
> Some motorgliders easily approach the complexity and work load of
> flying a light twin.
>
> I think Walt has a good question.

Is there a demonstrated problem? Are there people killing themselves
in motorgliders due to engine handling issues? Is it due to something
that experience in a C152 would help with?

If people are having any problems specific to motorgliders I imagine
it's due to being distracted putting the engine away, or attempting to
start and failing and not having a landing field picked out. Time
banging around a circuit in a 152 isn't going to do anything for that.

Chris Nicholas[_2_]

February 28th 11, 10:19 AM

I recently asked (on a mainly GA Power pilots’) forum what extra
hazards a glider pilot might need to think about, when acquiring a
self-sustaining glider. (I am getting a FES, but not the self-launch
variety.)

Many of the responses related to internal combustion engines, rather
than electric. For what it is worth, this was my question and my first
thought, followed by is the list I got from various people, edited to
avoid duplications;

-------------
Normally, flying a pure glider, there are certain hazards that power
pilots all too frequently fall victim to, that we don't. One example
is pressing on into increasingly bad weather, lowering cloud base,
often resulting in CFIT when the plan B of turning back turns out not
to work. In a glider, it is almost impossible to be in this position
in the first place, because you can't maintain height under a lowering
cloud base that is turning to rain or worse. In fact you wouldn't be
going cross-country initially in those conditions.

By next season, I hope to have a sustainer engine in my glider. This
will enable me to cruise for about one hour at 50 knots at level
height (e.g., to get home instead of landing out in a farmer’s field).
Although it is unlikely that I would be going cross-country in the
conditions described above, it is conceivable that I might use
thermals to reach a patch of bad weather, and so need to avoid the
temptation to fall into the same trap and end up with CFIT.

My question is: what other pitfalls, not normally faced by a glider
pilot, might I now have to be aware of, when going into sustained
powered flight for up to an hour? (I cannot take off with the
sustainer motor – still need a conventional glider launch by winch or
aerotow.)

---------------------
Engine fires - not something a glider pilot normally has to worry
about.

Effect of icing.

Carb ice.

Engine failures - you'd have to go through some of the same drills as
a powered pilot.

The effect on your compass. It will need swinging twice - once with
the engine on and working and once in the pure glider mode.

The effect of propwash on the handling. if it blows over the elevator
and or rudder it will make them much more powerful and also torque and
gyroscopic effect will alter the handling.

Depending on where the thrust line is it will also affect the pitch,
particularly if it is pylon mounted.

Added weight of engine and fuel will complicate C of G /Ballast/etc
calculations.

Fuel contamination will be a 'new' problem.

Mag problems, freezing of moisture on ignition.

Fuel pump problems - assuming your engine is above the tank..

Noise and vibration will increase fatigue.

Vibration will affect fatigue life of glider sealing of hatches etc
assuming your engine is a 'pop out'.

'Jamming' of controls from cockpit to engine potential 'heating' of
cockpit when engine is running.

Extra drag if engine sticks in 'out' position.

----------------------

What do others think?

Chris N.

Andy[_1_]

February 28th 11, 02:26 PM

On Feb 27, 4:42*pm, Walt Connelly <Walt.Connelly.
> wrote:
> silentpilot;763779 Wrote:
>
> > On Feb 27, 5:31*am, LimaZulu wrote:-
> > I would like to inform you that we made first self-launch with FES
> > installed on Silent 2 sailplane.
> > You can fiind video of this important moment
> > on:http://www.front-electric-sustainer.com
> > Regards,
> > Luka Znidarsic-
>
> > looks very interesting!!!!
>
> While I am fascinated by the self launcher, the sustainer and the like,
> I have long been curious as to why a glider with a motor doesn't require
> an "airplane, single engine, land" license to fly. *Just curious. *
>
> Walt
>
> --
> Walt Connelly

The simple answer is that if FAA defines a US registered aircraft as a
"glider" then an FAA glider rating is required to fly it. Would you
want the FAA to redefine "glider"?

In many other countries a glider rating or qualification is not
sufficient to fly self launch but it is sufficient to fly a
"sustainer". This is one of the reasons that sustainer engines (aka
turbos) are far more common that engine installations capable of self
launch, except in USA.

Andy

Walt Connelly

February 28th 11, 02:53 PM

On Feb 27, 7:13*pm, Darryl Ramm wrote:

Because its not a ASEL aircraft. What do you would think would happen
if you set loose a typical power pilot in a self launch motorglider?

What would happen if you set him loose in a sea plane, a twin or a
jet? It's at least arguable the skill gap between single engine land
and any of those is comparable to that between a pure glider and a
self-launcher yet they each require a specific rating.

Some motorgliders easily approach the complexity and work load of
flying a light twin.

I think Walt has a good question.

Bill Daniels

I think my point was missed. I am not opposed to the glider pilot having an engine, I was curious as to how one got around the ASEL situation. In my mind if you put an engine on and glider it becomes an ASEL. Take the pure motor glider with an engine hanging on the nose. Could an ASEL pilot check out in one and fly it legally? Perhaps a light sport pilot could do the same? Sure these things are gonna float like no conventional ASEL would but I'm just asking a question. I need to check the regs on this for myself when I get the chance but I realize this forum contains a plethora of information.

I have a commercial rating for both airplanes and gliders so I think I see both sides of the equation. In my mind, the glider pilot's skill is greater than an equivalent time ASEL type. I learned things I never knew and developed greater skills in flying than I had when I transitioned from power to gliders., But when an ASEL type want to fly a multi, he is required to get a multi engine rating and it appears on his license. Same with seaplane and other different types of ratings. I believe the endorsement is all that is required of a glider pilot for a motor glider, am I right?

For the record I have seen a high time, highly experienced power and glider pilot make a major blunder with his motor out. Scared the crappola out of me and I was standing on the ground at the time. The bottom line is that proper training and check outs are everything.

Walt

Darryl Ramm

February 28th 11, 08:12 PM

Walt

It does not become an ASEL, its type certified (or experimental) as a
glider. Now it might be possible if somebody really wanted to have
some touring motorglider certified under either - and some may well
have been.

Asking for them to be ASEL would be the *last* think I would want, but
I am concerned that the self launch endorsement training can be
problematic - its possible for somebody to sign a pilot off but as
Bill says some of these are complex and things like system
understanding, pre-flight/simple maintenance and emergency procedures
need to be really gone through well. And all this vary widely between
types--especially between a typical retracting mast and touring style
motorglider. And chance to practice emergency procedures in a complex
single seater without the instructor being there is reduced, but this
at least better get talked about, and the instructor better make sure
you know where to put your fingers when things go pear shaped.

I've met motorglider owners who seem oblivious to about simple stuff
like the proper oil to use, how the lubrication system and different
alarms on the engines work -- scary stuff. Did they ever read the
pilot or maintenance manual?

I used to have a power license, I did my formal self launch sign off
in a Grob 109, not at all relevant to the ASH-26E that I fly, but both
the (very experienced) instructor and I knew that and he pushed me on
a nasty windy day. In reality it was really a ASEL taildragger sign
off, but we talked though some of the nasty stuff with retracting mast
motorgliders. Then through the ASH-26E owners community I ended up
sitting down with a current very experienced owner and did an informal
ground school then talked things over with an instructor/examiner who
signed me off in the ASH-26E. I felt like I had pretty good training,
but YMMV.

There are some good instructors out here who can teach this stuff, but
there are just not many of them, and not many two seat motorgliders.

Darryl

mike

February 28th 11, 08:18 PM

On Feb 28, 7:53*am, Walt Connelly <Walt.Connelly.
> wrote:
> bildan;763822 Wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Feb 27, 7:13*pm, Darryl Ramm wrote:
> > -
>
> > Because its not a ASEL aircraft. What do you would think would happen
> > if you set loose a typical power pilot in a self launch motorglider?-
>
> > What would happen if you set him loose in a sea plane, a twin or a
> > jet? *It's at least arguable the skill gap between single engine land
> > and any of those is comparable to that between a pure glider and a
> > self-launcher yet they each require a specific rating.
>
> > Some motorgliders easily approach the complexity and work load of
> > flying a light twin.
>
> > I think Walt has a good question.
>
> > Bill Daniels
>
> I think my point was missed. *I am not opposed to the glider pilot
> having an engine, I was curious as to how one got around the ASEL
> situation. *In my mind if you put an engine on and glider it becomes an
> ASEL. * Take the pure motor glider with an engine hanging on the nose.
> Could an ASEL pilot check out in one and fly it legally? *Perhaps a
> light sport pilot could do the same? *Sure these things are gonna float
> like no conventional ASEL would but I'm just asking a question. I need
> to check the regs on this for myself when I get the chance but I realize
> this forum contains a plethora of information.
>
> I have a commercial rating for both airplanes and gliders so I think I
> see both sides of the equation. *In my mind, the glider pilot's skill is
> greater than an equivalent time ASEL type. *I learned things I never
> knew and developed greater skills in flying than I had when I
> transitioned from power to gliders., *But when an ASEL type want to fly
> a multi, he is required to get a multi engine rating and it appears on
> his license. *Same with seaplane and other different types of ratings.
> I believe the endorsement is all that is required of a glider pilot for
> a motor glider, am I right?
>
> For the record I have seen a high time, highly experienced power and
> glider pilot make a major blunder with his motor out. *Scared the
> crappola out of me and I was standing on the ground at the time. *The
> bottom line is that proper training and check outs are everything.
>
> Walt
>
> --
> Walt Connelly

My $ .02

What makes an aircraft a motor glider is the "span loading", which
determines, more than a power source, the flight characteristics of an
aircraft.

Mike

Mike the Strike

February 28th 11, 08:35 PM

On Feb 28, 1:18*pm, mike > wrote:
> On Feb 28, 7:53*am, Walt Connelly <Walt.Connelly.
>
>
>
> > wrote:
> > bildan;763822 Wrote:
>
> > > On Feb 27, 7:13*pm, Darryl Ramm wrote:
> > > -
>
> > > Because its not a ASEL aircraft. What do you would think would happen
> > > if you set loose a typical power pilot in a self launch motorglider?-
>
> > > What would happen if you set him loose in a sea plane, a twin or a
> > > jet? *It's at least arguable the skill gap between single engine land
> > > and any of those is comparable to that between a pure glider and a
> > > self-launcher yet they each require a specific rating.
>
> > > Some motorgliders easily approach the complexity and work load of
> > > flying a light twin.
>
> > > I think Walt has a good question.
>
> > > Bill Daniels
>
> > I think my point was missed. *I am not opposed to the glider pilot
> > having an engine, I was curious as to how one got around the ASEL
> > situation. *In my mind if you put an engine on and glider it becomes an
> > ASEL. * Take the pure motor glider with an engine hanging on the nose..
> > Could an ASEL pilot check out in one and fly it legally? *Perhaps a
> > light sport pilot could do the same? *Sure these things are gonna float
> > like no conventional ASEL would but I'm just asking a question. I need
> > to check the regs on this for myself when I get the chance but I realize
> > this forum contains a plethora of information.
>
> > I have a commercial rating for both airplanes and gliders so I think I
> > see both sides of the equation. *In my mind, the glider pilot's skill is
> > greater than an equivalent time ASEL type. *I learned things I never
> > knew and developed greater skills in flying than I had when I
> > transitioned from power to gliders., *But when an ASEL type want to fly
> > a multi, he is required to get a multi engine rating and it appears on
> > his license. *Same with seaplane and other different types of ratings..
> > I believe the endorsement is all that is required of a glider pilot for
> > a motor glider, am I right?
>
> > For the record I have seen a high time, highly experienced power and
> > glider pilot make a major blunder with his motor out. *Scared the
> > crappola out of me and I was standing on the ground at the time. *The
> > bottom line is that proper training and check outs are everything.
>
> > Walt
>
> > --
> > Walt Connelly
>
> My $ .02
>
> What makes an aircraft a motor glider is the "span loading", which
> determines, more than a power source, the flight characteristics of an
> aircraft.
>
> Mike

The FAA certified Spaceship One as a glider. Presumably this is
because it didn't have an engine and they didn't know how to certify
an aircraft with a rocket motor.

I'm not sure that it would meet your "span loading" criterion!

Mike

silentpilot

February 28th 11, 09:37 PM

On Feb 27, 5:15*pm, key > wrote:
> Very interesting! *What are your plans for developing self-launch
> electric sailplanes?
>
> Key Dismukes

THIS WAS THE FIRST FLIGHT OF A FRONT ELECTRIC SELF LAUNCH IN THE
WORLD !!!

development is over.........
tests are in progress.........
success is coming because of:

ease of use
foolproof controls and operations
no maintenance

similar to the 20 years old carat but electric and prop folds back

ecologic.............

silentpilot

February 28th 11, 09:49 PM

> While I am fascinated by the self launcher, the sustainer and the like,
> I have long been curious as to why a glider with a motor doesn't require
> an "airplane, single engine, land" license to fly. *Just curious. *
>
> Walt

because some bureaucrat decided it is a glider.........
and you can only fly it with a glider licence.
bureaucracy will never keep up with progress.

but in some country a touring motor glider is considered an ultralight
about as an "airplane, single engine, land"

mike

February 28th 11, 10:10 PM

On Feb 28, 1:35*pm, Mike the Strike > wrote:
> On Feb 28, 1:18*pm, mike > wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Feb 28, 7:53*am, Walt Connelly <Walt.Connelly.
>
> > > wrote:
> > > bildan;763822 Wrote:
>
> > > > On Feb 27, 7:13*pm, Darryl Ramm wrote:
> > > > -
>
> > > > Because its not a ASEL aircraft. What do you would think would happen
> > > > if you set loose a typical power pilot in a self launch motorglider?-
>
> > > > What would happen if you set him loose in a sea plane, a twin or a
> > > > jet? *It's at least arguable the skill gap between single engine land
> > > > and any of those is comparable to that between a pure glider and a
> > > > self-launcher yet they each require a specific rating.
>
> > > > Some motorgliders easily approach the complexity and work load of
> > > > flying a light twin.
>
> > > > I think Walt has a good question.
>
> > > > Bill Daniels
>
> > > I think my point was missed. *I am not opposed to the glider pilot
> > > having an engine, I was curious as to how one got around the ASEL
> > > situation. *In my mind if you put an engine on and glider it becomes an
> > > ASEL. * Take the pure motor glider with an engine hanging on the nose.
> > > Could an ASEL pilot check out in one and fly it legally? *Perhaps a
> > > light sport pilot could do the same? *Sure these things are gonna float
> > > like no conventional ASEL would but I'm just asking a question. I need
> > > to check the regs on this for myself when I get the chance but I realize
> > > this forum contains a plethora of information.
>
> > > I have a commercial rating for both airplanes and gliders so I think I
> > > see both sides of the equation. *In my mind, the glider pilot's skill is
> > > greater than an equivalent time ASEL type. *I learned things I never
> > > knew and developed greater skills in flying than I had when I
> > > transitioned from power to gliders., *But when an ASEL type want to fly
> > > a multi, he is required to get a multi engine rating and it appears on
> > > his license. *Same with seaplane and other different types of ratings.
> > > I believe the endorsement is all that is required of a glider pilot for
> > > a motor glider, am I right?
>
> > > For the record I have seen a high time, highly experienced power and
> > > glider pilot make a major blunder with his motor out. *Scared the
> > > crappola out of me and I was standing on the ground at the time. *The
> > > bottom line is that proper training and check outs are everything.
>
> > > Walt
>
> > > --
> > > Walt Connelly
>
> > My $ .02
>
> > What makes an aircraft a motor glider is the "span loading", which
> > determines, more than a power source, the flight characteristics of an
> > aircraft.
>
> > Mike
>
> The FAA certified Spaceship One as a glider. * Presumably this is
> because it didn't have an engine and they didn't know how to certify
> an aircraft with a rocket motor.
>
> I'm not sure that it would meet your "span loading" criterion!
>
> Mike

It is not "MY" criterion! The FAA made it "THEIR" criterion.

Mike

Alexander Georgas

February 28th 11, 11:29 PM

On Feb 28, 4:53*pm, Walt Connelly <Walt.Connelly.
> wrote:
> bildan;763822 Wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Feb 27, 7:13*pm, Darryl Ramm wrote:
> > -
>
> > Because its not a ASEL aircraft. What do you would think would happen
> > if you set loose a typical power pilot in a self launch motorglider?-
>
> > What would happen if you set him loose in a sea plane, a twin or a
> > jet? *It's at least arguable the skill gap between single engine land
> > and any of those is comparable to that between a pure glider and a
> > self-launcher yet they each require a specific rating.
>
> > Some motorgliders easily approach the complexity and work load of
> > flying a light twin.
>
> > I think Walt has a good question.
>
> > Bill Daniels
>
> I think my point was missed. *I am not opposed to the glider pilot
> having an engine, I was curious as to how one got around the ASEL
> situation. *In my mind if you put an engine on and glider it becomes an
> ASEL. * Take the pure motor glider with an engine hanging on the nose.
> Could an ASEL pilot check out in one and fly it legally? *Perhaps a
> light sport pilot could do the same? *Sure these things are gonna float
> like no conventional ASEL would but I'm just asking a question. I need
> to check the regs on this for myself when I get the chance but I realize
> this forum contains a plethora of information.
>
> I have a commercial rating for both airplanes and gliders so I think I
> see both sides of the equation. *In my mind, the glider pilot's skill is
> greater than an equivalent time ASEL type. *I learned things I never
> knew and developed greater skills in flying than I had when I
> transitioned from power to gliders., *But when an ASEL type want to fly
> a multi, he is required to get a multi engine rating and it appears on
> his license. *Same with seaplane and other different types of ratings.
> I believe the endorsement is all that is required of a glider pilot for
> a motor glider, am I right?
>
> For the record I have seen a high time, highly experienced power and
> glider pilot make a major blunder with his motor out. *Scared the
> crappola out of me and I was standing on the ground at the time. *The
> bottom line is that proper training and check outs are everything.
>
> Walt
>
> --
> Walt Connelly

Both types of pilots are highly skilled and well trained for their
particular machines. It just is that sticking an engine into a modern
sailplane makes it as much of an ASEL as turning of the engine on a
152 makes it a soaring machine.

The Cessna will glide, but in a very different manner from a glider.
Conversely, an SLMG with its long wings, slippery surface and
specialized engine designed exclusively for full power operation and a
very narrow flight envelope (the one I fly will go from stall to stall
+12 knots before it overrevs) is far from the typical ASEL experience.

Eric Greenwell[_4_]

March 1st 11, 03:44 AM

On 2/28/2011 2:19 AM, Chris Nicholas wrote:
> I recently asked (on a mainly GA Power pilots’) forum what extra
> hazards a glider pilot might need to think about, when acquiring a
> self-sustaining glider. (I am getting a FES, but not the self-launch
> variety.)
>
> Many of the responses related to internal combustion engines, rather
> than electric. For what it is worth, this was my question and my first
> thought, followed by is the list I got from various people, edited to
> avoid duplications;

I address some of the problems in my "A Guide to Self-launching
Sailplane Operation Mar/2004" (tinyurl.com/yfs7tnz); however, because
it's a sustainer with simple "retraction" and electric, you avoid
many/most of the problems.

Read my Guide, then after a season with the FES, let me know what
_should_ have been in the Guide to prepare you for your glider.

--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA (change ".netto" to ".us" to
email me)

- "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation Mar/2004" Much of what
you need to know tinyurl.com/yfs7tnz

Chris Nicholas[_2_]

March 1st 11, 01:04 PM

Eric, thanks. Looks very comprehensive. I will read it over time,
and get back to you if I have anything to add.

Regards - Chris.

Dan[_6_]

March 1st 11, 02:11 PM

On Feb 27, 2:31*am, LimaZulu > wrote:
> I would like to inform you that we made first self-launch with FES
> installed on Silent 2 sailplane.
> You can fiind video of this important moment on:http://www.front-electric-sustainer.com
>
> Regards,
>
> Luka Znidarsic

Luka,
This is really a great achievement. Congratulations to you and your
team.
I wish you luck in the further development of the FES concept.
I look forward to seeing your future progress.
Bravo!
Dan Rihn
WO

Andy[_1_]

March 1st 11, 03:00 PM

On Feb 28, 7:26*am, Andy > wrote:

> In many other countries a glider rating or qualification is not
> sufficient to fly self launch but it is sufficient to fly a
> "sustainer".

I'm going to withdraw this statement since it does not seem to be true
under current EASA rules. After doing a bit of research I'm not sure
anymore that it ever was true.

Under current EASA rules the dividing line seems to be between powered
sailplanes (either self launching, or self sustaining) and touring
motor gliders.

Since we have pilots from all round the world reading this group I'd
be interested in feedback on whether there is now, or ever was, a
difference in qualification required for self launch vs sustainer
(turbo) gliders in your country.

Andy

Chris Nicholas[_2_]

March 1st 11, 03:21 PM

It was, and still is, true for the UK that “a glider rating or
qualification is not sufficient to fly self launch but it is
sufficient to fly a sustainer”. For a self launch, a PPL is required;
for glider/sustainers, no licence is needed at present. (There is not
only no current legal requirement in the UK;there is no UK CAA-issued
glider pilot licence to hold at present).

EASA pilot licensing for gliders is not yet in force for the UK.

When it comes, I have been told it will continue this distinction, but
with the difference that glider pilots will have to have a licence to
fly gliders.

I have heard that existing glider pilots (unlicensed) will be granted
a licence under a form of “grandfather” rights, I await news of how
that will happen, when (2012?), and at what cost.

Chris N.

Chris Nicholas[_2_]

March 6th 11, 12:52 PM

Latest I heard is that the UK CAA thinks that the transition to EASA
licenses for UK glider pilots will take place over 3 years, 2012 to
2015. This came from a CAA slide presentation late 2010. I have not
heard anything different recently, but it was covered by a caveat that
it was not yet definite.

Meanwhile, in the UK, we are still able to fly a turbo without a
licence. They are classed as gliders.

Chris N.

Andy[_1_]

March 6th 11, 03:50 PM

On Mar 6, 5:52*am, Chris Nicholas > wrote:
> Latest I heard is that the UK CAA thinks that the transition to EASA
> licenses for UK glider pilots will take place over 3 years, 2012 to
> 2015. *This came from a CAA slide presentation late 2010. I have not
> heard anything different recently, but it was covered by a caveat that
> it was not yet definite.
>
> Meanwhile, in the UK, we are still able to fly a turbo without a
> licence. They are classed as gliders.
>
> Chris N.

Thanks for the update Chris.

Can someone from Germany, South Africa, Austalia, or elsewhere please
comment on whether there is a different pilot qualification required
for self launch vs. sustainer gliders in your country.

Andy

BruceGreeff

March 6th 11, 08:13 PM

in South Africa there is one Glider Pilot License - Endorsed per rated
launch type.
Winch, Aerotow, Selflaunch and Touring Motor Glider.

The last has been contentious , and has a separate skills test and
different training.

Regulation at present is under the obsolete Air Nav Regulations because
the new reg left gliders out...

That will soon be rectified for Tour Motor gliders, putting them as a
rating under part 62.(Equivalent to NPPL in the UK)

The entire administration of recreational pilots licenses is currently
being somewhat arbitrarily changed by a newly created and not
particularly accountable Recreational Aviation Administration. Glider
pilot's licenses are currently being issued that have no rating for tour
motor gliders, but have a rating expiry date for the non-existent
rating. One assumes this is because they want to make the TMG a stand
alone license rather than a rating.

We have now had 4 months of chaos - so - for now - legally - and
according to the Part 149 Manual of procedure approved by CAA but not
applied by RAASA, there is one GPL with Tour Gliders and other motorised
gliders as a rating. The span loading rule is applied.

So - for the foreseeable, Pure glider, Sustainer and Self launch gliders
will remain under GPL. There is no reason other than political and
financial to move TMGs to the NPPL, but it is a definite objective of
various parties to do so.

Cheers
Bruce

On 2011/03/06 5:50 PM, Andy wrote:
> On Mar 6, 5:52 am, Chris > wrote:
>> Latest I heard is that the UK CAA thinks that the transition to EASA
>> licenses for UK glider pilots will take place over 3 years, 2012 to
>> 2015. This came from a CAA slide presentation late 2010. I have not
>> heard anything different recently, but it was covered by a caveat that
>> it was not yet definite.
>>
>> Meanwhile, in the UK, we are still able to fly a turbo without a
>> licence. They are classed as gliders.
>>
>> Chris N.
>
> Thanks for the update Chris.
>
> Can someone from Germany, South Africa, Austalia, or elsewhere please
> comment on whether there is a different pilot qualification required
> for self launch vs. sustainer gliders in your country.
>
> Andy

--
Bruce Greeff
T59D #1771 & Std Cirrus #57