IFR in motorglider?

[cp]

Question:

Can I, a commercial & instrument rated power and glider pilot legally
fly IFR in a motorglider (which is IFR certified) if I do not have a
current medical?

Thanks!

Chuck

[Tony Verhulst]

cp wrote:
> Question:
>
> Can I, a commercial & instrument rated power and glider pilot legally
> fly IFR in a motorglider (which is IFR certified) if I do not have a
> current medical?

Oh, this is a good one :-). I suspect that your certificate reads
"instrument, airplane" but, a motor glider is not an airplane, as far as
the FAA is concerned.

Tony V.

[Bob Greenblatt]

On 6/29/04 2:37 PM, in article
, "cp"
> wrote:

> Question:
>
> Can I, a commercial & instrument rated power and glider pilot legally
> fly IFR in a motorglider (which is IFR certified) if I do not have a
> current medical?
>
> Thanks!
>
> Chuck
Good one! I would guess that the answer is yes provided the glider is
current re VOR, transponder and altimeter checks, and you have met the
instrument experience and competency requirements of 61.57.

Bob
CFI, CFII, CFIG

--
Bob
bobgreenblattATmsnDOTcom <--fix this before responding

[Andy Durbin]

(cp) wrote in message >...
> Question:
>
> Can I, a commercial & instrument rated power and glider pilot legally
> fly IFR in a motorglider (which is IFR certified) if I do not have a
> current medical?
>
> Thanks!
>
> Chuck

You don't say what country you operate in. In USA no medical is
required for any glider operation.

Andy

[Tom Seim]

(cp) wrote in message >...
> Question:
>
> Can I, a commercial & instrument rated power and glider pilot legally
> fly IFR in a motorglider (which is IFR certified) if I do not have a
> current medical?
>
If the legality of your flight depends upon a certificate that
requires a current medical (which I think is the case), no.

[Andy Durbin]

Tony Verhulst > wrote in message >...
> cp wrote:
> > Question:
> >
> > Can I, a commercial & instrument rated power and glider pilot legally
> > fly IFR in a motorglider (which is IFR certified) if I do not have a
> > current medical?
>
> Oh, this is a good one :-). I suspect that your certificate reads
> "instrument, airplane" but, a motor glider is not an airplane, as far as
> the FAA is concerned.
>
> Tony V.

An instrument airplane rating is required to operate IFR in a glider.

Currency requirements as defined in

Section 61.57: Recent flight experience: Pilot in command.

(2) For the purpose of obtaining instrument experience in a glider,
performed and logged under actual or simulated instrument conditions--
(i) At least 3 hours of instrument time in flight, of which 1\1/2\
hours may be acquired in an airplane or a glider if no passengers are
to be carried; or
(ii) 3 hours of instrument time in flight in a glider if a passenger
is to be carried.


Note that being intrument current in airplanes does not assure
instrument currency in gliders.


Andy

[Paul Lynch]

The problem is getting the 1.5 hours (of the 3 required) in the glider to
get current. Since you are single seat, you cannot legally do simulated
instrument. That means getting in the appropriately equipped 2-seater to get
legally current.

The original poster had a motorglider. Should that be a two seater, the
challenges get smaller.

Paul

"Andy Durbin" > wrote in message
om...
> Tony Verhulst > wrote in message
>...
> > cp wrote:
> > > Question:
> > >
> > > Can I, a commercial & instrument rated power and glider pilot legally
> > > fly IFR in a motorglider (which is IFR certified) if I do not have a
> > > current medical?
> >
> > Oh, this is a good one :-). I suspect that your certificate reads
> > "instrument, airplane" but, a motor glider is not an airplane, as far as
> > the FAA is concerned.
> >
> > Tony V.
>
> An instrument airplane rating is required to operate IFR in a glider.
>
> Currency requirements as defined in
>
> Section 61.57: Recent flight experience: Pilot in command.
>
> (2) For the purpose of obtaining instrument experience in a glider,
> performed and logged under actual or simulated instrument conditions--
> (i) At least 3 hours of instrument time in flight, of which 1\1/2\
> hours may be acquired in an airplane or a glider if no passengers are
> to be carried; or
> (ii) 3 hours of instrument time in flight in a glider if a passenger
> is to be carried.
>
>
> Note that being intrument current in airplanes does not assure
> instrument currency in gliders.
>
>
> Andy

[Andy Durbin]

"Paul Lynch" > wrote in message news:<utBEc.8566$mN3.7647@lakeread06>...
> The problem is getting the 1.5 hours (of the 3 required) in the glider to
> get current. Since you are single seat, you cannot legally do simulated
> instrument. That means getting in the appropriately equipped 2-seater to get
> legally current.
>
> The original poster had a motorglider. Should that be a two seater, the
> challenges get smaller.
>
> Paul


Actually, the regulation imposes no requirement to do any of the 3
hours of instrument flight in a glider unless passengers are to be
carried. It just says 1.5 hours *may* be done in a glider.

The real problem may be keeping up 3 hours of instrument flight for
every six months following an IPC or initial issuance of the
instrument rating. For those not familiar with instrument currency
requirements – the 6-month currency must be maintained, once it
is lost it can only regained by taking an Instrument Proficiency
Check. You cannot *get* current by flying 3 hours in 6 months, you
can only maintain existing currency.

Note that the IPC to qualify for glider IFR may be done in a glider or
an airplane. So one possible scenario is that the airplane instrument
pilot takes an IPC in an airplane then, in addition to the 6
approaches with holding etc required every 6 months to keep airplane
instrument current, the pilot also ensures that he flies 3 hours of
instrument time in the same 6 months. That keeps the pilot legally
current for airplane and glider IFR without flying a glider at all so
long as passengers are not carried.

The other way would be to do an IPC in a 2-place glider. Since the
Instrument PTS does not apply to gliders, the instructor could choose
what tasks had to be performed. All you need then is an instrument
instructor who is glider rated and a suitable glider. Following the
glider IPC you then need to maintain the 3 hours instrument flight
every 6 months, or get the 3 hours in the next 6 months, or to go and
get another IPC.


Andy

[Brian Case]

Actually the those were the old regulations. With the rewrite of FAR
61 a few years ago they dropped the hour requirment to stay current.
Now all that is required is 6 Approaches and entering a holding
pattern every 6 months.


As it has had been before if you let this expire you have an
additional 6 months to perform these approaches and holding to become
current again. If however you go for more that 12 months without
becoming current you will have to take an instrument proficency check
with a CFII.

Your are correct that currency in an airplane will transfer to glider.

Brian Case
CFIIG/ASEL



> Actually, the regulation imposes no requirement to do any of the 3
> hours of instrument flight in a glider unless passengers are to be
> carried. It just says 1.5 hours *may* be done in a glider.
>
> The real problem may be keeping up 3 hours of instrument flight for
> every six months following an IPC or initial issuance of the
> instrument rating. For those not familiar with instrument currency
> requirements – the 6-month currency must be maintained, once it
> is lost it can only regained by taking an Instrument Proficiency
> Check. You cannot *get* current by flying 3 hours in 6 months, you
> can only maintain existing currency.
>
> Note that the IPC to qualify for glider IFR may be done in a glider or
> an airplane. So one possible scenario is that the airplane instrument
> pilot takes an IPC in an airplane then, in addition to the 6
> approaches with holding etc required every 6 months to keep airplane
> instrument current, the pilot also ensures that he flies 3 hours of
> instrument time in the same 6 months. That keeps the pilot legally
> current for airplane and glider IFR without flying a glider at all so
> long as passengers are not carried.
>
> The other way would be to do an IPC in a 2-place glider. Since the
> Instrument PTS does not apply to gliders, the instructor could choose
> what tasks had to be performed. All you need then is an instrument
> instructor who is glider rated and a suitable glider. Following the
> glider IPC you then need to maintain the 3 hours instrument flight
> every 6 months, or get the 3 hours in the next 6 months, or to go and
> get another IPC.
>
>
> Andy

[Bill Daniels]

"Brian Case" > wrote in message
m...
> Actually the those were the old regulations. With the rewrite of FAR
> 61 a few years ago they dropped the hour requirment to stay current.
> Now all that is required is 6 Approaches and entering a holding
> pattern every 6 months.
>
>
> As it has had been before if you let this expire you have an
> additional 6 months to perform these approaches and holding to become
> current again. If however you go for more that 12 months without
> becoming current you will have to take an instrument proficency check
> with a CFII.
>
> Your are correct that currency in an airplane will transfer to glider.
>
> Brian Case
> CFIIG/ASEL
>
>
>
> > Actually, the regulation imposes no requirement to do any of the 3
> > hours of instrument flight in a glider unless passengers are to be
> > carried. It just says 1.5 hours *may* be done in a glider.
> >
> > The real problem may be keeping up 3 hours of instrument flight for
> > every six months following an IPC or initial issuance of the
> > instrument rating. For those not familiar with instrument currency
> > requirements – the 6-month currency must be maintained, once it
> > is lost it can only regained by taking an Instrument Proficiency
> > Check. You cannot *get* current by flying 3 hours in 6 months, you
> > can only maintain existing currency.
> >
> > Note that the IPC to qualify for glider IFR may be done in a glider or
> > an airplane. So one possible scenario is that the airplane instrument
> > pilot takes an IPC in an airplane then, in addition to the 6
> > approaches with holding etc required every 6 months to keep airplane
> > instrument current, the pilot also ensures that he flies 3 hours of
> > instrument time in the same 6 months. That keeps the pilot legally
> > current for airplane and glider IFR without flying a glider at all so
> > long as passengers are not carried.
> >
> > The other way would be to do an IPC in a 2-place glider. Since the
> > Instrument PTS does not apply to gliders, the instructor could choose
> > what tasks had to be performed. All you need then is an instrument
> > instructor who is glider rated and a suitable glider. Following the
> > glider IPC you then need to maintain the 3 hours instrument flight
> > every 6 months, or get the 3 hours in the next 6 months, or to go and
> > get another IPC.
> >
> >
> > Andy

I always considered an IPC an opportunity and not a burden. I got one every
6 months even though I had the time and approaches in real IMC. I sought
out the crustiest CFII's I could find and asked them to put me through the
ringer. An old geezer who flew for an air freight company was the best. I
figured since I was really out there in the wild gray yonder I needed to be
as sharp as possible. They always taught me something I didn't know.

Usually, the IPC meant the simulated loss of the vacuum gyros and the whole
avionics stack except for the ADF and marker beacon receiver. He'd hand me
a handheld comm radio after turning off or covering up all the really useful
gadgets and say, "Put on the hood and get me down alive". A few holding
patterns and non-precision approaches with no autopilot and a 45 knot
crosswind followed.

Single pilot IFR in IMC is not for wusses.

Bill Daniels

[Andy Durbin]

(Brian Case) wrote in message >...

> Actually the those were the old regulations. With the rewrite of FAR
> 61 a few years ago they dropped the hour requirment to stay current.
> Now all that is required is 6 Approaches and entering a holding
> pattern every 6 months.
>

No - Current 61.57 specifies *approaches* for airplane currency but
*hours* for glider currency. The pertinent parts were quoted earlier
in this thread.


> As it has had been before if you let this expire you have an
> additional 6 months to perform these approaches and holding to become
> current again. If however you go for more that 12 months without
> becoming current you will have to take an instrument proficency check
> with a CFII.
>

Again, the glider currency will only be maintained if 3 hours of
instrument flight are performed in the initial 6 months or the
following 6 months.

> Your are correct that currency in an airplane will transfer to glider.

I didn't say that. In fact I pointed out that it may not be the case.
The 6 approaches required for airplane currency may be completed in
less than the 3 flight hours required for glider instrument currency.

Andy Durbin (CFII)

[Brian Case]

Thanks Andy I did go read it, and you are correct. I learned something
I didn't know. Amazing that that can happen here.

Brian
CFIIG/ASEL


(Andy Durbin) wrote in message >...
> (Brian Case) wrote in message >...
>
> > Actually the those were the old regulations. With the rewrite of FAR
> > 61 a few years ago they dropped the hour requirment to stay current.
> > Now all that is required is 6 Approaches and entering a holding
> > pattern every 6 months.
> >
>
> No - Current 61.57 specifies *approaches* for airplane currency but
> *hours* for glider currency. The pertinent parts were quoted earlier
> in this thread.
>
>
> > As it has had been before if you let this expire you have an
> > additional 6 months to perform these approaches and holding to become
> > current again. If however you go for more that 12 months without
> > becoming current you will have to take an instrument proficency check
> > with a CFII.
> >
>
> Again, the glider currency will only be maintained if 3 hours of
> instrument flight are performed in the initial 6 months or the
> following 6 months.
>
> > Your are correct that currency in an airplane will transfer to glider.
>
> I didn't say that. In fact I pointed out that it may not be the case.
> The 6 approaches required for airplane currency may be completed in
> less than the 3 flight hours required for glider instrument currency.
>
> Andy Durbin (CFII)

[Mark James Boyd]

In the USA:

(e) Instrument rating. No person may act as pilot in command of a civil aircraft under IFR or in weather conditions less than the minimums prescribed for VFR flight unless that person holds:

(3) For a glider, a pilot certificate with a glider category rating and an airplane instrument rating; or



Furthermore:

(c) Medical certificate. (1) Except as provided for in paragraph (c)(2) of this section, a person may not act as pilot in command or in any other capacity as a required pilot flight crewmember of an aircraft, under a certificate issued to that person under this part, unless that person has a current and appropriate medical certificate that has been issued under part 67 of this chapter, or other documentation acceptable to the Administrator, which is in that person's physical possession or readily accessible in the aircraft.

(2) A person is not required to meet the requirements of paragraph (c)(1) of this section if that person --

(iii) Is holding a pilot certificate or a flight instructor certificate with a glider category rating, and is piloting or providing training in a glider, as appropriate;



It seems the answer from these two sections is
yes, as far as they go. Others have pointed out
that IFR currency and equipment requirements go beyond this.
As far as this goes, I'd guess strongly that an IPC to
get current is a good way to go. Sure one could get current
in a two seater with foggles and a safety pilot, or
maybe fly 3 hours of glider actual IFR solo every 6 months,
but in the US I'd guess the IPC would often be simpler and more
effective at meeting the reg's intention.

As far as equipment goes, there are a lot of misconceptions about
what is "required." Back during the ATC controller
strike (remember Reagan?) nobody used a transponder for anything,
just time slots and phone calls. Even in modern times
in A,B,C,D,E airspace, I personally have flown no-transponder
both VFR and IFR, with a waiver one hour before hand.

And in "G" airspace, there is no radio requirement
for IFR even, as far as I've ever seen. In
area with no altimeter setting information (the
mountains in Reno, California, for example, right Al? ;)
the G airspace can go quite high.

I've also gotten a "cube" of area and altitude to fool around in the
clouds, in airplanes, before. Always out of the way
of other IFR traffic, and coordinated ahead of the flight,
and done to practice 180 turns from clouds in actual IFR with
students. No danger either, since the
clouds were only 2000-6000, and out away from
airways and approaches. ATC didn't care as long as there was no
possibility of traffic conflict, and we uttered those
magic words "we will maintain our own terrain
separation."

And as far as AI and DG, etc. go, my FAA examiner pointed out
that the instruments are for powered aircraft.
The POH is the limiting document for gliders
for flight instruments required for IFR as far as
I can tell (except that durned DME way up there in the FLs).
I must say, however, I've done the "needle, ball, and
airspeed" in gliders and planes in actual and
simulated, and it's some sketchy s**t if you
don't have recent practice.

But all of this is armchair wisdom (?) from me.
Carl Herold could write a book on this. We've
seen this subject enough on RAS maybe we oughta
all call him and ask him if he'd write something
up for Soaring mag... ;) Horse's mouth is best, dontcha know...

In article >,
Bob Greenblatt > wrote:
>On 6/29/04 2:37 PM, in article
, "cp"
> wrote:
>
>> Question:
>>
>> Can I, a commercial & instrument rated power and glider pilot legally
>> fly IFR in a motorglider (which is IFR certified) if I do not have a
>> current medical?
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>> Chuck
>Good one! I would guess that the answer is yes provided the glider is
>current re VOR, transponder and altimeter checks, and you have met the
>instrument experience and competency requirements of 61.57.
>
>Bob
>CFI, CFII, CFIG
>
>--
>Bob
>bobgreenblattATmsnDOTcom <--fix this before responding
>
>


--

------------+
Mark Boyd
Avenal, California, USA

[ADP]

Interesting.

14 CFR 61-3(e) takes care of the pilot but the original question pertained
to motor gliders.

AC 21 17-2(a) states:
h. Section 91.205 of the FAR. Powered gliders are considered to be powered
aircraft for the
purpose of complying with § 91.205.

91.205, of course, specifies the requirements for flying IFR.

A distinction must be made between flying IFR and flying in clouds.

While I doubt any motor glider can meet the requirements for flying IFR (and
no unpowered glider can), flying in clouds in uncontrolled airspace seems to
be a simple matter of having an instrument rating and having no day VFR
restrictions in your glider handbook or operating restrictions.

In uncontrolled airspace, you can do just about anything you want, if
properly certificated. The problem is finding uncontrolled airspace.

Allan


"Mark James Boyd" > wrote in message
news:40e9c2ea$1@darkstar...
> In the USA:
>
> (e) Instrument rating. No person may act as pilot in command of a civil
> aircraft under IFR or in weather conditions less than the minimums
> prescribed for VFR flight unless that person holds:
>
> (3) For a glider, a pilot certificate with a glider category rating and an
> airplane instrument rating; or
>
>
.......Snip.....

[Mark James Boyd]

ADP > wrote:
>Interesting.
>
>While I doubt any motor glider can meet the requirements for flying IFR (and
>no unpowered glider can),


Goodness no. I believe unpowered gliders can and have
flown in controlled airspace, and under IFR, and quite recently and
legally in the USA. There was a recent high-altitude downwind dash
in wave over the Sierras by a savy, experienced ATP that did just
this, IIRC. Somebody who doesn't have to rush home
for dinner like I must can perhaps chime in here...


>flying in clouds in uncontrolled airspace seems to
>be a simple matter of having an instrument rating and having no day VFR
>restrictions in your glider handbook or operating restrictions.


Goodness, yes. Carl Herold by secondhand info seems
to have 300 hrs + glider IMC this way. But again, I may
be deifying him rather than stating fact...best to
get his input directly I suspect...


Although a bit rare, none of this seems outside of the
realm of legality. Certainly very risky if one
chooses needle, ball, airspeed alone without
much recent experience this way, but
not illegal with certain caveats.

Personally I'd SURE want an AI too...
--

------------+
Mark Boyd
Avenal, California, USA

[Tom Seim]

(Mark James Boyd) wrote in message news:<40e9f92c$1@darkstar>...
> ADP > wrote:
> >Interesting.
> >
> >While I doubt any motor glider can meet the requirements for flying IFR (and
> >no unpowered glider can),
>
>
> Goodness no. I believe unpowered gliders can and have
> flown in controlled airspace, and under IFR, and quite recently and
> legally in the USA. There was a recent high-altitude downwind dash
> in wave over the Sierras by a savy, experienced ATP that did just
> this, IIRC. Somebody who doesn't have to rush home
> for dinner like I must can perhaps chime in here...
>
>
> >flying in clouds in uncontrolled airspace seems to
> >be a simple matter of having an instrument rating and having no day VFR
> >restrictions in your glider handbook or operating restrictions.
>
>
> Goodness, yes. Carl Herold by secondhand info seems
> to have 300 hrs + glider IMC this way. But again, I may
> be deifying him rather than stating fact...best to
> get his input directly I suspect...
>
>
> Although a bit rare, none of this seems outside of the
> realm of legality. Certainly very risky if one
> chooses needle, ball, airspeed alone without
> much recent experience this way, but
> not illegal with certain caveats.

I will remind you that the original post was whether it was legal to
fly said glider WITHOUT A CURRENT MEDICAL! The answer to this question
must be an unequivocal NO!

Tom

[ADP]

Why must it be an unequivocal no?

Please site your sources.

Allan

"Tom Seim" > wrote in message
om...
> (Mark James Boyd) wrote in message
> news:<40e9f92c$1@darkstar>...
>> ADP > wrote:
> I will remind you that the original post was whether it was legal to
> fly said glider WITHOUT A CURRENT MEDICAL! The answer to this question
> must be an unequivocal NO!
>
> Tom

[Tom Seim]

"ADP" > wrote in message >...
> Why must it be an unequivocal no?
>
> Please site your sources.

61.23

[ADP]

Where in 61.23? In fact, it says precisely the opposite.

"Tom Seim" > wrote in message
om...
> "ADP" > wrote in message
> >...
>> Why must it be an unequivocal no?
>>
>> Please site your sources.
>
> 61.23

[Tom Seim]

"ADP" > wrote in message >...
> Where in 61.23? In fact, it says precisely the opposite.

IFR flight requires an "Instrument-Airplane" rating. "Airplane"
requires a medical. There is no "Instrument-Glider" rating.

Tom

[ADP]

Well Tom,

Wrong again.

You may have an instrument rating in a helicopter or an autogiro (powered
lift). Clearly they are not "Airplanes".

I am aware that there is no instrument glider designation but that is not
the point.

As I have already exhaustively pointed out, a motor glider is considered a
powered aircraft for the purposes of 14 CFR 91.205. That being the case, a
current IFR ticket (however defined) will enable you to fly a properly
equipped motor glider under IFR.
14 CFR 61.23 B(8) also says that you do not need a medical to take a test or
check for a certificate, rating or authorization when using a flight
simulator or flight training device.

Also, 14 CFR 61.3 (E)(3) specifies that to fly a glider under IFR you may
have a pilot certificate with a glider category rating and an
AIRPLANE instrument rating.

Thus, you may renew your instrument rating, take a check or become current
without any medical at all.

In addition, the recency requirements for flying IFR under 14 CFR
61.57(C)(2) i and ii allow you to become current with:
1. 3 hours instrument time in as glider in flight -simulated or actual.
(For which no medical is required), or
2. Up to 1.5 hrs in an aircraft of a total of 3 hours in flight and ( if you
can persuade the other pilot to be PIC) no medical is required.

So, despite the desire of almost everyone here to rewrite the regulations to
suit their particular prejudices,
we can do what is permitted and safe and this is one of those things..

Allan

"Tom Seim" > wrote in message
om...
> "ADP" > wrote in message
> >...
>> Where in 61.23? In fact, it says precisely the opposite.
>
> IFR flight requires an "Instrument-Airplane" rating. "Airplane"
> requires a medical. There is no "Instrument-Glider" rating.
>
> Tom

[Mark James Boyd]

Tom Seim > wrote:
>
>I will remind you that the original post was whether it was legal to
>fly said glider WITHOUT A CURRENT MEDICAL! The answer to this question
>must be an unequivocal NO!

Aggghhh. This one comes down again to if one
thinks a motorglider is a powered aircraft.
This subject is too fuzzy for me to agree or
disagree. I'd tell you that
a) I have a medical so I don't personally care so much
b) if I didn't have a medical I might interpret
the rule to mean I can't fly in clouds with the engine on,
(but I can fly in them with it removed or stowed)
which is silly.
c) if I had a medical revoked or failed, I'd
likely not be safe to fly anything at all...

So really I guess the pilot wants to know if
he can fly a motorglider in the clouds with the motor
running with an expired medical but no
known adverse medical problems.

That's a good question for the FSDO. I dunno what they'd
say. Somebody ref'd an AC on this but the early posts in this
thread are no longer accessible. Ooops, I shoulda saved the
AC ref...
--

------------+
Mark Boyd
Avenal, California, USA

[ADP]

AC 21 17-2(a) states:
h. Section 91.205 of the FAR. Powered gliders are considered to be powered
aircraft for the purpose of complying with § 91.205.

Allan


"Mark James Boyd" > wrote in message
news:40edcd7c$1@darkstar...
>
>
> That's a good question for the FSDO. I dunno what they'd
> say. Somebody ref'd an AC on this but the early posts in this
> thread are no longer accessible. Ooops, I shoulda saved the
> AC ref...
> --
>
> ------------+
> Mark Boyd
> Avenal, California, USA

[Tom Seim]

"ADP" > wrote in message >...
> Well Tom,
>
> Wrong again.
>
> You may have an instrument rating in a helicopter or an autogiro (powered
> lift). Clearly they are not "Airplanes".

Picky, picky. Same difference.

>
> I am aware that there is no instrument glider designation but that is not
> the point.
>
> As I have already exhaustively pointed out, a motor glider is considered a
> powered aircraft for the purposes of 14 CFR 91.205. That being the case, a
> current IFR ticket (however defined) will enable you to fly a properly
> equipped motor glider under IFR.
> 14 CFR 61.23 B(8) also says that you do not need a medical to take a test or
> check for a certificate, rating or authorization when using a flight
> simulator or flight training device.
>
> Also, 14 CFR 61.3 (E)(3) specifies that to fly a glider under IFR you may
> have a pilot certificate with a glider category rating and an
> AIRPLANE instrument rating.
>
> Thus, you may renew your instrument rating, take a check or become current
> without any medical at all.
>
> In addition, the recency requirements for flying IFR under 14 CFR
> 61.57(C)(2) i and ii allow you to become current with:
> 1. 3 hours instrument time in as glider in flight -simulated or actual.
> (For which no medical is required), or
> 2. Up to 1.5 hrs in an aircraft of a total of 3 hours in flight and ( if you
> can persuade the other pilot to be PIC) no medical is required.

I concede the point that, in this special case, it is possible to
maintain IFR currency without a current medical.

>
> So, despite the desire of almost everyone here to rewrite the regulations to
> suit their particular prejudices,
> we can do what is permitted and safe and this is one of those things..

That is not to say that the practice is safe. Presumably, the pilot in
question doesn't have a current medical because he lost it for some
important medical reason. You cannot declare his actions safe w/o
knowing what that reason was. Remember, we self-certify that we are
fit to fly gliders. As I am sure you are aware, we do not have cart
blanche to fly with a disabling medical condition.

And, yes, I don't know why the guy lost his medical either.

Tom

[ADP]

Wow Tom, quite a concession.

Yes there is a difference between being legal and being safe.
Being legal and being dead doesn't make a lot of sense to me either.
Of course, being picky again, we do not "self certify", we simply observe
the requirements of 14 CFR 61.53(b). While I and, I suspect, you take
this regulation very seriously, I concede that some others may not.

This mirrors the real world, some people are responsible and some are not.
My observations indicate that pilots, of any type, are usually more
responsible
than the general population.

There is at least one other reason why an individual may not have a current
medical.
In my case, while undergoing a back operation, my First Class Medical
expired.
After multiple operations, I have fully recovered but choose not to go
through the
draconian requirements to requalify for a medical. Filling out the Doctor
visits alone
would require 5 extra pages. Although I believe I could qualify for a
medical of
some degree, I choose not to. Having flown powered aircraft most of my life
I am now concentrating on soaring with, I might add, great pleasure.

So, be safe out there and keep the rest of us on our toes.

Cheers,

Allan


"Tom Seim" > wrote in message
om...
> "ADP" > wrote in message
> >...
>> Well Tom,
>>
>> Wrong again.
>>
>> You may have an instrument rating in a helicopter or an autogiro (powered
>> lift). Clearly they are not "Airplanes".
>
> Picky, picky. Same difference.
>
>> ....SNIP......
>
> That is not to say that the practice is safe. Presumably, the pilot in
> question doesn't have a current medical because he lost it for some
> important medical reason. You cannot declare his actions safe w/o
> knowing what that reason was. Remember, we self-certify that we are
> fit to fly gliders. As I am sure you are aware, we do not have cart
> blanche to fly with a disabling medical condition.
>
> And, yes, I don't know why the guy lost his medical either.
>
> Tom

[Mark James Boyd]

http://www.airweb.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library%5Crg
AdvisoryCircular.nsf/0/EAE91A15C5E11823862569B600563FBF?OpenDocument

You gotta paste together the link, sorry ;(

In article >,
ADP > wrote:
>AC 21 17-2(a) states:
>h. Section 91.205 of the FAR. Powered gliders are considered to be powered
>aircraft for the purpose of complying with § 91.205.
>
>Allan
>
>
>"Mark James Boyd" > wrote in message
>news:40edcd7c$1@darkstar...
>>
>>
>> That's a good question for the FSDO. I dunno what they'd
>> say. Somebody ref'd an AC on this but the early posts in this
>> thread are no longer accessible. Ooops, I shoulda saved the
>> AC ref...
>> --
>>
>> ------------+
>> Mark Boyd
>> Avenal, California, USA
>
>


--

------------+
Mark Boyd
Avenal, California, USA

[Mark James Boyd]

Tom Seim > wrote:
>And, yes, I don't know why the guy lost his medical either.

If I used to fly power and then flew only gliders in
my "retirement" I wouldn't get a renewal medical ever.
My doc said the EKG is like $120 for over 40. Yikes,
I can't afford to get old...
--

------------+
Mark Boyd
Avenal, California, USA

[Paul Lynch]

EKG not required for a Class III medical, only a Class I. A basic exam
usually only runs about $75 to $85 unless there are "problems", but then you
don't need one except maybe for peace of mind.

"Mark James Boyd" > wrote in message
news:40f3823f$1@darkstar...
> Tom Seim > wrote:
> >And, yes, I don't know why the guy lost his medical either.
>
> If I used to fly power and then flew only gliders in
> my "retirement" I wouldn't get a renewal medical ever.
> My doc said the EKG is like $120 for over 40. Yikes,
> I can't afford to get old...
> --
>
> ------------+
> Mark Boyd
> Avenal, California, USA

[Mark Rubin]

EKG not required for a Class III medical, only a Class I. A basic exam
usually only runs about $75 to $85 unless there are "problems", but then you
don't need one except maybe for peace of mind.

"Mark James Boyd" wrote in message
news:40f3823f$1@darkstar...
Tom Seim wrote:
And, yes, I don't know why the guy lost his medical either.

If I used to fly power and then flew only gliders in
my "retirement" I wouldn't get a renewal medical ever.
My doc said the EKG is like $120 for over 40. Yikes,
I can't afford to get old...Mark Boyd
Avenal, California, USA
--

This is a really old thread, but I am looking at the issue now. As some indicated above, the FAA regs are clear. An airplance instrument rating and glider rating allows you to fly gliders and motor gliders IFR, as long as you meet the ifr currency requirements. Motor gliders are gliders as far as the faa regs go, so you need no medical. It is possible to equip a motor glider with the items required in FAR 91.205. BUT, all the motor gliders I am aware of, are certified day vfr only. So this restriction does not change, whether you install all the ifr equipment or not. The manufacturer can not remove this restriction without a new certification for the motor glider. The only option I can think of is getting a DAR to do a field approval to add IFR to the Airworhtyness cert. I can't find any evidence that this has ever been accomplished. I've talked to EAA and they have no info. I will try the soaring society next, but it doesn't look good. I've hear rumors that STEMME will try to certify ifr on their new S6 and S8 due to military interest, but no written evidence, and those things cost $300K
------------+