FAA says towing ULV's is OK?

[ken ward]

It looks like FAR 61.69 and 91.309 as of 1 Sep 04 have now added the
words "unpowered ultralight vehicle", which in FAR 103 are hang gliders.

I don't know how this pertains to a Sparrowhawk, but if an FBO can tow
gliders heavier than a Sparrowhawk, and lighter than a Sparrowhawk, then
they ought to be to tow an actual Sparrowhawk.

I also read that in denying exemption 6024 in 1995 the FAA explicitly
said that certificated aircraft were the preferred tow vehicles for
unpowered ultralight vehicles, but I haven't been able to find that
statement using Google.

Ken (who did several auto payout winch tows at New Jerusalem on Sunday)
San Jose, CA

[BTIZ]

Ken, I believe you read the new rules correctly, just one thing missing that
some one may want. Proof of liability insurance on your Sparrowhawk.

And if you come to my club, please show proof of a "GliderPilot" or "Light
Sport Aircraft, Glider" rating. And I believe the Sparrowhawk would have to
either show a "Light Sport Aircraft" airworthiness certificate or something
to that effect for "unpowered ultralight".

Because it says I can tow "light sport aircraft" or "unpowered ultralight
vehicles".
Oh, and to be a guest (visiting member) at the club, you still need to show
an SSA Membership for our insurance coverage on the tow plane.

Come on out, we had thermals and light winds to over 12K MSL last weekend.

BT

"ken ward" > wrote in message
...
> It looks like FAR 61.69 and 91.309 as of 1 Sep 04 have now added the
> words "unpowered ultralight vehicle", which in FAR 103 are hang gliders.
>
> I don't know how this pertains to a Sparrowhawk, but if an FBO can tow
> gliders heavier than a Sparrowhawk, and lighter than a Sparrowhawk, then
> they ought to be to tow an actual Sparrowhawk.
>
> I also read that in denying exemption 6024 in 1995 the FAA explicitly
> said that certificated aircraft were the preferred tow vehicles for
> unpowered ultralight vehicles, but I haven't been able to find that
> statement using Google.
>
> Ken (who did several auto payout winch tows at New Jerusalem on Sunday)
> San Jose, CA

[ken ward]

I'd also need a Sparrowhawk, as I don't have one. They sure look nice,
though. I'm not sure they're considered to be "unpowered ultralight
vehicles" according to the definition in FAR Part 103.1(d)

On the other hand, my BrightStar SWIFT makes the grade. I'd just need
to limit the tow to 45 knots or so...

Ken

In article <iVq6d.112$mS1.87@fed1read05>,
"BTIZ" > wrote:

> Ken, I believe you read the new rules correctly, just one thing missing that
> some one may want. Proof of liability insurance on your Sparrowhawk.
>
> And if you come to my club, please show proof of a "GliderPilot" or "Light
> Sport Aircraft, Glider" rating. And I believe the Sparrowhawk would have to
> either show a "Light Sport Aircraft" airworthiness certificate or something
> to that effect for "unpowered ultralight".
>
> Because it says I can tow "light sport aircraft" or "unpowered ultralight
> vehicles".
> Oh, and to be a guest (visiting member) at the club, you still need to show
> an SSA Membership for our insurance coverage on the tow plane.
>
> Come on out, we had thermals and light winds to over 12K MSL last weekend.
>
> BT
>
> "ken ward" > wrote in message
> ...
> > It looks like FAR 61.69 and 91.309 as of 1 Sep 04 have now added the
> > words "unpowered ultralight vehicle", which in FAR 103 are hang gliders.
> >
> > I don't know how this pertains to a Sparrowhawk, but if an FBO can tow
> > gliders heavier than a Sparrowhawk, and lighter than a Sparrowhawk, then
> > they ought to be to tow an actual Sparrowhawk.
> >
> > I also read that in denying exemption 6024 in 1995 the FAA explicitly
> > said that certificated aircraft were the preferred tow vehicles for
> > unpowered ultralight vehicles, but I haven't been able to find that
> > statement using Google.
> >
> > Ken (who did several auto payout winch tows at New Jerusalem on Sunday)
> > San Jose, CA
>
>

[Judy Ruprecht]

At 03:42 29 September 2004, Ken Ward wrote:
>I also read that in denying exemption 6024 in 1995
>the FAA >explicitly said that certificated aircraft
>were the preferred tow >vehicles for unpowered ultralight
>vehicles, but I haven't been >able to find that statement
>using Google.

You probably need the docket number to obtain a copy
of the exemption ruling from the Feds. (Might be easier
to get from USHGA?) Here's what I found doing an advanced
search on the Federal Register query page at:
http://www.gpoaccess.gov/fr/advanced.html

Federal Register

Docket No.: 23980
Petitioner: United States Hang Gliding Association,
Inc.
Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR 103.1
Description of Relief Sought/Disposition: To amend
Exemption No. 4144, as amended, which allows unpowered
ultralight vehicles to be towed aloft by powered ultralight
vehicles operated by individuals authorized by the
United States Hang Gliding Association, Inc. The amendment
would have allowed an increase to the weight limit
for single-place powered ultralight vehicles, used
in air-to-air towing operations only, up to
360 pounds empty weight. Additionally, this petition
would have allowed an increase to the weight limit
for two-place powered ultralight vehicles, used in
air-to-air towing operations only, up to 496 pounds
empty weight. Exemption No. 4144, as amended, stand
as is; the amendment is denied. Denied, February 10,
1995, Exemption No. 6024

Judy

[BTIZ]

45knots is tough with our 235HP Pawnee, I might be able to concentrate and
hold it between 50-55, but it's tough in the bumpy air.

BT

"ken ward" > wrote in message
...
> I'd also need a Sparrowhawk, as I don't have one. They sure look nice,
> though. I'm not sure they're considered to be "unpowered ultralight
> vehicles" according to the definition in FAR Part 103.1(d)
>
> On the other hand, my BrightStar SWIFT makes the grade. I'd just need
> to limit the tow to 45 knots or so...
>
> Ken
>
> In article <iVq6d.112$mS1.87@fed1read05>,
> "BTIZ" > wrote:
>
> > Ken, I believe you read the new rules correctly, just one thing missing
that
> > some one may want. Proof of liability insurance on your Sparrowhawk.
> >
> > And if you come to my club, please show proof of a "GliderPilot" or
"Light
> > Sport Aircraft, Glider" rating. And I believe the Sparrowhawk would have
to
> > either show a "Light Sport Aircraft" airworthiness certificate or
something
> > to that effect for "unpowered ultralight".
> >
> > Because it says I can tow "light sport aircraft" or "unpowered
ultralight
> > vehicles".
> > Oh, and to be a guest (visiting member) at the club, you still need to
show
> > an SSA Membership for our insurance coverage on the tow plane.
> >
> > Come on out, we had thermals and light winds to over 12K MSL last
weekend.
> >
> > BT
> >
> > "ken ward" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > > It looks like FAR 61.69 and 91.309 as of 1 Sep 04 have now added the
> > > words "unpowered ultralight vehicle", which in FAR 103 are hang
gliders.
> > >
> > > I don't know how this pertains to a Sparrowhawk, but if an FBO can tow
> > > gliders heavier than a Sparrowhawk, and lighter than a Sparrowhawk,
then
> > > they ought to be to tow an actual Sparrowhawk.
> > >
> > > I also read that in denying exemption 6024 in 1995 the FAA explicitly
> > > said that certificated aircraft were the preferred tow vehicles for
> > > unpowered ultralight vehicles, but I haven't been able to find that
> > > statement using Google.
> > >
> > > Ken (who did several auto payout winch tows at New Jerusalem on
Sunday)
> > > San Jose, CA
> >
> >