Experimental LSA gliders?

[[email protected]]

Hi Gang
Having a LSA power plane and in reviewing the proposed new
experimental certifications (FAA Order 8130.2F) which includes gliders
left me very puzzled. Why would anyone register a glider or motor
glider as an experimental or standard light sport aircraft (LSA)
although 8130.2F specifically includes them? The reason for
registering a power plane as a LSA is that no medical is required,
only a valid driving license, with the caveat that one is never denied
a medical. A glider or motor glider, whether registered as standard or
experimental, does not require the pilot to have a medical PERIOD. So
what am I missing? I am confused! Can anyone educate me please or is
this bureaucratic BS.
Dave

[[email protected]]

The main benefit would probably be with a special light sport glider
like the TST -14 or Urban Air Lambada. If someone wanted to buy one
and either use it for personal use or giving rides/instruction they
could do their own maintenance including annuals and 100 hour
inspections after taking an 80 hour maintenance course. That would
give someone freedom from an A&P or IA if they chose to do so.

The light sport gives many benefits besides skipping out on a medical.
The main benefit is being able to try different types of aircraft
without having to drop so much money. Once you have your first rating
you can try out anything else that fits into light sport. That
includes airplane and weight shift - land and sea, glider, powered
parachute, rotorcraft (gyro), and lighter than air. You just have to
become proficient in the new category/class and your instructor will
sign you off to take a proficiency check with another instructor. No
examiner or minimum times.

If someone wanted to transition into gliders from another class they
would be pretty limited since they made it a Vne of 120kts and gross
weight of 1,320 lbs. The Vne limits a lot of gliders and they'd
probably be stuck in Schweizers (nothing wrong with that per se).

Anyone know of operations giving instruction in LSA gliders or towards
the rating?

[[email protected]]

On Feb 17, 7:13 pm, wrote:
> The main benefit would probably be with a special light sport glider
> like the TST -14 or Urban Air Lambada. If someone wanted to buy one
> and either use it for personal use or giving rides/instruction they
> could do their own maintenance including annuals and 100 hour
> inspections after taking an 80 hour maintenance course. That would
> give someone freedom from an A&P or IA if they chose to do so.
>
> The light sport gives many benefits besides skipping out on a medical.
> The main benefit is being able to try different types of aircraft
> without having to drop so much money. Once you have your first rating
> you can try out anything else that fits into light sport. That
> includes airplane and weight shift - land and sea, glider, powered
> parachute, rotorcraft (gyro), and lighter than air. You just have to
> become proficient in the new category/class and your instructor will
> sign you off to take a proficiency check with another instructor. No
> examiner or minimum times.
>
> If someone wanted to transition into gliders from another class they
> would be pretty limited since they made it a Vne of 120kts and gross
> weight of 1,320 lbs. The Vne limits a lot of gliders and they'd
> probably be stuck in Schweizers (nothing wrong with that per se).
>
> Anyone know of operations giving instruction in LSA gliders or towards
> the rating?

The LSA max cruise speed is limited to 120 knots at any altitude up
to 10k feet msl (LSA rated pilot only) not VNE which is not defined.
For home built
gliders and powered aircraft both within the experimental categories
including but not limited to LSA experimental, constructors can do
their own annuals
after they have taken and passed a course. I still don't see an
advantage to register as a LSA except if it is a POWERED aircraft (not
glider
or motor glider) and there is a question concerning your medical.
I am told that insurance companies are becoming reluctant to issue
insurance policies to LSA pilots without medicals. I still have my
medical so it is not yet an issue for me.
Dave

[Wayne Paul]

> wrote in message
...
> On Feb 17, 7:13 pm, wrote:

> The LSA max cruise speed is limited to 120 knots at any altitude up
> to 10k feet msl (LSA rated pilot only) not VNE which is not defined.

Has the unpowered LSA (Glider) regs been change from a VNE limit of 120 Kts?
I know powered LSA have a Cruise limit of 120 kts. However, the last time I
checked, LSA (Glider) limit was still a VNE of 120 Kts. Has reason
prevailed a the Vne limit been removed? If so, could you please give me a
reference?

Wayne
HP-14 "6F"
http://www.soaridaho.com/

[Wayne Paul]

"Wayne Paul" > wrote in message
...
>
> > wrote in message
> ...
>> On Feb 17, 7:13 pm, wrote:
>
>> The LSA max cruise speed is limited to 120 knots at any altitude up
>> to 10k feet msl (LSA rated pilot only) not VNE which is not defined.
>
> Has the unpowered LSA (Glider) regs been change from a VNE limit of 120
> Kts? I know powered LSA have a Cruise limit of 120 kts. However, the last
> time I checked, LSA (Glider) limit was still a VNE of 120 Kts. Has
> reason prevailed a the Vne limit been removed? If so, could you please
> give me a reference?
>
> Wayne
> HP-14 "6F"
> http://www.soaridaho.com/
>
According to the following link, glider are still limited to a Vne of 120
kts.
http://www.sportpilot.org/learn/sp_rule.pdf

Wayne
HP-14 "6F"
http://www.soaridaho.com/

[[email protected]]

On Feb 17, 9:51 pm, "Wayne Paul" > wrote:
> "Wayne Paul" > wrote in message
>
> ...
>
>
>
> > > wrote in message
> ...
> >> On Feb 17, 7:13 pm, wrote:
>
> >> The LSA max cruise speed is limited to 120 knots at any altitude up
> >> to 10k feet msl (LSA rated pilot only) not VNE which is not defined.
>
> > Has the unpowered LSA (Glider) regs been change from a VNE limit of 120
> > Kts? I know powered LSA have a Cruise limit of 120 kts. However, the last
> > time I checked, LSA (Glider) limit was still a VNE of 120 Kts. Has
> > reason prevailed a the Vne limit been removed? If so, could you please
> > give me a reference?
>
> > Wayne
> > HP-14 "6F"
> >http://www.soaridaho.com/
>
> According to the following link, glider are still limited to a Vne of 120
> kts.http://www.sportpilot.org/learn/sp_rule.pdf
>
> Wayne
> HP-14 "6F"http://www.soaridaho.com/

Hi Gang
I stand corrected. You all are right a LSA glider is limited to 120
knots
VNE (SparrowHawk 123 knots) and a max stall speed of 45 knots.
Surely these are yet more reasons to never register a glider in
the LSA category. There are no speed limitations for a glider
(non powered ultra light vehicle!) in Part 103 nor for regular
gliders.
OK Guys and Gals convince me - give me a single reason, just a
single rational reason to register a glider as a LSA despite the
multitude of reasons not to do so.
Dave

[Marc Ramsey[_2_]]

wrote:
> OK Guys and Gals convince me - give me a single reason, just a
> single rational reason to register a glider as a LSA despite the
> multitude of reasons not to do so.

I doubt very many Sparrowhawks are legal Part 103 ultralights, most are
quite simply over the weight limitation. Owners of "fat" ultralights
are being "encouraged" to recertify under LSA (though I believe there
was a grace period which may be over, by now). If you're willing to
take your chances on not getting a ramp check involving a scale, then
there probably is no reason to switch.

LSA certification does allow for the manufacture of a two seat training
glider that can be used commercially, without going through a
multi-million dollar certification process. And yes, the 10,000 foot
limitation goes away if the PIC has a private license...

Marc

[[email protected]]

On Feb 18, 9:49 am, Marc Ramsey > wrote:
> wrote:
> > OK Guys and Gals convince me - give me a single reason, just a
> > single rational reason to register a glider as a LSA despite the
> > multitude of reasons not to do so.
>
> I doubt very many Sparrowhawks are legal Part 103 ultralights, most are
> quite simply over the weight limitation. Owners of "fat" ultralights
> are being "encouraged" to recertify under LSA (though I believe there
> was a grace period which may be over, by now). If you're willing to
> take your chances on not getting a ramp check involving a scale, then
> there probably is no reason to switch.
>
> LSA certification does allow for the manufacture of a two seat training
> glider that can be used commercially, without going through a
> multi-million dollar certification process. And yes, the 10,000 foot
> limitation goes away if the PIC has a private license...
>
> Marc

Hi Marc
I do not disagree with what you are saying but you have not answered
my question which is why register say a single place glider as a LSA
glider instead instead of as a regular glider (experimental or
standard).
Except for the 2 place trainer which, as you point out, might make
sense what's the rationale for a single place glider?
Dave

[Marc Ramsey[_2_]]

wrote:
> On Feb 18, 9:49 am, Marc Ramsey > wrote:
>> I doubt very many Sparrowhawks are legal Part 103 ultralights, most are
>> quite simply over the weight limitation. Owners of "fat" ultralights
>> are being "encouraged" to recertify under LSA (though I believe there
>> was a grace period which may be over, by now). If you're willing to
>> take your chances on not getting a ramp check involving a scale, then
>> there probably is no reason to switch.
>>
>> LSA certification does allow for the manufacture of a two seat training
>> glider that can be used commercially, without going through a
>> multi-million dollar certification process. And yes, the 10,000 foot
>> limitation goes away if the PIC has a private license...
>>
>> Marc
>
> I do not disagree with what you are saying but you have not answered
> my question which is why register say a single place glider as a LSA
> glider instead instead of as a regular glider (experimental or
> standard).

Sorry, I missed that part of the thread.

> Except for the 2 place trainer which, as you point out, might make
> sense what's the rationale for a single place glider?

For most, none, for single place gliders that already meet the LSA
restrictions (1-26, K6, K8 come immediately to mind), owner maintenance
could be an advantage in some (very limited) circumstances. The only
real advantage would be with a US manufactured single place glider that
can't meet 103 restrictions, and can be made to meet the LSA
restrictions. The problem with a not quite 103 legal Sparrowhawk is
that the FAA does have rules on the book that restrict series
manufacture and sale of non-type certificated non-ultralight aircraft.
They've been looking the other way for a while (is anyone really
building a Lancair Evolution in their garage?), but they could easily
change their bureaucratic minds...

Marc

[Bob Kuykendall]

On Feb 18, 10:55*am, Marc Ramsey > wrote:
> ... the FAA does have rules on the book that
> restrict series manufacture and sale of non-
> type certificated non-ultralight aircraft...

Cite? I keep hearing that, but I keep not seeing it. All those Zunis
got into the air somehow...

Thanks, Bob K.

[Marc Ramsey[_2_]]

Bob Kuykendall wrote:
> On Feb 18, 10:55 am, Marc Ramsey > wrote:
>> ... the FAA does have rules on the book that
>> restrict series manufacture and sale of non-
>> type certificated non-ultralight aircraft...
>
> Cite? I keep hearing that, but I keep not seeing it. All those Zunis
> got into the air somehow...

I can't give one, clearly, or I would have in the past. There's a bunch
of stuff in advisory circulars that is just plain hard to track down,
even with the wonders of the internet. Maybe it is a myth, but I doubt
it. Even Applebay was preparing to go through the type certification
dance, why would he have bothered for a single seater?

Marc

[[email protected]]

I'm not sure exactly where it states requirements but as an example
the FAA requires kits to have 51% completed by the owner. They just
put a moratorium on new kits approved for the 51% rule and are trying
to evaluate programs like Lancair and other "weekend" kits. This is of
course for Experimental-Amateur Built. You can probably register a US
factory built glider as exhibition or racing and get away with it. You
just wouldn't get the repairman certificate for having built it. I
think this is how some aerobatic aircraft like the Zivko Edge do it.

http://www.eaa.org/news/2008/2008-02-15_kits.asp

You can't register something as ELSA or SLSA that has already been
certified, so you can't convert and do maintenance on a 1-26 or Ka-6
that already exists. If someone wants to start building them again
like they've done with the Cub and Champ then you could.

[Bob Kuykendall]

On Feb 18, 3:25*pm, wrote:
> ...the FAA requires kits to have 51% completed by the owner...

No, that's not quite true.

The FAA rules require that the "major portion" of the aircraft be
constructed for the purposes of recreation and education. They don't
care whether it was the owner or another person, or another person's
hairdresser's dog. Just so long as it was built for fun and learning
and not for money.

Thanks, Bob K.
http://www.hpaircraft.com

[ventus2]

Thats where we have a definite advantage in Australia.
There is no speed limit for LSA and we only have to have a propeller (for
powered LSA). It does not have to be fixed pitch.
We fought hard for that and in the end are happy we managed to get that out
of the regulator.

As Marc rightly points out, LSA is a definite advantage for manufacturer's
to circumvent the multi million dollar type certification process. It does
not do much for gliders in my opinion if you have to prove that you have a
VNE of 120kts.
The nice bit about it is the 600kg which could make an 18m or strandard ship
go quite nicely. Who is going to check your speed in the air?

I don't envy the US system and am happy that our information re regulatory
material is readily accesible.
Admittedly, there is not much of an uptake in Aus for LSA, other than Jabiru
and a few imports, as our normal regs (for ultralights) are superior to the
LSA offering, even if the weight limit has not reached 600kg as yet. It will
this year though.
No one has taken up the LSA offering under gliding here as yet.

Chris

[[email protected]]

> The FAA rules require that the "major portion" of the aircraft be
> constructed for the purposes of recreation and education. They don't
> care whether it was the owner or another person, or another person's
> hairdresser's dog. Just so long as it was built for fun and learning
> and not for money.

I left that out but I don't think the FAA intended to include
operations like Lancair or Velocity. If you have the money you just
show up and within two weeks you construct the airframe, hang the
engine, install instruments and are ready to fly away in a
pressurized, turbine aircraft at 350 kts. The builder may have a hand
in the "majority" during that time but the factory is basically being
paid to do the majority of construction. The factory is in the
business of building airplanes and thats why the FAA is taking another
look at approved kits and programs. They don't want it to get to a
point where the factory has you install a tire and say you built the
entire thing.