Jim Stephenson talking about Sport Pilot Blitz

ET wrote:



Actually, he cannot train in the Ex-am built, except to train existing
pilots in type. However, it's very easy to registar an existing
"ultralight-like" aircraft as a granfathered eLSA that can be used for
training until the end of 2010.


Where does it say you can't train in a experimental amateur built?

Mark Smith wrote:

Richard Riley wrote:

On Fri, 25 Feb 2005 14:49:29 GMT, (sleepy6) wrote:
:
:
:I notice that the Stephenson supporter doesn't have the guts to post
:under his real name. It wouldn't be the first time ole Jim has used a
:false identity for his posts
:
:It doesn't really matter who made the post. The biggest majority of
:the UL community has got wise to Jim now. He can't post on any of the
:most popular lists anymore without several of us asking him embarassing
:questions that he refuses to answer And every time he refuses to
:answer a few more of his ASC toadies lose faith in him.

I didn't post the previous note, but I'll add my support.


As for the things you don't like about it, again, to paraphrase Jim S.:
you fat ul'rs did it to yourselves...

The fat (and fast) UL's did it to themselves.

When Titan Tornado is advertizing as a "legal 103" airplane, and their
2 place is supposed to be a UL trainer, what's the FAA supposed to do?
It's the same with hired guns building ex/am - eventually, if we
really get in their face, they'll come up with a way to enforce the
regs.


I build my own planes to train to save money,plus, get a safer,
stronber, more rigid plane that meets the needs of a rigorous training
routine better.

I can NO LONGER DO THAT !!

Of course you can. Just register it as experimental amateur built.
http://members.eaa.org/home/govt/exemptions/7162.pdf

Richard Riley



You can't train in experimental homebuilt, you knew this I'm sure

Who says you can't? Show me the reg.

Jerry Springer wrote in
:

ET wrote:



Actually, he cannot train in the Ex-am built, except to train
existing pilots in type. However, it's very easy to registar an
existing "ultralight-like" aircraft as a granfathered eLSA that can
be used for training until the end of 2010.


Where does it say you can't train in a experimental amateur built?


Ok, a CFI or SPI cannot train in HIS experimental. You cannot rent one
either.

If you own one, or borrow one, etc then no problem you can get all your
training in it. I'll try to look it up, but I think it's in the
operating limitations of the aircraft itself. No rental allowed.

Her is the link to the eaa eplaination of there exemption to allow for
transition or currency training in experimentals:

http://www.eaa.org/communications/ea...exemption.html

I can't find in a quick search where the rule says you cannot. It's
really not the training itself, it's the rental. And a CFI cannot just
say, OK, I'll charge you $80/hr for my training time, but the airplane
is free....



--
-- ET :-)

"A common mistake people make when trying to design something
completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete
fools."---- Douglas Adams

ET wrote:
Jerry Springer wrote in
:


ET wrote:



Actually, he cannot train in the Ex-am built, except to train
existing pilots in type. However, it's very easy to registar an
existing "ultralight-like" aircraft as a granfathered eLSA that can
be used for training until the end of 2010.



Where does it say you can't train in a experimental amateur built?



Ok, a CFI or SPI cannot train in HIS experimental. You cannot rent one
either.

If you own one, or borrow one, etc then no problem you can get all your
training in it. I'll try to look it up, but I think it's in the
operating limitations of the aircraft itself. No rental allowed.

Her is the link to the eaa eplaination of there exemption to allow for
transition or currency training in experimentals:

http://www.eaa.org/communications/ea...exemption.html

I can't find in a quick search where the rule says you cannot. It's
really not the training itself, it's the rental. And a CFI cannot just
say, OK, I'll charge you $80/hr for my training time, but the airplane
is free....



That is different than the statement "he cannot train in the Ex-am
built, Yes you cannot rent them but you can train in one all you want.
If you are a CFI then you know that giving instruction is not a
commercial operation..

Jerry Springer wrote:
ET wrote:



Actually, he cannot train in the Ex-am built, except to train existing
pilots in type. However, it's very easy to registar an existing
"ultralight-like" aircraft as a granfathered eLSA that can be used for
training until the end of 2010.

Where does it say you can't train in a experimental amateur built?

He
http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text....1.3.10.4.7.10

The relevant paragraph is that an experimental cannot be used to carry
persons for compensation or hire. That includes flight instruction.
There are two exceptions, that I know of, to this rule. 1. You can hire
a CFI to train you in your own experimental since the CFI will not be
operating the aircraft for compensation. You, as the owner will be
operating it. 2. The FAA routinely provides a training exemption to
experimental Gyroplanes since there are virtually no certified
gyroplanes available for training.

Jerry Springer wrote in
:

ET wrote:
Jerry Springer wrote in
:


ET wrote:



Actually, he cannot train in the Ex-am built, except to train
existing pilots in type. However, it's very easy to registar an
existing "ultralight-like" aircraft as a granfathered eLSA that can
be used for training until the end of 2010.



Where does it say you can't train in a experimental amateur built?



Ok, a CFI or SPI cannot train in HIS experimental. You cannot rent
one either.

If you own one, or borrow one, etc then no problem you can get all
your training in it. I'll try to look it up, but I think it's in the
operating limitations of the aircraft itself. No rental allowed.

Her is the link to the eaa eplaination of there exemption to allow
for transition or currency training in experimentals:

http://www.eaa.org/communications/ea...exemption.html

I can't find in a quick search where the rule says you cannot. It's
really not the training itself, it's the rental. And a CFI cannot
just say, OK, I'll charge you $80/hr for my training time, but the
airplane is free....



That is different than the statement "he cannot train in the Ex-am
built, Yes you cannot rent them but you can train in one all you want.
If you are a CFI then you know that giving instruction is not a
commercial operation..


Well, if your gonna call someone to task, at least read back in the
thread a little :-)

He was advising Mark, a BFI, that he could us an exp. am built as a SPI
(if hell froze over and Mark S decided to embrace Sport Pilot :-) ) to
train in the course of his business.

And yes, giving instruction is not a comercial operation, but charging
for the time to use the plane is. You notice I sail "HE" cannot train
in his exp am built.... meaning Mark Smith. Sorry for the confusion.

here is the relevent FAR:

Sec. 91.319

Part 91 GENERAL OPERATING AND FLIGHT RULES
Subpart D--Special Flight Operations

Sec. 91.319

Aircraft having experimental certificates: Operating limitations.


(a) No person may operate an aircraft that has an experimental
certificate-- (1) For other than the purpose for which the certificate
was issued; or (2) Carrying persons or property for compensation or
hire. ......

That brings up another question in the back of my mind. Arent there a
few airplane clubs out there that train and "rent" amature built exp.?
I expect that would work eh? It seems it would be cleanest if the CFI
was not really member of the club??


--
-- ET :-)

"A common mistake people make when trying to design something
completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete
fools."---- Douglas Adams

ET wrote:

Too many crazys out there, WAY too many.

"Out there"??? I think most of 'em (us?) are in HERE!

Mark "can't afford a pseudonym" Hickey

On Fri, 25 Feb 2005 20:05:44 GMT, ET wrote:

But hey, if Quicksilver decides not to put together Consensus standards
SLSA's well, there is your opportunity eh? You can do a little
paperwork, assemble them, sell them as SLSA's with Quicksilver as your
materials supplier and life goes on.

Well...I wouldn't use the term "a little paperwork."

While you no longer have to submit the data to the FAA for approval, you are
still required to perform a good amount of structural analysis and testing.
This data is supposed to be on-file at your factory; if the FAA does a spot
check and you don't have it, they'll pull the airworthiness certificates for
every plane you've ever sold. You'd have to reverse-engineer the Quicksilver.

Also, as part of the certification process, you have to generate a manufacturing
plan with quality control, publish full maintenance manuals, and establish a
system to monitor the fleet's airworthiness.

The program is designed for small companies, but not one- or two-man operations.

My feel is that as the deadline nears, there are probably going to be companies
that produce minimalist LSAs for ultralight training. The simpler the aircraft
is, the less the amount of paperwork.

Ron Wanttaja

On Fri, 25 Feb 2005 14:12:46 -0800, Jerry Springer wrote:

That is different than the statement "he cannot train in the Ex-am
built, Yes you cannot rent them but you can train in one all you want.
If you are a CFI then you know that giving instruction is not a
commercial operation..

I am reminded of Kansas during its "dry" days, when business establishments
weren't allowed to sell liquor by the drink. However, private clubs could, and
you could "buy a membership" at most establishments.

It might well be that this is how folks'll get around the rules about renting.
Start a "flying club," charge a membership fee, and make the bylaws require that
a member pay so much for flight hour to fly the aircraft. That's how we did the
Fly Baby club... charged a whole $7.50/hour, too!

Ron Wanttaja

On Fri, 25 Feb 2005 15:17:52 -0600, Mark Smith wrote:

My beef is with the Orgs who let it happen. they knew the costs would
literally soar when the feds got involved. Jim immediately turned that
problem into a business helping folks get through the mess. the Blitz
for the flyers and some other deal for the manufacturers,,,,,,

Not being tuned into the Ultralight stuff very much, I'm curious. What is the
nature of Stephenson's business? Is he offering assistance to people trying to
get LSAs certified, does he have a course for converting UL instructors, or....?

(Disclaimer: I've written for the ASC magazine in the past, but that was
through a friend who was then editor. Never dealt with anyone else in ASC.)

Ron Wanttaja