Pegasus time limit

Has anything developed regarding extending the total time limit on the
Pegasus?

Tom
Idaho

wrote:
Has anything developed regarding extending the total time limit on the
Pegasus?

Tom
Idaho

I called the SA Centrair in France in late October in order to buy some
parts and I asked them about that issue. The receptionist informed me
that "something's in works" and everything will be communicated in the
USA via the FAA. Her English was certainly better than my French.

But also keep in mind that the Pegase 101a has a life span in Europe of
12000 hours. The units in the US are no different than those in Europe
however there are the "English" issues which took place during the
translation from French to English: if you read the manual it says that
the inspections needs to be performed every 3000 hours, no different
than any other glider, but the translator also said "that the lifespan
of the structure is 3000 hours" which is clearly a mistake. I am
positive that the issue will be resolved. If not just slap on it the
"experimental" sign and just keep on flying.

Jacek
Washington State

There is a SF Bay Area Soaring Club that has a perfectly alright Pegasus already sitting on the ground for more than 1 year. Club members have been calling and calling and calling.
That "something" is already in the works forever and going to be delivered tomorrow.
There seem to be only less than a handful of these ships with exceeded time in the US.
The manufacturer has left the glider business already long time ago and is not really interested anymore.

Yes, it is only a paperwork issue, restating the inspection regime in the handbook and performing a standard 3000h inspection.
But why would they invest more time in these few "freedom fries" owners ?
Wake up guys ! Aint gonna happen !

Dumass

Originally Posted by

wrote:
Has anything developed regarding extending the total time limit on the
Pegasus?

Tom
Idaho

I called the SA Centrair in France in late October in order to buy some
parts and I asked them about that issue. The receptionist informed me
that "something's in works" and everything will be communicated in the
USA via the FAA. Her English was certainly better than my French.

But also keep in mind that the Pegase 101a has a life span in Europe of
12000 hours. The units in the US are no different than those in Europe
however there are the "English" issues which took place during the
translation from French to English: if you read the manual it says that
the inspections needs to be performed every 3000 hours, no different
than any other glider, but the translator also said "that the lifespan
of the structure is 3000 hours" which is clearly a mistake. I am
positive that the issue will be resolved. If not just slap on it the
"experimental" sign and just keep on flying.

Jacek
Washington State

I spoke with Greg Davison at the FAA in OK City recently, and his take
was somewhat less encouraging. It seems that Centrair has been
contacted on a number of occasions in the last fourteen months by
owners and the FAA about the service life limit. Greg reports that they
are "very polite" and continually offer the response that "something"
will be done. As yet, nothing has resulted except these empty promises.

I inquired about other means to get around this issue, such as an
"Alternate Means Of Compliance (AMOC)," Experimental certificate, Time
Machine, etc. Greg informed me that the "Experimental" route is a
non-starter (Sorry Jacek, read the FAR's). Experimental category does
NOT exempt an aircraft from FAA issued AD's, especially ones that
concern airframe structure and life limits.

Likewise, the AMOC route is also pretty much a no-go. In order to
create an AMOC dealing with the structural limits of the airframe, all
the original test data must either be included or duplicated. This
means testing to failure and extensive fatigue tests. The Pegasus spar
was based on another Centrair spar (the Marianne), and the design was
accepted. Unfortunately, all these data are the property of the holder
of the Type Certificate (S.N. Centrair) and unless the data is
released, it has to be duplicated. Meaning, buy a glider and test it
like the factory did. And then break it. As much fun as this sounds, it
is likely to be prohibitively expensive.

Greg is disturbed at the situation. In his words, the FAA is NOT
particularly enamored of the potential to ground an entire fleet of
gliders when a simple solution exists- but only if the cure comes from
S.N. Centrair. What is needed is a Service or Technical Bulletin from
S.N. Centrair that supersedes the Bulletin removing reference to a
(non-existent) 3,000 hr. inspection protocol and emphasizing the 3,000
hr. structural life limit in the U.S.

As Greg put it, this situation became apparent after an owner inquired
about the contradictory references in the Pegase 101 Owners Manual. FAA
requested clarification from S.N. Centrair and they just sidestepped
the issue by stating that the 3,000 hr. limit is the accepted
reference. As a result, Greg and the FAA were forced to issue the AD.
It would have been better if the reference had been to the 3,000 hr.
inspection and such an inspection was offered.

At this time, the ball is in S.N. Centrair's court. The FAA is pretty
much unable to bring pressure on them, and can only work through EASA,
the Eurpoean equivalent of the FAA. Since EASA is a relatively new
organization, having superseded the JAA, it is busy dealing with more
pressing issues- like who gets the corner office, etc.

I suggested a 3,000 hr. service life limit on other French aircraft
(Like the Airbus 380, which may need it more than the Pegase, if what I
have read about their wing problems is true). Maybe if Airbus had to
deal with something like this, S.N. Centrair would be "encouraged" to
step up and provide a 3,000 hr. inspection. Needless to say, I'm not
holding my breath.

wrote:
I spoke with Greg Davison at the FAA in OK City recently, and his take
was somewhat less encouraging. It seems that Centrair has been
contacted on a number of occasions in the last fourteen months by
owners and the FAA about the service life limit. Greg reports that they
are "very polite" and continually offer the response that "something"
will be done. As yet, nothing has resulted except these empty promises.

I inquired about other means to get around this issue, such as an
"Alternate Means Of Compliance (AMOC)," Experimental certificate, Time
Machine, etc. Greg informed me that the "Experimental" route is a
non-starter (Sorry Jacek, read the FAR's). Experimental category does
NOT exempt an aircraft from FAA issued AD's, especially ones that
concern airframe structure and life limits.

Likewise, the AMOC route is also pretty much a no-go. In order to
create an AMOC dealing with the structural limits of the airframe, all
the original test data must either be included or duplicated. This
means testing to failure and extensive fatigue tests. The Pegasus spar
was based on another Centrair spar (the Marianne), and the design was
accepted. Unfortunately, all these data are the property of the holder
of the Type Certificate (S.N. Centrair) and unless the data is
released, it has to be duplicated. Meaning, buy a glider and test it
like the factory did. And then break it. As much fun as this sounds, it
is likely to be prohibitively expensive.

Greg is disturbed at the situation. In his words, the FAA is NOT
particularly enamored of the potential to ground an entire fleet of
gliders when a simple solution exists- but only if the cure comes from
S.N. Centrair. What is needed is a Service or Technical Bulletin from
S.N. Centrair that supersedes the Bulletin removing reference to a
(non-existent) 3,000 hr. inspection protocol and emphasizing the 3,000
hr. structural life limit in the U.S.

As Greg put it, this situation became apparent after an owner inquired
about the contradictory references in the Pegase 101 Owners Manual. FAA
requested clarification from S.N. Centrair and they just sidestepped
the issue by stating that the 3,000 hr. limit is the accepted
reference. As a result, Greg and the FAA were forced to issue the AD.
It would have been better if the reference had been to the 3,000 hr.
inspection and such an inspection was offered.

At this time, the ball is in S.N. Centrair's court. The FAA is pretty
much unable to bring pressure on them, and can only work through EASA,
the Eurpoean equivalent of the FAA. Since EASA is a relatively new
organization, having superseded the JAA, it is busy dealing with more
pressing issues- like who gets the corner office, etc.

I suggested a 3,000 hr. service life limit on other French aircraft
(Like the Airbus 380, which may need it more than the Pegase, if what I
have read about their wing problems is true). Maybe if Airbus had to
deal with something like this, S.N. Centrair would be "encouraged" to
step up and provide a 3,000 hr. inspection. Needless to say, I'm not
holding my breath.

OK...how about this: there is 40 some Pegasus's in the US.....maybe we
all have to get together and write a letter to Centrair and basically
point out the solution to them....that was never done and I don't know
if that is going to bring any results but maybe would be worth
trying....

According to the FAA, there are approximately 50 Centrair Pegase 101
gliders in the US. I don't know how effective we are as a group, but
letters to Centrair and emails couldn't do to much harm. They are
French, so probably they dislike us boorish Yanks anyway. (As long as
the Germans aren't singing marching songs)

The address is:
Societe Nouvelle Centrair
B.P. 44, Aerodrome
36300 Le Blanc, France

Email:

wrote:
According to the FAA, there are approximately 50 Centrair Pegase 101
gliders in the US. I don't know how effective we are as a group, but
letters to Centrair and emails couldn't do to much harm.

If the problem is - have I read this right - that a mistranslation
turned a 3,000 hour inspection into a 3,000 hour life, why don't the 50
of you club together, pay for another professional translation, then
ask Centrair simply to inform the FAA by AD that the documentation has
been upgraded?

Minimum work on their part, and probably won't cost each of you that
much.

Sudden thought. What does the UK documentation for the Pegasus say?

Ian

And how do we find said owner who inquired about the contradictions, buy
them a one-way ticket to Baghdad, and have him/her join Saddam for a good
old lynching?

Never stick your hand in the mouth of a rotweiller if you don't want to get
bit.

As Greg put it, this situation became apparent after an owner inquired
about the contradictory references in the Pegase 101 Owners Manual. FAA
requested clarification from S.N. Centrair and they just sidestepped
the issue by stating that the 3,000 hr. limit is the accepted
reference. As a result, Greg and the FAA were forced to issue the AD.
It would have been better if the reference had been to the 3,000 hr.
inspection and such an inspection was offered.

It really is hard to believe that a mistranslation will eventually ground 50
gliders. I think more pressure on the FAA is also needed too. Maybe wishful
thinking, but we owners should try *anything* to protect our investment,
including a new translation.

Doug

"Ian" wrote in message
ups.com...

wrote:
According to the FAA, there are approximately 50 Centrair Pegase 101
gliders in the US. I don't know how effective we are as a group, but
letters to Centrair and emails couldn't do to much harm.

If the problem is - have I read this right - that a mistranslation
turned a 3,000 hour inspection into a 3,000 hour life, why don't the 50
of you club together, pay for another professional translation, then
ask Centrair simply to inform the FAA by AD that the documentation has
been upgraded?

Minimum work on their part, and probably won't cost each of you that
much.

Sudden thought. What does the UK documentation for the Pegasus say?

Ian

Doug wrote:
It really is hard to believe that a mistranslation will eventually ground 50
gliders. I think more pressure on the FAA is also needed too. Maybe wishful
thinking, but we owners should try *anything* to protect our investment,
including a new translation.

Doug

"Ian" wrote in message
ups.com...

wrote:
According to the FAA, there are approximately 50 Centrair Pegase 101
gliders in the US. I don't know how effective we are as a group, but
letters to Centrair and emails couldn't do to much harm.

If the problem is - have I read this right - that a mistranslation
turned a 3,000 hour inspection into a 3,000 hour life, why don't the 50
of you club together, pay for another professional translation, then
ask Centrair simply to inform the FAA by AD that the documentation has
been upgraded?

Minimum work on their part, and probably won't cost each of you that
much.

Sudden thought. What does the UK documentation for the Pegasus say?

Ian


If the problem is - have I read this right - that a mistranslation
turned a 3,000 hour inspection into a 3,000 hour life....

That what it is. When I get home I will post on this group exact
language from the manual. It is very obvious to me that it is a
translation issue. On the other hand I don't buy that the FAA is so
helpless. We simply need to pressure them until they will take an
action. There are some Pegs here in the US with 3000 hours+, my is only
1100 hours or should I say "I don't care because I have a plenty of
time? " They were importing the Pegs into the US without a flight
manual in English. I don't emember if the pre-certification ships are
now standard or experimental category but nonetheless something needs
to be done. They are perfectly good gliders capable of some impressive
flights and I think we, the owners of Pegase sailplanes, need to write
a letter(s) or hire a lawyer (how the hell do you spell that...lawyer
or layer) or do something. It is incredible to me that a stupid phrase
in someones poor translation is a base for grounding a good and
airworthy glider.

Jacek
Washington State

P.S. I am curious what the UK manual says....maybe someone can post
that info here and then we can take the issue with the FAA and show
them the UK flight manual, maybe they will listen and that might give
them a chance of a different approach with Centrair?