Jet Glider

In reference to Bill Collum's article in Soaring Magazine (Apr. 2008)
does anyone know what FAA regulations apply to retrofitting a non-
motorized glider with a turbine engine similar to the HPH-304?

Is a special turbine Type certification needed?

If there are two engines, is it then charactorized as a twin engine?

Are there extra certifications nessary for the pilot?

Is insurance readily available for a modified non-motorized glider as
a twin engine turbine?

Turbine powered experimental aircraft need an engine maintenance
program, approved by your FSDO. See the FAA Order 8130.2F or maybe G
is current now.

Jim



On Mar 16, 9:58 pm, 33 wrote:
In reference to Bill Collum's article in Soaring Magazine (Apr. 2008)
does anyone know what FAA regulations apply to retrofitting a non-
motorized glider with a turbine engine similar to the HPH-304?

Is a special turbine Type certification needed?

If there are two engines, is it then charactorized as a twin engine?

Are there extra certifications nessary for the pilot?

Is insurance readily available for a modified non-motorized glider as
a twin engine turbine?

wrote:

On Mar 16, 9:58 pm, 33 wrote:
In reference to Bill Collum's article in Soaring Magazine (Apr. 2008)
does anyone know what FAA regulations apply to retrofitting a non-
motorized glider with a turbine engine similar to the HPH-304?

Is a special turbine Type certification needed?

If there are two engines, is it then charactorized as a twin engine?

Are there extra certifications nessary for the pilot?

Is insurance readily available for a modified non-motorized glider as
a twin engine turbine?

Bob Carlton has been through all of this already. Take a look at his
website: www.jetsailplane.com

Insurance "Available", yes; readily, I don't know. I believe he insures
through Costello Associates.

It's registered as an experimental glider. It self-launches, so you need
that endorsement. No turbine certification needed, if I remember Bob
correctly. That kind of thing might apply only to airplanes, not gliders.

--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA
* Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

* Updated! "Transponders in Sailplanes" http://tinyurl.com/y739x4
* New Jan '08 - sections on Mode S, TPAS, ADS-B, Flarm, more

* "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation" at www.motorglider.org

Turbine powered experimental aircraft not only need an engine
maintenance program, but "Proficiency flights will be limited to a
nonstop flight that begins and ends at the home base airport, with
sufficient fuel reserve to meet the applicable operating rules of part
91."

Sec. 91.22 Fuel requirements for flight under VFR.
(a) No person may begin a flight in an airplane under VFR unless
(considering wind and forecast weather conditions) there is enough fuel
to fly to the first point of intended landing and, assuming normal
cruising fuel consumption--
(1) During the day, to fly after that for at least 30 minutes

With the FAA you never know, but isn't FAA Order 8130.2F referring to an
aircraft that needs a working turbine in order stay aloft? Arguably a
jet glider would not be considered to be turbine powered.





wrote:
Turbine powered experimental aircraft need an engine maintenance
program, approved by your FSDO. See the FAA Order 8130.2F or maybe G
is current now.

Jim



On Mar 16, 9:58 pm, 33 wrote:
In reference to Bill Collum's article in Soaring Magazine (Apr. 2008)
does anyone know what FAA regulations apply to retrofitting a non-
motorized glider with a turbine engine similar to the HPH-304?

Is a special turbine Type certification needed?

If there are two engines, is it then charactorized as a twin engine?

Are there extra certifications nessary for the pilot?

Is insurance readily available for a modified non-motorized glider as
a twin engine turbine?

"Greg Arnold" wrote in message
...
Sec. 91.22 Fuel requirements for flight under VFR.
(a) No person may begin a flight in an airplane ...

Using the FAA's definition a glider is not an airplane, so the above would
not apply to a jet glider.

Vaughn

Thank you's to all for the replies.