![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I recently submitted my 2010 Program Letter to my local FSDO, and he
replied with "In reviewing your program letter it was determined that it needs to be revised", followed by excerpts from 8130.2F 11/5/2004 (page 166). (Alas he did not get specific wrt the needed revisions.) All I did was take my 2009 program letter and revise it with my 2010 schedule, but with more detail, including place names, locations, and dates. (I have, of course, requested additional guidance.) Has anyone else experienced stricter program letter requirements from their FSDO? ted/2NO |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Feb 4, 8:51*am, Tuno wrote:
I recently submitted my 2010 Program Letter to my local FSDO, and he replied with "In reviewing your program letter it was determined that it needs to be revised", followed by excerpts from 8130.2F 11/5/2004 (page 166). (Alas he did not get specific wrt the needed revisions.) All I did was take my 2009 program letter and revise it with my 2010 schedule, but with more detail, including place names, locations, and dates. (I have, of course, requested additional guidance.) Has anyone else experienced stricter program letter requirements from their FSDO? ted/2NO When I brought my glider into this region, the DAR provided me with a Form letter he said was used by Denver FSDO. I've been completing one annually. However, I know other pilots that are submitting other formats. http://www.coloradosoaring.org/docs/...r_den_fsdo.pdf Frank Whiteley |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Feb 4, 8:51*am, Tuno wrote:
I recently submitted my 2010 Program Letter to my local FSDO, and he replied with "In reviewing your program letter it was determined that it needs to be revised", followed by excerpts from 8130.2F 11/5/2004 (page 166). (Alas he did not get specific wrt the needed revisions.) All I did was take my 2009 program letter and revise it with my 2010 schedule, but with more detail, including place names, locations, and dates. (I have, of course, requested additional guidance.) Has anyone else experienced stricter program letter requirements from their FSDO? ted/2NO Ted, Here the URL for some info on this subject from our May 2009 "Towlines" newsletter that might be helpful! Please see page 2... http://www.abqsoaring.org/news/Towlines_09_05.pdf Thanks - Renny Albuquerque Soaring Club |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Hi Ted,
Something is going on. I have submitted program letters to the Nashville FSDO for 8 years running without hearing a word. This January, within minutes of faxing it I got a call back from a guy at the FSDO saying he had reviewed the letter and it needed changes. This guy was very specific. He wanted all references to flying at 'sanctioned events' either removed or the specific dates of the event(s) added. I removed the offending wording and refaxed it. No more call backs. Hope that ends it. Regards, Chuck |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
What a waste of time (ours and the FAAs) and money. I'm sure glad my
glider is old enough to not need an annual program letter! Wonder if there is any chance the SSA could convince the FAA that eliminating this bull**** (along with the external number plate exemption requirement) would be a worthwhile contribution to reducing the deficit and national debt. Quick, somebody text Obama! Kirk 66 |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Ted et al
Your FSDO dude is a bit behind the times as the most current FAA order is 8130.2F Change 5 dated 01/15/2010. Check out para. 161 in order to get started. I've been told by our local FSDO that older gliders can no longer use their old "one time" program letter and that the operations limitations need to reflect the airport from which the glider is flown and that a yearly program letter must be submitted. HOWEVER, the local feds have not as yet quoted me book, chaper and verse of the reg/order that supports their statement. I'm still working on that but I suspect it can be found in the above mentioned order. Zulu |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Feb 4, 1:30*pm, zulu wrote:
Ted et al Your FSDO dude is a bit behind the times as the most current FAA order is 8130.2F Change 5 dated 01/15/2010. *Check out para. 161 in order to get started. I've been told by our local FSDO that older gliders can no longer use their old "one time" program letter and that the operations limitations need to reflect the airport from which the glider is flown and that a yearly program letter must be submitted. HOWEVER, the local feds have not as yet quoted me book, chaper and verse of the reg/order that supports their statement. *I'm still working on that but I suspect it can be found in the above mentioned order. Zulu Yeah, I can see that coming! Maybe time to put bogus N numbers on the glider - different on each side? But more seriously, has anyone out there been checked by the FAA to see if they are complying with their program letter? I can just see a ramp check at a big Sports Class contest! And what is the penalty? "You can't fly it here." "OK, where's the Fax machine?". Speaking of Faxing - what's with that? Can't the FAA handle an email attachement of a Word doc or a PDF file? Sheesh.... Kirk |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
A little more seriously, looking at 8130.2F (change 4), Section 10,
para e, it states: Effectivity. Aircraft that received original airworthiness certification before July 9, 1993, are NOT affected by this order unless the original airworthiness certification purpose changes, for example, from R&D to exhibition. Those aircraft, except for purpose changes, will not be affected until the FAA works with the public to determine the best strategy to certificate all experimental exhibition and/or air racing aircraft in accordance with the new policy. The policy established in this order will not be used in these cases unless specifically requested by the applicant. So it looks like older gliders should be safe. For now. Maybe.... See: http://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/m...F%20Ch%204.pdf, page 166. Kirk "Fingers crossed" 66 |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Feb 4, 2:46*pm, "kirk.stant" wrote:
A little more seriously, looking at 8130.2F (change 4), Section 10, para e, it states: Effectivity. Aircraft that received original airworthiness certification before July 9, 1993, are NOT affected by this order unless the original airworthiness certification purpose changes, for example, from R&D to exhibition. Those aircraft, except for purpose changes, will not be affected until the FAA works with the public to determine the best strategy to certificate all experimental exhibition and/or air racing aircraft in accordance with the new policy. The policy established in this order will not be used in these cases unless specifically requested by the applicant. So it looks like older gliders should be safe. *For now. *Maybe.... See: *http://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/m...F%20Ch%204.pdf, page 166. Kirk "Fingers crossed" 66 Well, if the FAA really does intend to "work with the public" on a new policy, perhaps that's the SSA's opportunity to work out a sensible policy for all experimental sailplanes. Preferably a one time letter that places no geographic restrictions. Would that common sense prevail for once.... -Evan Ludeman / T8 |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Speaking of Faxing - what's with that? Can't the FAA handle an email attachement of a Word doc or a PDF file? Sheesh.... Kirk A inquiry to your friendly FSDO might be in order. Electronic is easier for both parties. The Houston (TX) FDSO accepted my program letter (and other's) electronically this year. Understandably, they want a signature, so a plain Word file is generally not going to cut it. I printed the letter, signed it, scanned it to a pdf, and submitted. Based on a recommendation I saw some months ago (in Soaring mag or ras, I don't recall) to ask for receipt confirmation, I asked for a return email stating they received it, which they did. I realize that's not legally definative, but it's an easy step to at least confirm they read it and felt it was acceptable. While the whole program letter idea for sailplanes does seem a bit pointless, I did feel that our local FDSO was trying to make the best of the existing requirements and very willing to work with pilots. - Frank |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Program Letters US Experimental Exhibition | [email protected] | Soaring | 7 | April 16th 09 01:38 PM |
Letters Asking to Buy My Glider | ContestID67 | Soaring | 20 | November 30th 06 08:19 PM |
Service Bulletins, Service Letters, Service Spares Letters | O. Sami Saydjari | Owning | 5 | December 26th 03 05:36 AM |
Old Contest Letters | Mhudson126 | Soaring | 10 | December 24th 03 02:55 PM |