Jump to content

Towing gliders


ls6pilot

Recommended Posts

Yeah I got that. I know there's another part of it though. I'm saying, maybe I'm thinking there's nothing in the ASTM about standards for towing. I know there was SOME hitch SOMEWHERE, but I can't remember what that conversation had when I discussed it with a FSDO guy a few years ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What I posted was the FAA limitations on the airplane which is allowed to tow. It says nothing about the pilot. Although the plane is qualified for flight training I can't do any training that would be recognized by the FAA because I am not a CFI.

Also, of a plane qualifies as light sport but is standard certificated it is not a light sport plane (SLSA or ELSA) it is simply a standard certificated plane that can be flown by a light sport pilot.

(Every now and then we seem to have this confusion between light sport planes and the pilots - LS or PP - who fly them. There are rules for each. A light sport plane can tow a light sport glider, but not with a light sport pilot flying it. I'm ok with that.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In Germany glider towing with ultralights is very popular. There are a number of CTs, which are equipped with tow-hitches. So is our D-MQCT which tows a 650 kg doubleseater out of our 2000 ft field quite well. With such a doubleseater we get a climbrate of 300 ft/min.

D-MQCT.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

On the second part: Those aren't LSAs in the sense I'm getting at. They can certainly fit the category of one per the definition in 1.1, but the rules are written around the airworthiness certificate, and that's what I'm mainly referring to.

 

Corey,  It is hard to know what you really meant from the written word, If you put the "S" in front of LSA it becomes clear.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What I posted was the FAA limitations on the airplane which is allowed to tow. It says nothing about the pilot. Although the plane is qualified for flight training I can't do any training that would be recognized by the FAA because I am not a CFI.

Also, of a plane qualifies as light sport but is standard certificated it is not a light sport plane (SLSA or ELSA) it is simply a standard certificated plane that can be flown by a light sport pilot.

(Every now and then we seem to have this confusion between light sport planes and the pilots - LS or PP - who fly them. There are rules for each. A light sport plane can tow a light sport glider, but not with a light sport pilot flying it. I'm ok with that.)

 

Doug, I agree there is often confusion between the plane and pilot, where people try to place pilot limitations on the plane or vice versa. An example is sport pilots who think it is ilegal for them to fly faster than 120 kts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Tom,

" An example is sport pilots who think it is illegal for them to fly faster than 120 kts."

 

One little addition to this. If they are only have a Sport Pilot not a PP and they have not been signed off for greater than 87 knots then it is possible to not be allowed over the 87 knots. This is supposed to be a logbook sign off entry just like air space sign offs..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Tom,

" An example is sport pilots who think it is illegal for them to fly faster than 120 kts."

 

One little addition to this. If they are only have a Sport Pilot not a PP and they have not been signed off for greater than 87 knots then it is possible to not be allowed over the 87 knots. This is supposed to be a logbook sign off entry just like air space sign offs..

 

Roger, I am aware of that. I was pointing that sometimes people will try and place pilot limitations on the aircraft, and aircraft limitations on the pilot.

An other example of this was when you said you couldn't tow anything with a LSA. This is a pilot limitation for sport pilot, and not a aircraft limitation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Tom,

" An example is sport pilots who think it is illegal for them to fly faster than 120 kts."

 

One little addition to this. If they are only have a Sport Pilot not a PP and they have not been signed off for greater than 87 knots then it is possible to not be allowed over the 87 knots. This is supposed to be a logbook sign off entry just like air space sign offs..

 

I got my ticket in an airplane with Vh greater than 87kt.  I would need an endorsement to fly one with Vh *below* 87 knots!  Go figure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I got my ticket in an airplane with Vh greater than 87kt.  I would need an endorsement to fly one with Vh *below* 87 knots!  Go figure.

 

You need the endorsement even if you did the checkride in the airplane, in fact it should have been made prior to solo flight.

 

The less than 87 kt endorsement didn't go into effect until 2010, and if you have acted as PIC of one before this time you are grandfathered in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, of a plane qualifies as light sport but is standard certificated it is not a light sport plane (SLSA or ELSA) it is simply a standard certificated plane that can be flown by a light sport pilot.

 

When I made my other post on this I was kind of rushed, and I'm not quite sure I came across like I intended. I have deleted the text from the other post and am addressing it here.

 

It is true that a standard category airplane can never be a ELSA or SLSA, the regulations are quite clear about that. However that doesn't mean a standard category aircraft can't be a LSA. To know and understand what a LSA is you need to look at the only definition that really matters, the FAA's definition in 14 CFR part 1.1.

 

"Light-sport aircraft means an aircraft, other than a helicopter or powered-lift that, since its original certification, has continued to meet the following".

 

So the first question, is an airplane with a standard airworthiness certificate an aircraft? Well obviously the answer is yes. Since the answer is yes, that means the definition applies to it. If the airplane meets the requirements of the definition, and it has continuously met the requirements since its original certification it must be a "Light Sport Aircraft".

 

Through out the regulations that were changed with the implementation of the sport pilot rules, the creation of the definition, and the new ways to issue a airworthiness certificate for these aircraft the FAA has used language that goes along with the fact that they consider standard category aircraft that meet the definition to be LSA's. The FAA even went as far as creating a list of standard category Light Sport Aircraft. https://www.faa.gov/aircraft/gen_av/light_sport/media/ExistingModels.pdf

 

Just like a the fact that an airplane that has flaps, controlable pitch propeller, and retractable landing gear, is a Complex airplane, and a airplane with an engine of more than 200 horsepower is a High Performance airplane, then a aircraft that meets the requirement of the CFR 1.1 definition of a Light Sport Airplane is in fact a LSA.

 

In my opinion the way that the EAA and others approached the explanation of the new changes starting back in 2004 has led to much of confusion about this topic. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 11 months later...

Yes the FAA was clear from the start that certain 'legacy' aircraft qualified as light sport and therefore I as a sport pilot could fly them. I think the murkiness began when PP's started flying light sports and claimed all sorts of capabilities that the plane just doesn't have. A recent rhubarb was over flying IFR in a light sport. My rule of thumb is that if the plane does something that I'm excited about, then I probably am not allowed to fly it, lol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also of note, is the SINCE ORIGINAL CERTIFICATION part.

Certain cubs had the option of installing a constant speed prop on them. If it has ever been installed, that aircraft may never be used as LSA, even after you remove the modification.

The reason for the "SINCE ORIGINAL CERTIFICATION" part is because when the regs were being written, people were applying for weight reduction STCs for C150's, some were downright dangerous. So to stop it, that language was included.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎3‎/‎31‎/‎2018 at 7:35 PM, Anticept said:

Also of note, is the SINCE ORIGINAL CERTIFICATION part.

Certain cubs had the option of installing a constant speed prop on them. If it has ever been installed, that aircraft may never be used as LSA, even after you remove the modification.

The reason for the "SINCE ORIGINAL CERTIFICATION" part is because when the regs were being written, people were applying for weight reduction STCs for C150's, some were downright dangerous. So to stop it, that language was included.

The only Cubs that would have had a constant speed propeller would have already been out of the limits to be a light sport aircraft. What you are thinking about was a controlable pitch propeller called the Beech Roby. It used a hand crank to adjust the pitch.

Edited to add: This propeller was more common on Luscombe and Taylorcraft than Cubs. I know someone who bought a Taylorcraft from a sport pilot to use for sport pilot training, only to find out it had previously had one of these propellers installed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...