I truly believe that the motorglider alternative should be explored more fully. The KR -1 and 2 could easily purse that course of registration and Airworthiness.
AND, utilize 2 different wing structures in that pursuit. (much like Europa is doing) The Europa gets registered as a "motor"glider and has the ability to switch wings to the short ones, without a change in registration or Pilot certification requirements, ie; glider pilot with no medical. (with the short wings, it's still a glider) A great alternative to flaps or bellyboards on the KR, is the use of traditional glider airbrakes. These are very effective and preclude the problems with ground clearance. found on the KR. Just a thought Chuck In a message dated 4/14/04 2:11:34 PM Pacific Daylight Time, [email protected] writes: > Glad to see someone else had read it besides me. Sport Pilot really is to > no > ones benefit as it is written. The "pulling it back" is also not a legal > move under the FAA's charter. IF the rule does not pass in the alloted time > it is over, pulling it back does not change a thing, the law is actually > dead and some lawyer will speak up and it will all have to start over again. > > David Mikesell > [email protected] > www.skyguynca.com > ----- Original Message ----- > From: <[email protected]> > To: <[email protected]> > Sent: Wednesday, April 14, 2004 1:57 PM > Subject: Re: KR> Sport Plane Classification > > > >No "official" statement as to why OMB was going to reject it. FAA "pulled > >it" from OMB at the last second when they found out OMB was going to > reject it. > >If FAA had not pulled it, then the whole process would have to pretty much > >start from scratch again. > > > >The most likely reason was due to FAA's inaccurate statements of > >costs/benifits. > >The proposal was stated to cost 40 million dollars over the next 10 years > >with a benefit of probable lives saved of 83. > > > >The cost to "ultralight" manufacturers to become compliant with ASTM > >standards would put the average preconstructed aircraft at over 60 > thousand > >dollars.......thereby actually reducing the numbers of independent (former > Ultralight) > >flight instructors. > > > >Just as with Recreational Pilot, the current G.A. Flight schools have > stated > >no interest in this type of instruction and for obvious economic and > insurance > >reasons would not purchase an LSA sport Aircraft or, even purchase an > older > >Standard airworthy aircraft like Taylorcraft or Piper cub to provide this > >instruction. > > > >As for "transitioning" pilots (those currently certificated, but without > >current medical), > >the FAA could easily have written into Recreational Pilot an increased > >limitation for airspaces /speed/ passengers into that pilot classification > that > >would allow these pilots to continue to fly with just a State drivers > license and > >no medical. > > > >Other than that, current Privet pilots may ALREADY transition to > motorgliders > >with only 3 hours of transitional training. > > > >These motorgliders (called self launch by FAA) have all of the abilities > and > >more of any currently proposed Sport Aircraft. > >Many, like the Europa, Xenos, Pipistrel and Grob109 are every bit airplane > (2 > >seat side by side tractor 4 stroke engines, tricycle gear > > > >With the transitional training, here is the best part. > > There are NO limitations to > >Airspace > >Speed, > >Altitude > >Night flight > > > >And > >no endorsements required for tailwheel and complex. > >Not even a Sea plane rating is required if on floats. (yep, there ARE > >seaplane gliders) > >no ELT requirements as is for airplanes > >no Mode C transponder required in the veil or above 10,000 ft. > >Heck, you can even fly into some class A areas without an IFR rating or > >instrumentation. > > > >And, > >the 3 hours transition training serves as a BFR (that they will need any > way) > >And, there is no endorsement requirement for EACH Make and Model aircraft > as > >is for Sport Pilot > > > >Chuck > > > > > > > > > Chuck
