Will US Sport Pilot be insurable?

The US Sport Pilot initiative seems like it will be fully approved in less than another year. I wonder if Sport Pilots will be insurable in the US? By happy coincidence, Jane and Dennis both seem to be strong supporters, so I hope they can help with the final problem (which has also thwarted ultralights) of insurance.

Jane Garvey (head of US air regulations) supports the Sport Pilot initiative, which would allow much looser requirements for pilots and instructors transitioning from power to simple gliders (such as the 2-33 or 1-26).

Dennis Wright (the US soaring association guy) agrees US soaring is over-regulated and overly complex. See his Dec 2003 Soaring editorial. 'Remember 'safety' and 'fun' are not mutually exclusive'. He strongly supports sport pilot.

But in the US, the insurer has the veto power. Will Sport Pilot, Jane, and Dennis be able to convince insurers to cover this kind of flying?

There are more than 22 glider operations in California (including Reno and half of them have 2-33s and/or 1-26s. These operations have the potential to market to over 600,000 current pilots with a new product: a sport pilot glider license.

With no cumbersome and expensive FAA practical test, the sport pilot transition requires a mere glider instructor sign-off. Then the new sport pilot can take a passenger (spouse, kids, parents, friends) on lovely and quiet sunset flights in the 2-33...

And there is a large pool of instructors who can also become sport glider instructors with no FAA practical test, just requiring two sign-offs. Potentially they can instruct at these clubs too.

Well...if the insurer agrees. Hopefully the fact there hasn't been a US 2-33 fatality in 25 years will help show the simplicity and built in safety of that aircraft at least.

How have those in other countries fared? Do you have lower level licenses for less performing aircraft? Do you have issues finding insurance? Have your licensing requirements 'evolved' over time? For example, in the US power pilots used to not need IFR, night, or radio training. Our sport pilot initiative is an attempt to get back to the simpler standard by allowing only simple aircraft. Have you had similar initiatives to reduce these slowly rising barriers to pilot entry?

HA HA HA HA HA HA, that's a good one! ROTFLMAO!

(we've been hearing this for several years now....snicker, snicker)

I am not sure if I got the sense: would be this licence only available to power pilots who want to fly also gliders, or this licence would be a licence which requires very limited knowledge check passing available to those who want to fly gliders only? E.g. an retired person who dreams of flying in his own PW-5 just to watch the California state from above. )

Regards,

Janusz Kesik This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it visit www.leszno.pl - home of the www.css-leszno.it.pl

In the US, current initial license requirements for a glider pilot require flying with an 'examiner or inspector.' There are several hundred of these in the nation.

The real benefit of the Sport Pilot initiative in the US is that pilots who have already obtained a license in an aircraft (for example a regular old airplane) could now be approved for carrying passengers in another category of aircraft (gliders) with just the signature of a US flight instructor. There are tens of thousands of these instructors in the US. So this would mean this option becomes maybe 100 times more available than having to use an 'examiner or inspector.'

This 'sport pilot' privilege to fly a glider would only apply to lower performing, lightweight gliders (like the 2-33 or Ka7) which have a Vne less than 115 knots.

So what I'm wondering is what other countries require for pilots who want to carry a passenger and transition from power planes to gliders. Does it require a test like the original license, or is it a simpler test given by a common, everyday instructor?

In the US, pilots are already allowed to solo gliders with just a checkout and signature by an instructor (no FAA examiner or inspector) so this is not an issue in the US.

off to do more research..

BT

'Mark James Boyd' < This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it > wrote in message

There are tens of thousands of CFIs. With sport pilot, any of them can become 'sport glider CFIs' with two signatures of 'CFIGs or other sport glider CFIs'. I KNOW this is much easier than than scheduling/paying for an examiner CFIG checkride.

There are also NOT 'hundreds' of glider examiners/inspectors in the US. There are dozens. Try scheduling a check ride and look at your choices and prices. Jeezzz... My FAA examiner is going to need to get current before giving me my check ride. Can you really tell me he is going to do a more insightful job than our club instructor who trains pilots every weekend (oops I hope he doesn't read this :-blush

Actually, the endorsement given a rated airplane pilot when he/she is ready to solo a glider does NOT include a 90-day time limit. It appears you're thinking of 61.87(l)(2), which applies only to holders of student pilot certificates. (See 61.81, defining the applicability of Subpart C, 61.81 through 61.95 inclusive.)

The airplane rated pilot would be endorsed for glider solo under 61.31(d) and unless the CFI-G takes it upon him/herself to include a time limitation there is none.

thanx Judy.. I had always wondered about that.. I'll look through those references... but does that also means it's 'solo', and not a pax carrying flight.. regardless of standard or experimental aircraft certifications?

BT

Uhmmmmmm... I think understand your question(s) correctly. Given the fact that neither class nor type ratings apply to gliders:

- 61.31(c) requires the PIC to hold a glider rating in order to carry another person in a glider

- 61.31(d), as it applies to pilots who are not rated in gliders, requires that the PIC of the glider must either-

(1) be receiving training for the purpose of obtaining a glider rating and be under the supervision of an authorized instructor OR (2) have received glider training required by (Part 61), and have received the required endorsements from an instructor who is authorized to provide the required endorsements for solo flight.

61.31(k)(2)(iii) allows for Operating Limitations issued in connection with either an Experimental or Provisional airworthiness certificate to supercede the provisions of 61.31. (That's because in some instances, those Operating Limits require the pilot to hold rating(s) appropriate to the aircraft category, class and type.)

That last item is extrapolated from the answers to similar questions posed in the Part 61 FAQ, which is online at
http://www2.faa.gov/avr/afs/infoforgeneralaviation