Pegasus gliders.
Mitch
limit past 3000 hours? I know of a couple of gliders that are rapidly
approaching this point, and there must be more in the U.S. I did not
realize how bad the problem was until a discussion today with some
folks who truly love soaring, but very soon will not be able to fly
their gliders because of this life limit. This caused great alarm, as
Germany, England, and France have all extended the life limit to
12,000 hours on Pegasui. (Pegasuses?) However, the FAA still refuses
to expand the life limit.
Where is the SSA in all this? I thought they were to be the ones at
the tip of the spear with helping people out with problems like this,
but in my searching, I have seen no evidence of support. I must say,
I'm pretty disappointed in the lack of action on this. It seems like
it should be at the forefront of their attention. Hell, I don't even
know who "They" are anymore. I used to, but I lost track sometime
around the time all the money disappeared.
My own regional director is busy enough trying to prop up the entire
contest circuit on his own, so I'm not comfortable bothering him on
this issue. Who else is out there that can help?
Is anyone out there getting anywhere with resolving the Pegasus issue?
Frustrated,
EX
Frank Whiteley
JJ Sinclair
they have no reason to "extend" what could be a potential liability
issue. If I had a Pegasus I would accidently misplace the log book and
be forced to "estimate" the total hours in a new log book, thereafter
my aging memory would be soooo bad I just couldn't remember much over
20 hours per year that I flew the beast.
I forget the Latin phrase, something about Carberundum, anyway the
translation was; Don't let the bastards grind you down!
Hope this helps,
JJ
Lewis Hartswick
> Centrair is no longer involved with the manufacture of sailplanes and
> they have no reason to "extend" what could be a potential liability
> issue. If I had a Pegasus I would accidently misplace the log book and
> be forced to "estimate" the total hours in a new log book, thereafter
> my aging memory would be soooo bad I just couldn't remember much over
> 20 hours per year that I flew the beast.
> I forget the Latin phrase, something about Carberundum, anyway the
> translation was; Don't let the bastards grind you down!
> Hope this helps,
> JJ
>
"folks" seem to be using the idea. :-)
...lew...
Martin Gregorie
> I forget the Latin phrase, something about Carberundum, anyway
> the translation was; Don't let the bastards grind you down! Hope
> this helps,
>
Its schoolboy pig latin, guaranteed to make no sense to a Roman:
Nihil bastardio carborundum
--
martin@ | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org |
Mark628CA
As the owner of a high time Pegasus (and the guy Mitch was referring
to in the first post), I'd like to dispel a couple of rumors and
disagree with some of the "suggestions" to this situation. First, some
folks have suggested "losing" the A/C logbooks and just starting over.
This is in fact the worst idea, as the FAA must assume that, in the
absence of LEGAL documentation to the contrary, an aircraft with a
service life limit has reached that limit and is no longer
serviceable. There is an example of a Learjet that was auctioned off
in Mexico for peanuts because the logbooks were stolen along with the
pilot's luggage. Without documentation of the life history and
maintenance records, the aircraft was deemed unflyable according to
the FAA, and was not permitted to reenter the US. Likewise, the
suggestion of coming up with a "new" set of logbooks is questionable.
If you were caught, you would probably not only face the immediate
loss of the service life remaining, but could also be charged with
forging an official document.
Another suggestion that has been booted around in the past is to
change the certification from Standard to Experimental.
Unfortunately, Experimental status does not exempt the aircraft from
manufacturer service life limits and Airworthiness Directives.
In June of this year, I received a letter from the FAA outlining the
situation. I believe this letter was also sent to all registered
owners of the Pegase 101A in the US. It gave the reasoning behind the
AD that limited the service life. Basically, it boils down to the fact
that Centrair never submitted fatigue test data to the FAA, nor did
they offer an inspection protocol that would extend the service life
past 3000 hours. The letter also referred to the fact that Pegase
101's in France are still flying well beyond 3000 hours since they
were certified in France without a life limit.
JJ is also correct in stating that the "new" Centrair is not
cooperating on this issue. According to the FAA website, there are 31
Pegase gliders in the US, and since Centrair no longer manufactures
the glider, they are willing to write off the US owned ships. At least
in this matter. A couple of years ago, we were all forced to buy new
rudder pedals (at an exorbitant price) because of a Service Bulletin
that quickly became an AD from the FAA. Apparently, the French are OK
with taking our money, but not supporting their product otherwise. (At
this point I could make a comment about 1944, but I won't.
The last paragraph in the FAA's letter is intriguing. It states "SSA
or another entity could obtain approval for a service life extension
program via a Supplemental Type Certificate."
I am beginning research into exactly what this would entail. I would
be interested to hear from other Pegase 101 owners, especially those
who have been affected by the AD, and those who are nearing the 3000
hour life limit. From what I have been able to determine, the STC
could be costly, and I am wondering how to go about funding it.
Interested owners may contacy me directly at Mark (at) MMFabrication
dot com.
Oh, by the way, the proper Latin is "Non illegitimi carborundum."
Mark
Bob
> Nihil bastardio carborundum
>
> or....
illigitimi non carborundum
Martin Gregorie
I'm certain that's better Latin than mine (which I said was schoolboy
joke latin), but FWIW the online Latin-English translator at http://
www.translation-guide.com/ can't handle either - the only words it
recognises are nihil and non.
tommytoyz
Another possible solution is for owners to register the aircraft in a
European country but continue to fly it here. That's perfectly legal.
JJ Sinclair
carborundum"..................On the misplaced log book issue, the
Federalies should never be involved. Owner simply makes a log book
entry in his new book, Logs lost, estimated total time = 1000 hours.
Why/when should / would the Federallies be involved?
Illigitimi non carborundum!
JJ
cernauta
wrote:
>
>> � � Nihil bastardio carborundum
>>
>> or....
>
>ill_E_gitimi non carborundum
MickiMinner
>
> Is anyone out there getting anywhere with resolving the Pegasus issue?
>
> Frustrated,
> EX
Mitch and all Pegusai (?) owners...
You are right...it is durn frustrating. Steve Northcraft with the SSA
having been working hard and diligently to get the FAA to extend the
life of the Pegasus aircraft. So far he has been unsuccessful, but it
wasn't for the lack of trying. He is still working on it...and you can
contact him if you have any questions, ideas or concerns. It was a
huge topic of conversation at the last board meeting. (Micki acting
as secretary for) Charlie-Lite
BT
Did you contact the SSA to find out instead of just blasting it in public?
BT
"Mitch" <mhuds...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:bc4cc138-e6f4-4000...@k13g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
Wayne Paul
"Mitch" <mhuds...@aol.com> wrote in message news:bc4cc138-e6f4-4000...@k13g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
... Snip ...
>
> Where is the SSA in all this? I thought they were to be the ones at
> the tip of the spear with helping people out with problems like this,
> but in my searching, I have seen no evidence of support. I must say,
> I'm pretty disappointed in the lack of action on this. It seems like
> it should be at the forefront of their attention. Hell, I don't even
> know who "They" are anymore. I used to, but I lost track sometime
> around the time all the money disappeared.
>
... Snip ...
> Frustrated,
> EX
Have you bothered to look at this new group archives? If you had you would realize that the SSA has been actively involved. I find it troubling that you assume the SSA is doing nothing just because the French factory has not produced information which to FAA considers necessary to resolve the problem.
What is your suggestion to resolve the FAA's impasse with the factory? How can the SSA force the FAA to meet your needs? What can the SSA do that they haven't already done?
This SSA has been involved every since the factory started providing support for its' US owned product. The time limitation efforts have even been published in Soaring Magazine. Please don't be so critical of the SSA before you have done your research.
Mitch
The FAA indicated in the letter that potential alternative solutions
to extend the service life of these aircraft could be pursued by
private interests. The SSA, in reviewing what information would be
required to pursue this, has determined that we do not have the
required resources.
The SSA is disappointed with what now appears to be a final outcome
for this issue. However, over the course of discussions the last 4
years on this, and other certification related issues, it has become
apparent that further dialogue on the subject of how the FAA handles
glider certification is necessary and we will continue to pursue and
protect the interests of our membership.
Stephen Northcraft, Chairman
SSA Government Liaison Committee
So, what they are saying here is "We give up, if you guys want to do
it individually, you may go ahead and do that". If they (The SSA) do
not have the required resources to pursue this, what can the
membership as a whole do to provide the necessary resources? Once
again from the site-
"The SSA acts as the ‘umbrella’ organization for soaring in the United
States by representing the collective interests of its members –
individuals, clubs, chapters, and businesses...The SSA actively
encourages involvement of youth in the sport, and provides
representation to Federal agencies..."
I have done, and continue to do my share for the sport of Soaring, I
feel I have the right to be disappointed, and to publicly blast the
lack of action by an organization that I have believed in since I was
14.
uncl...@ix.netcom.com
Steve Northcraft has put huge hours into trying to get a favorable
outcome for this problem. The issue is that the FAA can only use
manufacturer's "approved data" or a suitably engineered and approved
STC as a basis to continue airworthiness.
Since Centrair won't provide such data, the only method currently
available would be for some entity to create, engineer including all
required source data, document, and then get approved a test plan for
continued airworthiness. OH- one other detail- this entity will also
have to carry the liability going forward that results from these
activities. Steve's statement is correct, the SSA does not have either
the finanacial nor technical resources to undertake such a project.
The only real practical solution is either export to a country without
life limit certification, or get a massive cramp in the log book entry
hand.
Sorry for your pain.
UH
Mike Schumann
limit was not an issue and buy a different glider.
Mike Schumann
"tommytoyz" <tommy...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:71274283-d108-493e...@o10g2000yqa.googlegroups.com...
Eric Greenwell
>
> I have done, and continue to do my share for the sport of Soaring, I
> feel I have the right to be disappointed, and to publicly blast the
> lack of action by an organization that I have believed in since I was
> 14.
N. about what he's done, try to get an idea of the magnitude of the
problem. You'll learn a lot more about the problem you face, the
problems the SSA faces trying to solve them, and that you are not the
only one with a problem in the SSA. And then, if they still seem like
lazy, uncaring wusses, you can continue to blast. And if you do, you
will not get any sympathy from me, who has watched Steve perform an
immense amount of work for the SSA and the NW glider clubs for literally
decades.
It's a very unfortunate situation you are in, but it was not caused by
Steve or the SSA, but by Centrair.
--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA
* Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly
Mitch
>
>
> It's a very unfortunate situation you are in, but it was not caused by
> Steve or the SSA, but by Centrair.
>
> --
> Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA
> * Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly
I'm not in the situation, I have a Discus, I am just trying to help
friends out. I have no doubt Steve has done a TON of work towards
this, that is evident. This can't be resolved by one person fighting
the battle alone, it must be many people working together... But where
are they? If the FAA route did not work, why can't a class action
suit be filed against Centair? This would require some sort of
organization made up of people with a common interest with a clear POC
(Point of Contact). Humm, wonder where we could find one of those?
Thanks for a well articulated and thought our response, Eric. Your
points are valid and noted.
EX
lanebush
limit when the glider was purchased? I believe your reasoning is
preventing a rational view of the situation that you find yourself in.
Dave Nadler
Given the weak dollar, this would be a good time to export
the US examples to a country where this problem doesn't exist...
Why don't you organize the US owners and do this as
a group ?