----- Original Message -----

From: Fred <gfredmc@...>

To: Sport_Aircraft@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Friday, December 20, 2002 5:02 AM

Subject: [Sport_Aircraft] Repairman Certificate

I am wondering how many people are going to have time, or can afford
to go to a 80 hour class to be able to work on our own aircraft, or
does it mean that we are going to be in the same boat as GA paying
thousands of dollars each year for maintenance ?







To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Sport_Aircraft-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

I am wondering how many people are going to have time, or can afford
to go to a 80 hour class to be able to work on our own aircraft, or
does it mean that we are going to be in the same boat as GA paying
thousands of dollars each year for maintenance ?

Money,money,money. Isn't life too good and easy to complain ??? War
is hell and the pain has already been felt, so enjoy life. DO NOT
learn of Russell Bourke's work on World War 1 airplane engines that
made him want to design a better engine. He did it. It works. A mono-
stroke 4-cycle. WOW. This is a Wonderful Old World. WOW. 2 power
pulses per crank-shaft revolution. WOW. NO nitrous-oxides or carbon-
monoxide. AIRCorp (American Independent Research Corp) knows how to
copy Russell Bourke. It has been done. 196 degree exhaust is SPECIAL.
Detonation, refridegeration, detonation, refridgeration at 0.25 lb of
cheap oil per horse-power hour. WOW. All I do is melt holes in
pistons. That is EASY. I want a Bourke-Cycle-Engine to power my Dad's
auto-gyro someday. I want EVERY EAA person to have a diesel 2-stroke
that has only 2 moving parts and CLEAN and COOL exhaust. A 2-stroke
that does not use the lubricating oil ??? YES. It has like a 4-cycle
bottem end that does not pollute the oil. Roger Richard at 1-207-255-
6888 is going to be selling them someday. Call him. Anyone can build
one. Just follow Russell Bourke's suggestions. Russell Bourke said
that if you do ANYTHING different, it will not happen right. Patented
in 1932. Made in 1954 and in 1957, Russell Bourke knew that the
parts,repair and gasoline industries would not like it. Life suckzzz.

--->
> new trainers will cost 50,000 rather than the 15,000 that we now
see for a good sport II

Compare that to the cost of a Cessna 152. But I doubt they will go
anywhere near 50K.  More like 25-30K , and still a lot cheaper than
the equivalent GA aircraft.

Unlike GA aircraft, the Sport Pilot will have the option to go to
school and do his own repairs and inspections.




> Mark Smith
> Tri-State Kite Sales           http://www.trikite.com
> 1121 N Locust St
> Mt Vernon, IN 47620          mailto:mark@t...
> 1-812-838-6351

I totally agree with you.  I think this is the next logical step
in both UL and GA.  It opens up an opportunity for both.  It makes
it easier for a person to obtain the necessary skills to fly himself
and his passenger with greater safety in both training and
equipment, not to mention not having to mess with the medical and
the number of people that will be able to fly again just because of
that.
I think it will open totally new markets in 103 by relegating it
back to a single person sport.  It will also make it necessary to
utilize new materials and technology to keep flying 103.

Cost wise, of course the price of the equipment will go up, but not
anywhere near the GA market.  Since the manufacturers now have to
prove their designs, there will be more cost involved and it will
pass along to the buyer.  I think that supply and demand will keep
the cost a lot less than GA tho and make it generally affordable to
a greater percentage of the public than it has been.


---

  In Sport_Aircraft@yahoogroups.com, TreatRayner@a... wrote:
>  I am looking forward to the new factory planes that will come
into the
> market.  This is only possible because of the relaxing of the
regulations
> against selling ready to fly aircraft.
>  Finding ways to improve something doesn't always mean it has to
cost
> significantly more.
>  I have not seen the new trainer price list but $50,000 per sounds
a little
> extreme. Trainers will come in a wide range of prices. I plan on
getting
> certified by the factory. Taking a short course will allow me to
work on and
> annual my own planes. You can either adapt and deal with the new
regulations
> or you can sit on the bench and pout.
>  Saying a MXII sport will cost $50,000 is ridiculous. The market
would never
> support a Quicksilver at triple the price. People who have to
exaggerate to
> prove their point don't really have a point to make.
>  I see Sport Pilot as a whole new type of aviation and opportunity
about to
> open up to all of us.
>
>   Treat Rayner USUA BFI

where in the world do you get the $50,000 number from???
So the 2 seat trainers that exist now for $20,000 are tomorrow going
to cost $50,000???   How is that possible?

--- In Sport_Aircraft@yahoogroups.com, Mark Smith <mark@t...> wrote:
> TreatRayner@a... wrote:
> ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
> >   I believe the concerns of "Sport Pilot" damaging the ultralight
> > industry unfounded. As the industry grows the technology advances
and
> > improves the aircraft designs strength and safety.
> ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
>
> the low costs of ultralight training can only stand so much
technology
> advanace and safety.
>
> new trainers will cost 50,000 rather than the 15,000 that we now
see for
> a good sport II
>
> certification will also bring specialists at high prices, long
hauls to
> get work done and factory certified parts as the only option for
> repairs,
>
> are you planning on getting a 50,000 dollar plane, paying an ANP to
do
> your work using only factory certiffied parts ?
>
> I doubt it,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
>
> What are you training in at the present and how many hours a year,
> fulltime, weekends, family only ?
>
> Do you rent planes ?
> --
>
>
> Mark Smith
> Tri-State Kite Sales           http://www.trikite.com
> 1121 N Locust St
> Mt Vernon, IN 47620          mailto:mark@t...
> 1-812-838-6351

TreatRayner@... wrote:
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
>   I believe the concerns of "Sport Pilot" damaging the ultralight
> industry unfounded. As the industry grows the technology advances and
> improves the aircraft designs strength and safety.
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

the low costs of ultralight training can only stand so much technology
advanace and safety.

new trainers will cost 50,000 rather than the 15,000 that we now see for
a good sport II

certification will also bring specialists at high prices, long hauls to
get work done and factory certified parts as the only option for
repairs,

are you planning on getting a 50,000 dollar plane, paying an ANP to do
your work using only factory certiffied parts ?

I doubt it,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

What are you training in at the present and how many hours a year,
fulltime, weekends, family only ?

Do you rent planes ?
--


Mark Smith
Tri-State Kite Sales           http://www.trikite.com
1121 N Locust St
Mt Vernon, IN 47620          mailto:mark@...
1-812-838-6351

Hey Jerry
I put that seminar arrival map on our website for people to download.
http://www.flyinggators.com/news/seminar.htm
I'll see you there.

In a message dated 12/9/2002 8:24:01 PM Eastern Standard Time, gilan@...
writes:

<< spring Fly-in March 22. >> Jerry's Fast!!

(***) Mar. 22,  Sat., Florida Flying Gators, Annual Spring Fly-In, Contests,
Games, Food.  Gators’ Airpark, North of Groveland      352-394-7674 (field)
Charles Cantrill, Pres.  407-332-8221  CNF518@...   ( 3FD4 )
123.375 www.FlyingGators.com  28-37-39.989N / 081-48-10.278W

In a message dated 12/9/2002 8:24:01 PM Eastern Standard Time, gilan@...
writes:

<< you know the Flying Gators are having a spring Fly-in March 22. >>
I'll go look.  I knew they were planning, but not the date.

Thanks, Jerry

Jerry
you know the Flying Gators are having a spring Fly-in March 22.

http://www.flyinggators.com


--- In Sport_Aircraft@yahoogroups.com, JERRYROOKS@a... wrote:
> Jerry Rooks' hobby is finding and sharing Flying Events in
Florida.  Ask me,
> and send your events to me for sharing!!!
>
> Thanks, Jerry Rooks, Plant City, FL

Jerry Rooks' hobby is finding and sharing Flying Events in Florida.  Ask me,
and send your events to me for sharing!!!

Thanks, Jerry Rooks, Plant City, FL

----- Original Message -----
From: Sport_Aircraft@yahoogroups.com
To: Sport_Aircraft@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, December 09, 2002 2:35 AM
Subject: [Sport_Aircraft] Poll results for Sport_Aircraft





The following Sport_Aircraft poll is now closed.  Here are the
final results:


POLL QUESTION: Are you familiar with (it is hard to be
because it is too simple and efficient)
Russell Bourle's work on the internal
combustion engine that is a diesel 2-
stroke with only 2 moving parts that
makes NO nitrous-oxides or carbon-
monoxides and uses only 0.25 lb of fuel
per horse-power hour ??? The first was
in 1932 and they were made in 1954.
Russell Bourke knew that the
parts,repair and gasoline industries
would not like it. It was/is TOO simple
and efficient to be a money maker.
Remember the OIL crisis of the
1970's ??? Detonation, refridgeration,
detonation, refridgeration at 6,500 RPM
for days used 1 gallon per hour.
Russell Bourke said if it uses 2
gallons per hour that you are losing
RPM and performance, so re-tune it. It
has CLEAN and COOL exhaust. Roger
Richard's AIRCorp (American Independant
Research Corp) gets 196 degree exhaust.
Russell Bourke GAVE it to the EAA to
help man-kind. The patents are long
expired, so ANYONE can have a diesel 2-
stroke that uses NO oil for lubrication
and does not pollute the oil it uses
for permanent lubrication. Read
the "Bourke Engine Documentary". Roger
Richard told me that Russell Bourke is
the JESUS CHRIST of internal combustion.

CHOICES AND RESULTS
- Ayuh, 1 votes, 9.09%
- Nope, 0 votes, 0.00%
- Maybe, was he the guy that saw in the 1920's that the teachers only knew what
their teachers taught them and if you keep building mistake on top of mistake it
will not get rid of the original problem ???, 1 votes, 9.09%
- know science, enjoy life,detonate,refridgerat,detonate,refridgerate at 0.25 lb
of OLD CHEAP OIL per horse-power hour, 1 votes, 9.09%
- KNOW that if it were used, we would be in a radioactive wasteland - 1970's OIL
crisis - money,money,money , who's pocket do you fill ??? Kennedy was killed for
a reason. , 1 votes, 9.09%
- Know that war is hell and the pain has already been felt, so enjoy life and do
not start a new OILySandWitch war, 1 votes, 9.09%
- Maybe it is too good to be true (to the Military Industrial Complex), 2 votes,
18.18%
- Why not use Russell Bourke's work on internal combustion ??? He gave it to the
EAA because it is the engine of the future from the past, 2 votes, 18.18%
- ??? What ??? is it ?? and why ??? , 1 votes, 9.09%
- Huh ??? A CLEAN and COOL exhaust ??? Why is it not used ??? Who is the greedy
war srarter ??? The world is jealous of Russell Bourke's specialness, 1 votes,
9.09%

INDIVIDUAL VOTES
- Ayuh
     - prm@...
- Nope
- Maybe, was he the guy that saw in the 1920's that the teachers only knew what
their teachers taught them and if you keep building mistake on top of mistake it
will not get rid of the original problem ???
     - prm@...
- know science, enjoy life,detonate,refridgerat,detonate,refridgerate at 0.25 lb
of OLD CHEAP OIL per horse-power hour
     - prm@...
- KNOW that if it were used, we would be in a radioactive wasteland - 1970's OIL
crisis - money,money,money , who's pocket do you fill ??? Kennedy was killed for
a reason.
     - prm@...
- Know that war is hell and the pain has already been felt, so enjoy life and do
not start a new OILySandWitch war
     - prm@...
- Maybe it is too good to be true (to the Military Industrial Complex)
     - prm@...
     - gilan@...
- Why not use Russell Bourke's work on internal combustion ??? He gave it to the
EAA because it is the engine of the future from the past
     - prm@...
     - gilan@...
- ??? What ??? is it ?? and why ???
     - gilan@...
- Huh ??? A CLEAN and COOL exhaust ??? Why is it not used ??? Who is the greedy
war srarter ??? The world is jealous of Russell Bourke's specialness
     - prm@...


For more information about this group, please visit
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Sport_Aircraft

For help with Yahoo! Groups, please visit
http://help.yahoo.com/help/us/groups/





To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Sport_Aircraft-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

The following Sport_Aircraft poll is now closed.  Here are the
final results:


POLL QUESTION: Are you familiar with (it is hard to be
because it is too simple and efficient)
Russell Bourle's work on the internal
combustion engine that is a diesel 2-
stroke with only 2 moving parts that
makes NO nitrous-oxides or carbon-
monoxides and uses only 0.25 lb of fuel
per horse-power hour ??? The first was
in 1932 and they were made in 1954.
Russell Bourke knew that the
parts,repair and gasoline industries
would not like it. It was/is TOO simple
and efficient to be a money maker.
Remember the OIL crisis of the
1970's ??? Detonation, refridgeration,
detonation, refridgeration at 6,500 RPM
for days used 1 gallon per hour.
Russell Bourke said if it uses 2
gallons per hour that you are losing
RPM and performance, so re-tune it. It
has CLEAN and COOL exhaust. Roger
Richard's AIRCorp (American Independant
Research Corp) gets 196 degree exhaust.
Russell Bourke GAVE it to the EAA to
help man-kind. The patents are long
expired, so ANYONE can have a diesel 2-
stroke that uses NO oil for lubrication
and does not pollute the oil it uses
for permanent lubrication. Read
the "Bourke Engine Documentary". Roger
Richard told me that Russell Bourke is
the JESUS CHRIST of internal combustion.

CHOICES AND RESULTS
- Ayuh, 1 votes, 9.09%
- Nope, 0 votes, 0.00%
- Maybe, was he the guy that saw in the 1920's that the teachers only knew what
their teachers taught them and if you keep building mistake on top of mistake it
will not get rid of the original problem ???, 1 votes, 9.09%
- know science, enjoy life,detonate,refridgerat,detonate,refridgerate at 0.25 lb
of OLD CHEAP OIL per horse-power hour, 1 votes, 9.09%
- KNOW that if it were used, we would be in a radioactive wasteland - 1970's OIL
crisis - money,money,money , who's pocket do you fill ??? Kennedy was killed for
a reason. , 1 votes, 9.09%
- Know that war is hell and the pain has already been felt, so enjoy life and do
not start a new OILySandWitch war, 1 votes, 9.09%
- Maybe it is too good to be true (to the Military Industrial Complex), 2 votes,
18.18%
- Why not use Russell Bourke's work on internal combustion ??? He gave it to the
EAA because it is the engine of the future from the past, 2 votes, 18.18%
- ??? What ??? is it ?? and why ??? , 1 votes, 9.09%
- Huh ??? A CLEAN and COOL exhaust ??? Why is it not used ??? Who is the greedy
war srarter ??? The world is jealous of Russell Bourke's specialness, 1 votes,
9.09%

INDIVIDUAL VOTES
- Ayuh
      - prm@...
- Nope
- Maybe, was he the guy that saw in the 1920's that the teachers only knew what
their teachers taught them and if you keep building mistake on top of mistake it
will not get rid of the original problem ???
      - prm@...
- know science, enjoy life,detonate,refridgerat,detonate,refridgerate at 0.25 lb
of OLD CHEAP OIL per horse-power hour
      - prm@...
- KNOW that if it were used, we would be in a radioactive wasteland - 1970's OIL
crisis - money,money,money , who's pocket do you fill ??? Kennedy was killed for
a reason.
      - prm@...
- Know that war is hell and the pain has already been felt, so enjoy life and do
not start a new OILySandWitch war
      - prm@...
- Maybe it is too good to be true (to the Military Industrial Complex)
      - prm@...
      - gilan@...
- Why not use Russell Bourke's work on internal combustion ??? He gave it to the
EAA because it is the engine of the future from the past
      - prm@...
      - gilan@...
- ??? What ??? is it ?? and why ???
      - gilan@...
- Huh ??? A CLEAN and COOL exhaust ??? Why is it not used ??? Who is the greedy
war srarter ??? The world is jealous of Russell Bourke's specialness
      - prm@...


For more information about this group, please visit
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Sport_Aircraft

For help with Yahoo! Groups, please visit
http://help.yahoo.com/help/us/groups/

For anyone that isn't aware and it is possible there may be someone
still not aware.
EAA has established a special information hot line if you have
questions about experimental or special Light-Sport Aircraft. If you
have questions call 877-359-1232 or 877-FLY-1232

Thank you all for the opportunity to be of service.  And Happy Thanksgiving.

Having been grounded for 8 days last year after 9/11, it is indeed thankful we
should be that we can still fly at all.

Keep 'em Flying,

Jim Stephenson
CEO/President of ASC

ELSA only.  And then only during the first 3 years of the rule!  Don't miss the
opportunity.

Jim Stephenson
   ----- Original Message -----
   From: gilan@...
   To: Sport_Aircraft@yahoogroups.com
   Sent: Wednesday, November 27, 2002 11:22 PM
   Subject: [Sport_Aircraft] [Sport_Pilot] Re: ELSA ?




   I have a factory built UL. I've changed the engine and prop to a
   design and now the plane is a FAT UL.  The plane was not a kit and
   came fully assembled by the factory ready to fly.  What type can I
   expect my plane to be?  An S LSA or E LSA ?


   --- In Sport_Aircraft@y..., asctwo@a... wrote:
   > If you do not register to bring it in within 24 months, and you do
   not complete the process by 36 months, and it does not fit into the
   rules otherwise.  It is a ground monument!  That is it.
   >
   > Big deal, how many aircraft have been built from "ground monuments"
   like Contential GPUs and Cessna and Piper parts?
   >
   > You will have to show 51% built after the 36 months (except for
   formal ELSA Kit Built).  That will add difficulty.  But you can also
   get the repairman certificate  if it is Amateur Built (AB) ala 51%
   rule.
   >
   > Jim Stephenson
   >   ----- Original Message -----
   >   From: czy@c...
   >   To: Sport_Pilot@y...
   >   Sent: Wednesday, November 27, 2002 11:30 AM
   >   Subject: fw: [Sport_Pilot] Re: ELSA ?
   >
   >
   >
   >
   >   How will airplanes that are stored in barns and don't get
   >   transferred into the system in the transition period get handled?
   Do
   >   they become orphaned, illegal and worthless?
   >
   >   Bill
   >
   >   --- In Sport_Pilot@y..., asctwo@a... wrote:
   >   >
   >   > ----- Original Message -----
   >   > From: AscTwo
   >   > To: jimc@d...
   >   > Sent: Tuesday, November 26, 2002 6:21 PM
   >   > Subject: Re: [Sport_Pilot] Re: ELSA ?
   >   >
   >   >
   >   > There is no perentage required.  It may be entirely prebuilt.
   >   That is why the class to get a repairman inspector certificate.
   >   >
   >   > As I understand it, there will be a requirement for the vehicle
   to
   >   have been in a system such as ASC vehicle registration, or under
   the
   >   exemptions as a trainer.
   >   >
   >   > Good question though.  We will see.
   >   >
   >   > Jim Stephenson
   >   >   ----- Original Message -----
   >   >   From: jimc@d...
   >   >   To: Sport_Pilot@y...
   >   >   Sent: Tuesday, November 26, 2002 1:32 PM
   >   >   Subject: [Sport_Pilot] Re: ELSA ?
   >   >
   >   >
   >   >
   >   >
   >   >   --- In Sport_Pilot@y..., asctwo@a... wrote:
   >   >
   >   >   > snip ....
   >   >   >
   >   >   > However, if you take advantage of the new (hence, current
   >   practice
   >   >   does not apply) Experimental Light Sport Aircraft (ELSA)
   ability
   >   to N
   >   >   number an aircraft without having built 51%, you will have to
   >   have
   >   >   the class to do the inspections.
   >   >   >
   >   >   > Jim Stephenson
   >   >
   >   >   Jim S, A couple of questions here:
   >   >
   >   >   (1) I hope I'm not tkaing this out of context - Based on the
   >   above
   >   >   statement is there a percentage (or minimum percentage) of
   owner
   >   >   built going to be established to register a "Fat UL" as
   ELSA.
   >   >
   >   >   (2) To register ELSA are you going to have to have the "Fat
   UL"
   >   >   already registered with an org.  I did not see a requirement
   to
   >   do
   >   >   this anywhere, but I keep hearing it referenced every now and
   >   then.
   >   >
   >   >   Thanks
   >   >
   >   >   Jim C
   >   >
   >   >
   >   >   To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
   >   >   Sport_Pilot-unsubscribe@y...
   >   >
   >   >
   >   >
   >   >   Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
   >   http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
   >
   >
   >   To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
   >   Sport_Pilot-unsubscribe@y...
   >
   >
   >
   >   Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
   http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/


   To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
   Sport_Aircraft-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com



   Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

I have a factory built UL. I've changed the engine and prop to a
design and now the plane is a FAT UL.  The plane was not a kit and
came fully assembled by the factory ready to fly.  What type can I
expect my plane to be?  An S LSA or E LSA ?


--- In Sport_Aircraft@y..., asctwo@a... wrote:
> If you do not register to bring it in within 24 months, and you do
not complete the process by 36 months, and it does not fit into the
rules otherwise.  It is a ground monument!  That is it.
>
> Big deal, how many aircraft have been built from "ground monuments"
like Contential GPUs and Cessna and Piper parts?
>
> You will have to show 51% built after the 36 months (except for
formal ELSA Kit Built).  That will add difficulty.  But you can also
get the repairman certificate  if it is Amateur Built (AB) ala 51%
rule.
>
> Jim Stephenson
>   ----- Original Message -----
>   From: czy@c...
>   To: Sport_Pilot@y...
>   Sent: Wednesday, November 27, 2002 11:30 AM
>   Subject: fw: [Sport_Pilot] Re: ELSA ?
>
>
>
>
>   How will airplanes that are stored in barns and don't get
>   transferred into the system in the transition period get handled?
Do
>   they become orphaned, illegal and worthless?
>
>   Bill
>
>   --- In Sport_Pilot@y..., asctwo@a... wrote:
>   >
>   > ----- Original Message -----
>   > From: AscTwo
>   > To: jimc@d...
>   > Sent: Tuesday, November 26, 2002 6:21 PM
>   > Subject: Re: [Sport_Pilot] Re: ELSA ?
>   >
>   >
>   > There is no perentage required.  It may be entirely prebuilt.
>   That is why the class to get a repairman inspector certificate.
>   >
>   > As I understand it, there will be a requirement for the vehicle
to
>   have been in a system such as ASC vehicle registration, or under
the
>   exemptions as a trainer.
>   >
>   > Good question though.  We will see.
>   >
>   > Jim Stephenson
>   >   ----- Original Message -----
>   >   From: jimc@d...
>   >   To: Sport_Pilot@y...
>   >   Sent: Tuesday, November 26, 2002 1:32 PM
>   >   Subject: [Sport_Pilot] Re: ELSA ?
>   >
>   >
>   >
>   >
>   >   --- In Sport_Pilot@y..., asctwo@a... wrote:
>   >
>   >   > snip ....
>   >   >
>   >   > However, if you take advantage of the new (hence, current
>   practice
>   >   does not apply) Experimental Light Sport Aircraft (ELSA)
ability
>   to N
>   >   number an aircraft without having built 51%, you will have to
>   have
>   >   the class to do the inspections.
>   >   >
>   >   > Jim Stephenson
>   >
>   >   Jim S, A couple of questions here:
>   >
>   >   (1) I hope I'm not tkaing this out of context - Based on the
>   above
>   >   statement is there a percentage (or minimum percentage) of
owner
>   >   built going to be established to register a "Fat UL" as
ELSA.
>   >
>   >   (2) To register ELSA are you going to have to have the "Fat
UL"
>   >   already registered with an org.  I did not see a requirement
to
>   do
>   >   this anywhere, but I keep hearing it referenced every now and
>   then.
>   >
>   >   Thanks
>   >
>   >   Jim C
>   >
>   >
>   >   To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>   >   Sport_Pilot-unsubscribe@y...
>   >
>   >
>   >
>   >   Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
>   http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>   To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>   Sport_Pilot-unsubscribe@y...
>
>
>
>   Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

If you do not register to bring it in within 24 months, and you do not complete
the process by 36 months, and it does not fit into the rules otherwise.  It is a
ground monument!  That is it.

Big deal, how many aircraft have been built from "ground monuments" like
Contential GPUs and Cessna and Piper parts?

You will have to show 51% built after the 36 months (except for formal ELSA Kit
Built).  That will add difficulty.  But you can also get the repairman
certificate  if it is Amateur Built (AB) ala 51% rule.

Jim Stephenson
   ----- Original Message -----
   From: czy@...
   To: Sport_Pilot@yahoogroups.com
   Sent: Wednesday, November 27, 2002 11:30 AM
   Subject: fw: [Sport_Pilot] Re: ELSA ?




   How will airplanes that are stored in barns and don't get
   transferred into the system in the transition period get handled? Do
   they become orphaned, illegal and worthless?

   Bill

   --- In Sport_Pilot@y..., asctwo@a... wrote:
   >
   > ----- Original Message -----
   > From: AscTwo
   > To: jimc@d...
   > Sent: Tuesday, November 26, 2002 6:21 PM
   > Subject: Re: [Sport_Pilot] Re: ELSA ?
   >
   >
   > There is no perentage required.  It may be entirely prebuilt.
   That is why the class to get a repairman inspector certificate.
   >
   > As I understand it, there will be a requirement for the vehicle to
   have been in a system such as ASC vehicle registration, or under the
   exemptions as a trainer.
   >
   > Good question though.  We will see.
   >
   > Jim Stephenson
   >   ----- Original Message -----
   >   From: jimc@d...
   >   To: Sport_Pilot@y...
   >   Sent: Tuesday, November 26, 2002 1:32 PM
   >   Subject: [Sport_Pilot] Re: ELSA ?
   >
   >
   >
   >
   >   --- In Sport_Pilot@y..., asctwo@a... wrote:
   >
   >   > snip ....
   >   >
   >   > However, if you take advantage of the new (hence, current
   practice
   >   does not apply) Experimental Light Sport Aircraft (ELSA) ability
   to N
   >   number an aircraft without having built 51%, you will have to
   have
   >   the class to do the inspections.
   >   >
   >   > Jim Stephenson
   >
   >   Jim S, A couple of questions here:
   >
   >   (1) I hope I'm not tkaing this out of context - Based on the
   above
   >   statement is there a percentage (or minimum percentage) of owner
   >   built going to be established to register a "Fat UL" as ELSA.
   >
   >   (2) To register ELSA are you going to have to have the "Fat UL"
   >   already registered with an org.  I did not see a requirement to
   do
   >   this anywhere, but I keep hearing it referenced every now and
   then.
   >
   >   Thanks
   >
   >   Jim C
   >
   >
   >   To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
   >   Sport_Pilot-unsubscribe@y...
   >
   >
   >
   >   Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
   http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/


   To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
   Sport_Pilot-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com



   Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

See comments interspersed by Jim Stephenson
   ----- Original Message -----
   From: dannym@...
   To: Sport_Pilot@yahoogroups.com
   Sent: Wednesday, November 27, 2002 12:03 AM
   Subject: [Sport_Pilot] Questions from a PPC Pilot




   Many questions from a concerned PPC pilot:

   1) How is this project being tracked past the NPRM?  Is there
   documentation on which modifications have been approved or denied?  Can
   we expect a new NPRM 2.0, and another review period, before SP
   inception?
   The Government is tracking it but does not report out to us because of
"expartee law"  which says the FAA may not reprot changes after the comment
period is over and before the rule is final.  Anything you see here should be
stated as "we believe" or "we have asked for".  No one can actually know the
changes being complete "behind closed doors".

   JS>  Having said that, we do get some implications.  occationally under severe
questioning, like above, an FAA official will say, "WE HEARD YOUR COMMENTS!". 
That about the best we get.


   2) Is there going to be a functional difference between a "homebuilt"
   ELS and a manufactured ELS kit, built by the pilot or a third party?  Or
   do they have identical construction, certification, and maintenance
   requirements?

   JS> they could look exactly the same.  The "functional" difference is teh
requirements for who and how the maintenance is done. And what the functional
limitations of use are. m  An ELSA "Kit Built" will be very close to a ELSA
plane brought in from before the rule.   A LSA will be very different in
maintenance and allowed use.

   3) The NPRM states there will be a mechanism by which PPCs constructed
   prior to SP inception might be certified as SLS, rather than the default
   ELS.  Will there be any procedure by which a kit built, or homebuilt,
   constructed after SP inception might be certified as SLS?

   JS> By SLS, I believe you mean Special Light Sport Aircraft.  What FAA meant
was that the Light Sport Aircraft (LSA) will have a "special airworthiness
certificate" instead of a "Type Certificate" (TC).  Yes, some of the brought in
ELSA would possibly be elegible for LSA certification by their manufacturer.  It
is not likely though.  The Consensus Standards that have to be metare not yet
approved.  In additon the standards will include quality assurance and continued
airwortiness requirements that can not be met after the fact, that is if they
were not done that way when the ship was built.

   JS>  Once the standards are nearly complete (we have all 5 specifications in
ballot for PPCs) a manufacturer coudl begin documenting his next ship to that
level and it could theoretically be retro approved form that point.  Is it
likely?  What is the benefit to the manufacturer?

   4) What is the expected process for qualifying an existing ultralight
   for ELS?  I assume an inspection for "broken stuff" will be required.
   Will certain design features be illegal, thus requiring modification or
   scrapping of a machine?  Will the machine be required to meet all the
   requirements of new ELS construction as documented on SP inception?

   JS> The process will be very much as Experimental Amateur Built (AB) is today.
Except you will not be able to get the repairmans certificate for building an
ELSA.  What the Designated Airworthiness Representative (DAR) will be looking
for is workmanship and material application.  It is an experimental and
therefore up to the pilot(test pilot) to prove it is safe to fly.   The five
ASTM Consensus Standards will not apply to the ELSA brought in from before the
rule.  A ELSA Kit Built will have to have a signed statement that it came from a
valid LSA productiono line and to the extent it was pre-built, tha construction
was under the required consensus standards.  That is why the kit built will not
require the 51% amateur built rule.

   5) Will the FAR 91 restrictions on "aerobatic maneuvers" (nose +/- 30
   deg, bank 60 deg) apply to SP operations?  Because, in the case of
   powered parachutes, it is not unusual to exceed the nose and bank angles
   specified, and doing so does not carry with it the same liabilities as
   with fixed wing craft (no PPC has stalled or gone into a tailspin as far
   as I know).

   JS> Becareful what you call aerobatics.  The limits you describe are both more
lax and more restrictive than the limits applied at other times.  Experimental
aircraft are allowed to do aerobatic maneuvers, unless plycarded against them. 
The rule may come out with some limitations on either ELSA, or ELSA Kit Built or
LSA, we do not know right now.  (Maybe thsi question alone will be enough to
show a problem that FAA could solve ahead of time. "Be careful what you ask
for".) The manufacturers of LSA will probably limit LSA by plycard or operating
limitations, themselves, "liability having its way with us".

   6) The original NPRM stated in the preamble the intent for pilots to be
   able to do maintenance on their own machines, presumably within some
   form of limitations.  Yet the body contained no language to enable
   this.  Has this concept been further developed?

   JS>  The Sport Pilot transition team, which I am on,  is working very hard to
make training availabel as soon as possible after the rule so that two new
ratings will be available.   They are Repairman Inspector Level (RIL) which is a
person who can do the 12 month condition inspection on a plane he owns and flys
for fun.   And, Repairman Maintenance Level (RML) which is a person who can do
some higher maintance on LSA and do 12 month conditon inspections on both ELSA
and LSA for hire!    Notice, I did not say "annual".   For the FAA the word
"annual" has very special meaning and carries a lot of "baggage" from FAR Part
43.  FAR Part 43 will not aply to ELSA, ELSA Kit Built or LSA.  The reason FAA
did that was to avoid some of that baggage.

   7) What is the expected inception date of SP?

   JS> We know they can not go past Sept 2003 by congressional law.  the earliest
a rule could be final is Sun n' Fun with a 90 delay in activation.  Probably
unless all sorts of new problems come out of the FAA die-hards who are dragging
their foot (by the way, we should all be thanking Sue for slaying so many of
these dragons already, a real "Joan of Arc") the most likely date is Oshkosh
2003 with a 90 delay to activiate at say October 1, 2003, at latest Jan 1 2004.
If it does not make that "Katie bar the door"!

   Regards,
   Danny Miller


   To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
   Sport_Pilot-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com



   Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

We only burn the carbon of our hydro-carbon fuels at 80-90 feet per
second. Russell Bourke burned the hydrogen of ANY hydro-carbon fuel
at 5,000 feet per second. His engines like the OLD cheap oils more
than the new gasolines. But, hey, melted aluminum is more of a money
maker. With a scotch-yoke-crankshaft, the piston stays at TDC (top
ded center) long enough to burn ALL the fuel and then the piston
moves away and that is the refridgeration stroke. Expanding gases is
how refidgerators work. The work of Russell Bourke is based on PROVEN
PHYSICAL SCIENTIFIC FACTS. Scintific facts do not lie. Scientists do.
Who said life was fair ??? Life is too good and easy to complain, so
shut up and pay your bills. War is hell and the pain has already been
felt, many many times, so enjoy life. Life is only a game. Enjoy it
while you have it. Nikola Tesla said "Electricity is present
everywhere in unlimited quantities and can drive the world's
machinery without the need of coal,oil,gas or any other fuels.". That
is why he is not taught in school. Thomas Edison called AC
electricity the Assasin Current. He is taught in school. I just saw
that a man in Great Britian invented the incandesceny light in 1878,
1 year before Thomas Edison, according to the Ripley's Believe it or
Not. Why do I not have a 2-stroke that uses NO 2-stroke oil to
lubricate itself ??? A Bourke engine showed NO wear at 2,000 hours.

Enter your vote today!  A new poll has been created for the
Sport_Aircraft group:

Are you familiar with (it is hard to be
because it is too simple and efficient)
Russell Bourle's work on the internal
combustion engine that is a diesel 2-
stroke with only 2 moving parts that
makes NO nitrous-oxides or carbon-
monoxides and uses only 0.25 lb of fuel
per horse-power hour ??? The first was
in 1932 and they were made in 1954.
Russell Bourke knew that the
parts,repair and gasoline industries
would not like it. It was/is TOO simple
and efficient to be a money maker.
Remember the OIL crisis of the
1970's ??? Detonation, refridgeration,
detonation, refridgeration at 6,500 RPM
for days used 1 gallon per hour.
Russell Bourke said if it uses 2
gallons per hour that you are losing
RPM and performance, so re-tune it. It
has CLEAN and COOL exhaust. Roger
Richard's AIRCorp (American Independant
Research Corp) gets 196 degree exhaust.
Russell Bourke GAVE it to the EAA to
help man-kind. The patents are long
expired, so ANYONE can have a diesel 2-
stroke that uses NO oil for lubrication
and does not pollute the oil it uses
for permanent lubrication. Read
the "Bourke Engine Documentary". Roger
Richard told me that Russell Bourke is
the JESUS CHRIST of internal combustion.

   o Ayuh
   o Nope
   o Maybe, was he the guy that saw in the 1920's that the teachers only knew
what their teachers taught them and if you keep building mistake on top of
mistake it will not get rid of the original problem ???
   o know science, enjoy life,detonate,refridgerat,detonate,refridgerate at 0.25
lb of OLD CHEAP OIL per horse-power hour
   o KNOW that if it were used, we would be in a radioactive wasteland - 1970's
OIL crisis - money,money,money , who's pocket do you fill ??? Kennedy was killed
for a reason.
   o Know that war is hell and the pain has already been felt, so enjoy life and
do not start a new OILySandWitch war
   o Maybe it is too good to be true (to the Military Industrial Complex)
   o Why not use Russell Bourke's work on internal combustion ??? He gave it to
the EAA because it is the engine of the future from the past
   o ??? What ??? is it ?? and why ???
   o Huh ??? A CLEAN and COOL exhaust ??? Why is it not used ??? Who is the
greedy war srarter ??? The world is jealous of Russell Bourke's specialness


To vote, please visit the following web page:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Sport_Aircraft/surveys?id=321837

Note: Please do not reply to this message. Poll votes are
not collected via email. To vote, you must go to the Yahoo! Groups
web site listed above.

Thanks!

Hello,

This email message is a notification to let you know that
a file has been uploaded to the Files area of the Sport_Aircraft
group.

   File        : /Bourke4u2c.bmp
   Uploaded by : prime4u2001 <prm@...>
   Description : Russel Bourke's engine's description - TOO powerful to be good
to itself - DO NOT over-accelerate or you will learn why Russel said what he
did.

You can access this file at the URL

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Sport_Aircraft/files/Bourke4u2c.bmp

To learn more about file sharing for your group, please visit

http://help.yahoo.com/help/us/groups/files

Regards,

prime4u2001 <prm@...>

Hi,

This is Jim Stephenson,  President/CEO of Aero Sports Connection.

I am also a member of the ASTM Light Sport Aircraft committee F37,
sitting on the executive committee, the cross cutting committee, the
fixed wing committee, and chairman for the Powered Parachute
Committee.

As a member of ARAC on Sport Pilot since 1996, a member of Sue
Gardners team working on Sport Pilot Transistion and Head of the
organization with the mosst exempt instructors in teh nation, perhaps
I can answer some questions with what I know so far.


Jim Stephenson

--- In Sport_Aircraft@y..., "Rex" <gilan@g...> wrote:
> The sport pilot / light-sport aircraft proposal is one of the most
> significant rulemaking proposals FAA has developed for the benefit
of
> aviation in the last half century. It will offer a dramatic
> opportunity for individuals who have always wanted to fly for fun,
> but found the process too expensive, too time consuming or too
> complicated. It will make aviation safer by making pilot training
>more accessible and aircraft ownership more affordable.

What would Sport Pilot mean to me if I already had a P/P and was
trying to get into flying a two seat fat U/L? It sounds like it would
be illegal?  Is there such as option of registering it experimental
trainer while possesing  a BFI. Sounds doable, but with all the talk,
it couldn't be that easy?

John

The sport pilot / light-sport aircraft proposal is one of the most
significant rulemaking proposals FAA has developed for the benefit of
aviation in the last half century. It will offer a dramatic
opportunity for individuals who have always wanted to fly for fun,
but found the process too expensive, too time consuming or too
complicated. It will make aviation safer by making pilot training
more accessible and aircraft ownership more affordable.