S_Ellzey

Hi guys,

We have rolled a lot of the comments received into the proposal which has been loaded on to the JPO web site (www.jetpilots.org) Some grammar fixes, “AMA site” changed to “AMA chartered club flying site, and AMA sanctioned event”, and rather than trying to set a minimum number of flight there is now a criteria for passing on to the next phase.

Let me know what you think.

Steven Ellzey
President, Jet Pilot’s Organization

Scott Strimple

Hi Steve,

I have a question with regard to the latest proposal. I believe it states that if a modeler demonstrates B,C,D and then gets a "restricted" turbine waiver to fly on a BB with a turbine waivered pilot he then must fly again with a CD from the turbine approved list to demonstrate his ablity again.
-- am I correct in reading that this means the applicant must fly for 2 cds from the approved list?
-- if so, can they be the same CD?

Thanks

Scott Strimple

Scott Strimple

Sorry Steve..I forgot this one...

-- when I read this new section w/regard to the "alternative" method of obtaining a waiver it reads as though the applicant may fly a turbine powered a/c on BB with current waivered pilot.
When the applicant is demonstrating to the approved CD for purposes of compliance with the waiver requirements, is the applicant able to perform the demo flight in a turbine powered a/c now?

Thanks again.

Scott Strimple

Gordon Mc

My Feedback: (11)

Steve - looks pretty good !

I think Scott has a valid question about the aircraft type used for the solo demonstration. When I read the proposal, I assumed that it meant that a turbine powered aircraft could be used - but since it doesn't actually state that (and the old rules specifically prohibited use of a turbine aircraft for sign-off flights), it might prevent some confusion if that point was made explicit.

BTW - glad to see that the proposal includes provisions for turbine powered aircraft that won't do 150 mph.

Good work - thank you !

Gordon

Gordon Mc

My Feedback: (11)

As far as I can see, there is nowhere that it states that the waivered pilot that assists you while you are on the buddy box must be a TCD - just any waivered pilot.

Gordon

Scott Strimple

Good point Gordon...I was a bit vague with my post.


Originally posted by Scott Strimple
I have a question with regard to the latest proposal. I believe it states that if a modeler demonstrates
B,C,D and then gets a "restricted" turbine waiver to fly on a BB with a turbine waivered pilot he then
must fly again with a CD from the turbine approved list to demonstrate his ablity again.
-- am I correct in reading that this means the applicant must fly for 2 cds from the approved list?


I am referring to the 2 CD's that must initially sign off on the applicants abilities in the first step...then in the case of an interim turbine waiver yet another CD is required. This is a total of 3 signitures from CDs albeit 2 from the approved list...my question was with regard to the 2 approved signitures...can they be from the same CD?

Thanks
Scott

Tom Antlfinger

My Feedback: (24)

Steve, it looks good. It now mirrors what full-scale pilots go thru with an instructor and then an FAA designated-examiner check ride. I have always received a temporary certificate while the FAA was processing the paperwork, which may take several weeks, as it has with the AMA.

I still think the speed and number of flights is redundant if you are on a buddy box, but I can live with that, since it does preclude some newbie who has never maneuvered a fast plane from bugging a turbine instructor, until he has logged 50 moderately fast flights.

Hope the AMA pays attention to this proposal.

Tom

S_Ellzey

Hi,

The intent is to permit the pilot to complete the solo demonstration with his turbine powered model that he has been buddy boxing with. I will look into some rewording here.

I see no reason that the TCD that signs off on the final turbine flight can not be the same one that signed off on the 110 mph flight. In some parts of the country finding one can be enough of a problem.

Thanks,

Steven

Silver182

My Feedback: (2)

The use of any aircraft not capable of 150 mph or more won't be passed on by the AMA Safety committee as it currently is represented --------Take a look at this denial letter I received earlier this year ----------

1Eye

My Feedback: (2)

Lee remarked ...
The use of any aircraft not capable of 150 mph or more won't be passed on by the AMA Safety
>>>>

Lee, I pointed out the same thing after the first "notification" (also included a link to a copy of the letter you posted). Other than the speed deal (where nobody is listening), the proposal has merit but will likely be DOA, but, otoh, since it's coming from the JPO who knows.

Mike

DavidR

My Feedback: (1)

I think it is a positive step. Who knows how they Turbine safety comittee will react.

The one difference Lee is that if the individual chooses the 110 mph route then they are required to be on a buddy box until they do the signoff flight on their turbine airplane.

David Reid

Silver182

My Feedback: (2)

The use of a turbine powered airplane & buddy box "dual" was also discussed by us with the powers that be, and they would hear nothing of it ------. "That idea is way too logical" Actually I think it all boils down to an insurance issue ---- I don't believe they want every Tom, dick and Harry or many more David's, Lee's, or Steve's to be actually driving these things around the sky -----.

I believe they think we are already getting out of control, sorta, and they are not going to do anything that will encourage many more of us getting involved in this segment of our sport -----

I think you will see only more restrictions not encouragement. I don't mean to be putting a damper on this proposal, but that's the way I see things coming down from the top -------
Regards,
from one-of-them
fire breathing
out of control
speed freak
Jet Jocks
Lee ---------