Narrative:

I recently bought an aircraft that is referred to as an ultralight by absolutely everybody, except the FAA. The FAA calls it an ultralight trainer. I have flown it on wheels, and recently put floats on it for use in the florida keys. On the date and time on this form I flew it taking a passenger (friend) on her birthday for a flight. After our third landing, one of the floats took on water, making the airplane unsafe or unable to take off, so I had it towed back to shore. There were no injuries or conflicts of any kind. It was simply equipment failure. After returning home, I was reviewing the information I had for the airplane and floats when I came across a copy of far part 103. I bought the plane used, and it was already licensed experimental and had an n-number. I have an ATP, commercial asel, so flying an experimental with both seats occupied on land is legal. According to part 103, however, there are no 2 seat ultralights, rather they are trainers operated by documented instructors under a waiver with strict guidelines. By myself I can legally fly an ultralight on floats with no seaplane rating or even license under part 103, but with a passenger I would be flying an experimental, using my pilot's license, and I would need a seaplane rating. As a former CFI, military jet instructor for 7 yrs, and now as a major airline pilot, in addition to my instruction received and experienced in my own ultralight, it would be a formality to get certified as a united states ultralight association flight instructor. If I had done that, the flight could have been conducted legally as a training flight. As it is, I was in violation of part 103 by taking a passenger, or part 91 by operating an experimental airplane on water without a seaplane rating. Since my livelihood depends on my license, this violation could be more serious to me than the average guy on the street. I'm sharing this with my fellow airline pilot buddies who also are ultralight enthusiasts, and with the safety department in our union. I have also learned to read the fine print more carefully, and not simply to trust the nice man at the dealership, or the squadron of hangar flyers. Thanks for your time and for working in this valuable system. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: reporter stated that he did not realize that his aircraft was not considered an ultralight even though it was registered and was issued an experimental airworthiness certificate in the amateur built category. He suggested that the ultralight operator association be given this information and the matter be covered in callback, regarding applicability of section 103.3(east) covering power ultralight limits to be considered an ultralight, in order to inform many ultralight operators of whether their ultralight can be actually operated as an ultralight or need for the aircraft and pilots to be certificated accordingly.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: PLT OF AN SMA FLOAT PLANE OPERATED THE ACFT ON WATER WITHOUT A SEAPLANE RATING DUE TO A MISUNDERSTANDING IN WHICH HE BELIEVED THAT HE DID NOT REQUIRE PLT CERTIFICATION SINCE HE THOUGHT THAT THE ACFT WAS CONSIDERED AN ULTRALIGHT.

Narrative: I RECENTLY BOUGHT AN ACFT THAT IS REFERRED TO AS AN ULTRALIGHT BY ABSOLUTELY EVERYBODY, EXCEPT THE FAA. THE FAA CALLS IT AN ULTRALIGHT TRAINER. I HAVE FLOWN IT ON WHEELS, AND RECENTLY PUT FLOATS ON IT FOR USE IN THE FLORIDA KEYS. ON THE DATE AND TIME ON THIS FORM I FLEW IT TAKING A PAX (FRIEND) ON HER BIRTHDAY FOR A FLT. AFTER OUR THIRD LNDG, ONE OF THE FLOATS TOOK ON WATER, MAKING THE AIRPLANE UNSAFE OR UNABLE TO TAKE OFF, SO I HAD IT TOWED BACK TO SHORE. THERE WERE NO INJURIES OR CONFLICTS OF ANY KIND. IT WAS SIMPLY EQUIP FAILURE. AFTER RETURNING HOME, I WAS REVIEWING THE INFO I HAD FOR THE AIRPLANE AND FLOATS WHEN I CAME ACROSS A COPY OF FAR PART 103. I BOUGHT THE PLANE USED, AND IT WAS ALREADY LICENSED EXPERIMENTAL AND HAD AN N-NUMBER. I HAVE AN ATP, COMMERCIAL ASEL, SO FLYING AN EXPERIMENTAL WITH BOTH SEATS OCCUPIED ON LAND IS LEGAL. ACCORDING TO PART 103, HOWEVER, THERE ARE NO 2 SEAT ULTRALIGHTS, RATHER THEY ARE TRAINERS OPERATED BY DOCUMENTED INSTRUCTORS UNDER A WAIVER WITH STRICT GUIDELINES. BY MYSELF I CAN LEGALLY FLY AN ULTRALIGHT ON FLOATS WITH NO SEAPLANE RATING OR EVEN LICENSE UNDER PART 103, BUT WITH A PAX I WOULD BE FLYING AN EXPERIMENTAL, USING MY PLT'S LICENSE, AND I WOULD NEED A SEAPLANE RATING. AS A FORMER CFI, MIL JET INSTRUCTOR FOR 7 YRS, AND NOW AS A MAJOR AIRLINE PLT, IN ADDITION TO MY INSTRUCTION RECEIVED AND EXPERIENCED IN MY OWN ULTRALIGHT, IT WOULD BE A FORMALITY TO GET CERTIFIED AS A UNITED STATES ULTRALIGHT ASSOCIATION FLT INSTRUCTOR. IF I HAD DONE THAT, THE FLT COULD HAVE BEEN CONDUCTED LEGALLY AS A TRAINING FLT. AS IT IS, I WAS IN VIOLATION OF PART 103 BY TAKING A PAX, OR PART 91 BY OPERATING AN EXPERIMENTAL AIRPLANE ON WATER WITHOUT A SEAPLANE RATING. SINCE MY LIVELIHOOD DEPENDS ON MY LICENSE, THIS VIOLATION COULD BE MORE SERIOUS TO ME THAN THE AVERAGE GUY ON THE STREET. I'M SHARING THIS WITH MY FELLOW AIRLINE PLT BUDDIES WHO ALSO ARE ULTRALIGHT ENTHUSIASTS, AND WITH THE SAFETY DEPT IN OUR UNION. I HAVE ALSO LEARNED TO READ THE FINE PRINT MORE CAREFULLY, AND NOT SIMPLY TO TRUST THE NICE MAN AT THE DEALERSHIP, OR THE SQUADRON OF HANGAR FLYERS. THANKS FOR YOUR TIME AND FOR WORKING IN THIS VALUABLE SYS. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: RPTR STATED THAT HE DID NOT REALIZE THAT HIS ACFT WAS NOT CONSIDERED AN ULTRALIGHT EVEN THOUGH IT WAS REGISTERED AND WAS ISSUED AN EXPERIMENTAL AIRWORTHINESS CERTIFICATE IN THE AMATEUR BUILT CATEGORY. HE SUGGESTED THAT THE ULTRALIGHT OPERATOR ASSOCIATION BE GIVEN THIS INFO AND THE MATTER BE COVERED IN CALLBACK, REGARDING APPLICABILITY OF SECTION 103.3(E) COVERING PWR ULTRALIGHT LIMITS TO BE CONSIDERED AN ULTRALIGHT, IN ORDER TO INFORM MANY ULTRALIGHT OPERATORS OF WHETHER THEIR ULTRALIGHT CAN BE ACTUALLY OPERATED AS AN ULTRALIGHT OR NEED FOR THE ACFT AND PLTS TO BE CERTIFICATED ACCORDINGLY.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2007 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.