[Bob Kuczewski]

For those who want the particulars on the Aero Sports Connection Tandem Exemption, here's the link: http://www.aerosports.org/training/exemption-9785.

And for the record, here's the exemption:

FAA_Exemption_9785c_p1.jpg (171.42 KiB) Viewed 3053 times

FAA_Exemption_9785c_p2.jpg (172.79 KiB) Viewed 3053 times

[wingspan33]

In trying to find ASC's original exemption request, I came across the following* -

Dispositions of Petitions
Docket No.: FAA–2001–10583.

Petitioner: Aero Sports Connection.
Section of 14 CFR Affected: 14 CFR 103.1(a).

Description of Relief Sought/Disposition:

To permit Aero Sports Connection to operate unpowered
ultralight vehicles with another occupant for the purpose
of sport and recreation. Grant, 5/25/2004, Exemption No. 8330

Looks like they applied for their first exemption over 10 years ago.


* Found in the Federal Register of 6/23/04

[wingspan33]

Here's a link found at another site that gives a much more detailed report of ASC's tandem exemption -

http://www.powerchutes.com/exemption6080.asp

Seems the exemption numbers change with each renewal (?).

This one, from the FAA concerning ASC, goes back to the mid 1990s!

[Bill Cummings]

So whether under USHA's exemption or ASC's exemption (No. 9785C) the joy rides for children violated the conditions and limitations.
No. 3. All flights operating under this exemption must be for training purposes only.
Exemption No. 9785C granted in 2014 and set to expire November 30, 2016. (Unless jerked early for children joy rides.)
Was the USHPA's exemption as confining as to exclude children on hired rides? I just want to be double checked for accuracy.