Sport Pilot Talk

Doss79 · Joined: 30 Jun 2008 Posts: 108 Location: San Antonio, Tx

I don't know about you guys, but I believe that by the FAA allowing a maximum gross weight of 1600lb under the Sport Pilot rule, we will make aviation much more affordable. Have you checked the classifieds lately? I'm seeing low low prices on C150s, etc that I have never seen before. Locally, there are 2 pristine C150s going for $13k...and that's ASKING. That's a HUGE HUGE difference when you look at the 100k+ costs of the new stuff for virtually the same speed range. Plus, these older aircraft have a solid support system and the number of A&Ps that work on them is numerous. FYI, other "fun" aircraft in the 1600lb range is the P-18-95 Supercub (the one with no flaps).

Furthermore, has anyone seen the latest stats for the number of new pilots in 2009? I'm betting it's going to be the worst ever (thats not including the current economy!). We're down to the levels of the early 1940s (I believe around 500k pilots in the US). Lets be honest, the Sport Pilot is an absolute failure. For me, I can not find a sport pilot examiner in a city of 2million people. The closest is Dallas which is about 5 hours away. I've talked to local CFIs and no one has heard of any person around my age (29) doing the sport pilot thing. What you have is older folks defaulting to the Sport Pilot rule and not renewing their medical.

In conclusion, I guess the best solution is to stay as a Private Pilot. It's still cheaper than buying a new LSA.

N918KT · Posted: Sun Jan 24, 2010 4:34 pm Post subject:

There are a few old LSAs that are really cheap. There's the Ercoupe 415-C and the Piper J-3 Cub. The Ercoupe costs about the same as a C150 I think and the Cub is slightly more expensive I think.

Doss79 · Joined: 30 Jun 2008 Posts: 108 Location: San Antonio, Tx

Kevin,
I forgot to mention in the above post that I already own a J3 Cub. I can't find a tailwheel qualified Sport Pilot DPE to give me a checkride. Been ready for months. About to give up and sell and go the PPL route.

Cub flyer · Joined: 10 Sep 2006 Posts: 593

I'd like think we might get to see the recreational and SP rating merge.

Take the best from both.

Restrictions of the SP certificate with the recreational aircraft limitations.

Then get rid of all the airplane sets and signoffs and just have a simple sign off matrix for powered fixed wing airplanes.

These sets are to cover the areas which would cause transition accidents

This would only be a flight instructor sign off. Flight instructor needs to have 20 hours PIC time in each configuration listed before giving dual in that area.

1. for each type of towered airport airspace class (B,C,D)
2. floats
3. skis
4. amphib gear for floats
5. over 10000 feet for moutain guys allowed with sign off.
6. for each make and model change if two place. Not for single place. For a single place tailwheel you would need a previous signoff in a tailwheel airplane.
7. Aerobatic

flyboy2007 · Joined: 27 Jan 2008 Posts: 79 Location: wisconsin

Yes but when and if the sport pilot rule goes up to 1600 I think you will see the price of planes like the 150 and 140 and so on go up in value being there will be more call for them. Just my oppinion but makes sense to me. Happy flying!

KSCessnaDriver · Joined: 25 Jan 2009 Posts: 159 Location: KOJC

The LSA and Sport Pilot rules weren't intended to bring about cheaper flying. They were made solely to regulate aircraft that claimed to be operating under FAR Part 103, when they actually weren't. The weight has already gone up in the past, from proposals at 1,232 pounds to now 1,320 pounds. There is a much stronger lobby of people now to oppose the increase in gross weight, much of it from current manufactures. They don't want to see their brand value diluted, which is likely to happen if the weights are moved up.

N918KT · Posted: Sun Jan 24, 2010 6:02 pm Post subject:

But when will LSAs be spread out to flight schools? And I do mean MANY flight schools. I wish there were as many LSAs in flight schools as a C172, or at least a C150/C152. That way, I won't have to look so far to go for SP training.

Cub flyer · Joined: 10 Sep 2006 Posts: 593

I don't think the manufacturers have anything to worry about. This reminds me of the AN-2 debate for commercial use.

If I had the money I'd buy a new airplane. Because I don't I buy used.

The people who want a new airplane will buy one.

A Mercedes customer won't buy a 79 olds Cutlass.

The 79 olds buyer can't buy a Mercedes. Both drive down the road just fine at the same speed.

If a relative wants to learn to drive you don't give them your new Mercedes. Thats about what is happening with a 130K LSA in a flight school.

Try insuring a teenage driver in a new Corvette.

Cub flyer · Joined: 10 Sep 2006 Posts: 593

I don't think the 150 value has anywhere to go but down.

The cost to take a ratty one and overhaul the engine, fix what is broken, install good radios, paint and interior is more than a nice late 70's 172.

The airplanes will all get to this point eventually where they need something expensive.

The insurance companies are capping what value you can insure the older airplanes at. No insurance = no bank loan.

It is very easy to wrap up $45,000 in a Piper Colt.

Price out a engine overhaul, paint, interior, tires, instrument overhaul, glass, plastic parts, brakes, wheels, hoses, hardware, exhaust system, alternator upgrade, copper cables, and prop overhaul for any of the

"Bargin" airplanes it appears less appealing. I honestly don't know where the next group of airplanes will come from. There is not enough production to support the loss rate and the current outside stored metal airplanes are getting beyond economic repair. Even if someone gave you one free.

drseti · Joined: 28 Nov 2009 Posts: 1384 Location: Lock Haven PA

N918KT wrote: But when will LSAs be spread out to flight schools? And I do mean MANY flight schools.

Now that Cessna has delivered its first SkyCrasher, and Piper has acquired the SportCrusher, I think you're about to see a significant increase in LSA penetration into flight schools (At least, I hope so...)

N918KT · Posted: Sun Jan 24, 2010 8:36 pm Post subject:

drseti wrote: N918KT wrote: But when will LSAs be spread out to flight schools? And I do mean MANY flight schools.

Now that Cessna has delivered its first SkyCrasher, and Piper has acquired the SportCrusher, I think you're about to see a significant increase in LSA penetration into flight schools (At least, I hope so...)

Ha Ha Ha!!! Ha Ha Ha!!! You're killing me!!!

Very funny, how you say the LSA's names in the wrong way.

frfly172 · Joined: 08 Jan 2009 Posts: 67 Location: Quincy Mass

I would think that now that cessna and piper have lsa there will be no increase in weight.The big boys wont want to compete with themselves in the market.

drseti · Joined: 28 Nov 2009 Posts: 1384 Location: Lock Haven PA

frfly172 wrote: I would think that now that cessna and piper have lsa there will be no increase in weight.

You're probably right.

dstclair · Joined: 06 Mar 2008 Posts: 212 Location: Allen, TX

As long as Cessna and Piper are targeting flight training, then neither has anything to gain by an increase in MTOW. The useful load of both planes is sub-500 lbs which really equates to ~2 hrs of fuel (with 45 minutes of reserves) for duel flight instructions. Solo's will have no issue with weight.

Not what I'd want in a personal aircraft but more than OK for fligh schools.

I'd guess both wouldn't mind an extra 100lbs but can't see them spending the $$$ to lobby for it.

KSCessnaDriver · Joined: 25 Jan 2009 Posts: 159 Location: KOJC

dstclair wrote: As long as Cessna and Piper are targeting flight training, then neither has anything to gain by an increase in MTOW. The useful load of both planes is sub-500 lbs which really equates to ~2 hrs of fuel (with 45 minutes of reserves) for duel flight instructions. Solo's will have no issue with weight.

Say what? I don't know much about the SkyCatcher, but the PiperSport has right at 600 pounds of useful load. Fill it with 30 gallons (full) and you've still got 420 pounds of payload. Not sure how big you are, but that's two 210 pound people. Not small by any means.