Sport Pilot Talk

https://www.barnstormers.com/ad_detail. ... fieds.html
This thing seems sorted out.

I would want to know if the recent extensive tail AD had been performed.

I'm seeing a lot of RV12's for sale these days.

Something weird about them?

Not bashing Van....I'm an RV8 builder/flyer (400 hrs) and hold Van's Aircraft in very high regard. I just see more -12's listed vs. the legacy model RV's.

In my day job im an accountant. I specialize in complex securities/investments which requires me to establish valuation and trends. Now im a complete novice on aircraft so this is a SWAG (scientific wild a$$ guess) but it seems there is a bunch of folks worried about downward pricing pressures on LSAs if there is truly a weight change allowing for wider capabilities in newer SLAs. This combined the ADS B 2020 expenses looming seems to be pushing more sellers thereby reducing prices.

Again total novice opining on something that i have little history in.

Lets hear the more experienced chime in.

I can see your reasoning and agree with your assessment. It has a lot of merit. I too would be worried, as I’ve set a 10-12 year timeframe for selling my S-LSA. I’m lucky, in that mine is rated to a MAUW of 1540lbs everywhere else in the world and the manufacturer has already said they will sign off on the weight increase, if and when the FAA changes the rule.

Your professional opinion seems very plausible.

Sling 2 Pilot wrote:I'm lucky, in that mine is rated to a MAUW of 1540lbs everywhere else in the world and the manufacturer has already said they will sign off on the weight increase, if and when the FAA changes the rule.

Whatever the new rule is (if and when a change in MTOW even happens), an existing plane may or may not pass other FAA requirements at the higher weight. Clean calibrated stall speed may become an issue, since that always varies with weight. And, when FAA changes one rule, they don't have a particularly good record for coordinating its impact on other rules.

Yeah, I think it is a combination of Basic Med slowly kicking in with more and more pilots reclaiming their Basic Med medicals + all these rumors of MTOW and other changes.

As Sling 2 Pilot wrote - when these changes come thru, owners of planes like Sling 2 or Jabiru that were originally designed for 1500-1600 LBS will come out on top - enjoying higher MTOW and having planes with better resale value.

As far as RV 12s - in addition to above reasons, a lot of builders start with RV 12s since this is the simplest kit that Vans offers and then some of them move on to higher gross models.

drseti wrote:

Sling 2 Pilot wrote:I'm lucky, in that mine is rated to a MAUW of 1540lbs everywhere else in the world and the manufacturer has already said they will sign off on the weight increase, if and when the FAA changes the rule.

Whatever the new rule is (if and when a change in MTOW even happens), an existing plane may or may not pass other FAA requirements at the higher weight. Clean calibrated stall speed may become an issue, since that always varies with weight. And, when FAA changes one rule, they don't have a particularly good record for coordinating its impact on other rules.

As Warmi stated, Sling and a handful of other types will come out on top, compared to those LSA’s built at the 1320lb MAUW.

Sling 2 Pilot wrote:As Warmi stated, Sling and a handful of other types will come out on top, compared to those LSA’s built at the 1320lb MAUW.

Only if they can pass the 45 kt CAS stall speed test at that higher weight (unless FAA changes that limit too. Which I consider unlikely, given past history.)

drseti wrote:Which I consider unlikely, given past history.)

Hey Paul -- I thought all history was in the past? History is defined as the study of past events -- so the phrase 'past history' is a bit redundant

You can say that again! And also repetitive, Dave.

Remember that, in aviation, redundancy is two of the most important safety features.

drseti wrote:

Sling 2 Pilot wrote:As Warmi stated, Sling and a handful of other types will come out on top, compared to those LSA’s built at the 1320lb MAUW.

Only if they can pass the 45 kt CAS stall speed test at that higher weight (unless FAA changes that limit too. Which I consider unlikely, given past history.)

No issue with the Sling 2. Figures the same at both weights, 43 kts.

Sling 2 Pilot wrote:

drseti wrote:

Sling 2 Pilot wrote:As Warmi stated, Sling and a handful of other types will come out on top, compared to those LSA’s built at the 1320lb MAUW.

Only if they can pass the 45 kt CAS stall speed test at that higher weight (unless FAA changes that limit too. Which I consider unlikely, given past history.)

No issue with the Sling 2. Figures the same at both weights, 43 kts.

Did you opt for the ballistic recovery system?

Sling 2 Pilot wrote:No issue with the Sling 2. Figures the same at both weights, 43 kts.

I don't doubt that this is what the manufacturer publishes. But it defies the laws of physics.

Stall speed always goes up with the square root of weight. Increasing wt from 1320 to 1540 is a ratio of 1.167. The square root of 1.67 is 1.08, so stall speed has to go up 8%. An 8% increase from 43 kts brings stall speed up to 46.4 kts.

Yes, I admit that's negligible. And yes, I'm being pedantic here. But not nearly as pedantic as the FAA is known to be!

Wm.Ince wrote:

Sling 2 Pilot wrote:

drseti wrote:Only if they can pass the 45 kt CAS stall speed test at that higher weight (unless FAA changes that limit too. Which I consider unlikely, given past history.)

No issue with the Sling 2. Figures the same at both weights, 43 kts.

Did you opt for the ballistic recovery system?

No Wm, no chute. Pretty much the same set up as Cam’s EAB, except no chute and no external navigator.