Skycatcher to be certified in Primary category

[drseti]

Cessna could build all export 162's under the PC and not affect the SLSA ones???

Yes, and Piper could have continued importing and marketing Sport Cruisers under the PiperSport name. What a company can do and what it chooses to do are often three different things.

[Jack Tyler]

"Candidly, I'm more concerned about what flight schools will choose to do. If they start getting the non-LSA, and non-sport pilot compliant version, then it kinda gives the flight school their replacement 152, which i know 3 in my area have been wanting, but actively refuse to do anything related to sport pilot training in them."

That seems a reasonable concern to me. This forum has consistently featured posts from aspiring SP students and potential LSA renters who find 'traditional' flight schools have little interest in offering SP training. Moreover, creating an LSA category and SP rating doesn't automatically create a vibrant market for either the a/c or the training, atlho' that was the supposition (and the sales pitch). And for the existing flight school, the business case for *adding* a curriculum and a relatively expensive, new a/c without seeing a sufficient increase in training hours to cover the expense simply hasn't been present in large parts of the country.

"The current [Cessna] leadership has proven their goals are solely profitability and do not necessarily encompass aviation initiatives unless that supports growing the business."

That is Cessna's primary job...and their (and Textron's) responsibility to their stockholders. Restaurant owners are not responsible for making people hungry, but rather to offer the kind of food which those who want to eat will purchase. *We* are principally responsible for creating a General Aviation market, not manufacturers. (Tho' there surely are exceptions for consumer goods! I had no idea I needed an iPad until Apple created it. <s>) Having said all that, it's certainly fair to say Cessna has not succeeded well at providing a desirable LSA product. It's safe and flies well, but it isn't sufficiently affordable or mission capable. So the Skycatcher has not expanded the market beyond the flight schools, much at all. Now we're watching yet another new LSA introduction, this time from the innovative Pipistrel folks who were initially positioning it as an affordable trainer. Is the training market the only game in town in the eyes of manufacturers?

This weekend I was helping a friend do his ground checks on his E-LSA Highlander. It was a big day for him as the DAR returned with his Airworthiness Certificate, officially turning his 'project' into a legal, flyable aircraft. A small group of likeminded pilots/home builders showed up to look at the plane (for the 100th time) and I was struck by the dark humor that surfaced in that group when one person teased the owner about his Rotax engine. "Hey," was the response, "It's an LSA. You know, the future of general aviation." The snide laughter that followed left me wondering: Who is going to be promoting the SP rating if even those who value it have become jaundiced?

[Jack Tyler]

Here's the scoop, as reported on today's AOPA ePilot which covered the announcement at AirVenture. No meaningful change to the product to USA customers. Same MTOW, still LSA compliant & SP eligible. Nothing beyond adopting the existing Skycatcher to the new EASA regs.

----------------------------------------

"In a major strategy shift, Cessna Aircraft announced at EAA AirVenture that it was removing its 162 Skycatcher from the light sport aircraft category into a primary aircraft category. The manufacturer made the move to help speed up certification of the single-engine piston aircraft in Europe and the rest of the world.

The Wichita, Kan.-based manufacturer originally built the Skycatcher as its entry into the LSA category. The manufacturer had refunded deposits made by European customers while it worked on finding a solution to the certification problem.

Cessna will work with FAA to move the Skycatcher over to the primary category to handle type and production certification. In an effort to pave the way for a simpler validation effort in Europe (after receiving FAA approval), a Cessna/FAA team will apply certification specification (CS-LSA) rules from the European Aviation Safety Agency during the validation process.

"The Skycatcher will be transitioned into the primary category, and will continue to meet the definition of a light-sport aircraft," said Tracy Leopold, business leader for the Cessna 162. "The owner operator can continue to operate the aircraft with a sport pilot license. This makes the Skycatcher a more innovative aircraft for our customers."

Skycatcher deliveries in Europe are expected to begin in 2013, said Leopold.

[tadel001]

Primary Category is not a standard airworthiness certificate. It is a type certificate but not standard airworthiness. As for instrumentation, it does not need to be TSO equipment. PRimary Category allows the manufacturer to propose an airworthiness standard (ASTM, BCAR CAA, etc.) and then certifiy to that standard. I am not sure what Cessna is thinking in terms of transition the cert to Europe since Primary is not recognized by EASA. Primary is in the middle of LSA (very very little FAA involvement) and Part 23 (substantial FAA involvement). In the end, I am not sure why more LSA companies didn't go primary category since they could have used ASTM as the standard.

[drseti]

"The Skycatcher will be transitioned into the primary category, and will continue to meet the definition of a light-sport aircraft," said Tracy Leopold, business leader for the Cessna 162. "The owner operator can continue to operate the aircraft with a sport pilot license. This makes the Skycatcher a more innovative aircraft for our customers."

"Meet the definition of" and "continue to operate... with a sport pilot license" do satisfy the piloting issues, but not the maintenance concerns. On another forum (LSRM closed linked-in group), discussions make it very clear that, unless the Airworthiness Certificate specifically says Light Sport, a Light Sport Repairman can't maintain or inspect them. Maintenance will require an A&P, and annual inspections an IA. (As previously mentioned, this may not be a problem for Cessna Pilot Centers that have real maintenance departments, but it would rule out the SkyCatcher for private owners, or small flight schools like mine.)

It may become possible, when buying a new SkyCatcher, to specify whether it will carry LSA or Primary Category paperwork. I rather doubt it can be moved from one category to another, once the airworthiness certificate has been issued.

[drseti]

Such a matrix is hard to write so that everyone reads it as you intended,

True. The matrix was just one slide from the PowerPoint presentation for an hour-long LSA maintenance seminar that I give for AMTs. It's a little hard to interpret out of the context of the rest of the seminar.

The matrix seems to apply to non-standard certificated airplanes, so I don't feel like it addresses my inquiry.

Your inquiry was about certified aircraft that can be flown by Sport Pilots. Those are covered by the last column, Sport Pilot Eligible Aircraft (the abbreviation is SPEA).

Do you have the reg cite for maintenance standards?

FAR Part 43. There's a lot in there (more than can be covered in a brief post, or even a 1-hour seminar).

[Jack Tyler]

Paul, I think you're overstating things just a bit.

"Maintenance [of a Primary category Skycatcher] will require an A&P, and annual inspections an IA. ...it would rule out the SkyCatcher for private owners..."

I think most of us are in general agreement that the Skycatcher does not appeal as strongly as some other LSA's to private buyers/owners as it does to training programs. But I'll bet that a majority of LSA owners do not do their own annual condition inspections nor most of the maintenance. It would be nice to cross-reference the number of folks who have completed the full training program allowing them to do their own annuals with a comprehensive owners list, but that kind of detail just isn't available to my knowledge. But in general, I see far more LSA's torn down in A&P shops than I do in private hangars (or at least to the extent I see LSA's torn down at all).

[drseti]

Paul, I think you're overstating things just a bit.

"Maintenance [of a Primary category Skycatcher] will require an A&P, and annual inspections an IA. ...it would rule out the SkyCatcher for private owners..."

You're right, Jack. I should modify that to read:

"it would rule out the SkyCatcher for some private owners..."

After all, all generalizations are untrue.

[deltafox]

Perhaps this is a tangential thread but...I've been searching for an LSA Owner course and have only seen availability west of the Great Divide. Is there training available east of the Mississippi (and north of the Confederacy)?

[drseti]

Rainbow Aviation occasionally takes their LSRI course on the road to Oshkosh. Check their website, Dave.