Zodiac 601XL as ELSA?

[drseti]

Paul's note about differing insurance rates for S- vs. E-LSA a/c is worth researching a bit, either talking with several individual brokers and/or talking with an AOPA insurance broker who shops among a mix of carriers (http://www.aopaia.com/). Insurance rates are a function of multiple variables and the specific dollar difference for that one variable may not in itself be significant in the grand scheme of things (aka: the annual premium).

Jack and others have rightly pointed out that the LSA industry is a bit young for us to be drawing sweeping generalizations about a number of factors (including insurance). With this in mind, I'm going to open up a new thread in the "Ask the Insurance Agent" section of this Forum, in hopes that EAA insurance agent Bob Mackey and others will chime in. I invite you all to follow me over there, if the insurance question is of interest to you.

[nbjeeptj]

I think there is some value lost in converting from slsa to Elsa in that unless I am wrong a flight school can not use a Elsa as a trainer unless it is the owner of the Elsa they are training. So even If you did not plan to use the a/c that way it may sway a potential buyer later down the road. Like I said it would need to be looked into I know a Eab airplane cannot be used in a flight school.

[drseti]

unless I am wrong a flight school can not use a Elsa as a trainer

That is correct -- nor can an FBO use an E-LSA as a rental aircraft. Were it otherwise, I would probably have built an RV-12!

[Jack Tyler]

"I think there is some value lost in converting from slsa to Elsa in that unless I am wrong a flight school can not use a Elsa as a trainer unless it is the owner of the Elsa they are training."

Yup, that's conceptually true. But OTOH flight schools might not be looking for the same well-equipped S-LSA a/c that a Sport Pilot buyer might be shopping for. That's why some LSA mfgrs offer different model levels and different panels at different price points. On the list of things that sway 'perceived value', I wouldn't automatically put this one very high. Instead, I'd suggest the buyer give some thought to what's important to him/her, and how that lines up with what's permitted by each class...and only then, think about converting or not.

If you don't want to get your hands dirty - and to be fair, also trust in your mechanical skills - or you aren't bothered by paying a standard labor rate for even simple electrical/electronic/fuel system/etc. troubleshooting, or you aren't bothered by decisions regarding mods and upgrades being solely under the control of the manufacturer, then one of the main reasons for converting to an E-LSA disappears.

[dstclair]

Perhaps off topic but if one were to convert their S-LSA to an E-LSA can the owner change the flight restrictions? For instance, could the airplane magically be IFR capable provided it met the equippage requirements in the FARs? The pilot would need to be appropriately rated, of course.

[drseti]

To be IFR legal, an aircraft must (in addition to being properly equipped with avionics, gyros, heated pitot, etc.) have an FAR Part 23 certified engine and prop. Few LSAs do, which might explain why IFR legal LSAs are so rare.

[dstclair]

Paul,

I believe certified engines are for certified aircraft (Part 23). Part 91 defines what is required for IFR. Lot's of EABs out there flying IFR with non-certified engines. Just don't know if that applies to E-LSA.

[drseti]

Lot's of EABs out there flying IFR with non-certified engines.

I don't doubt that, Dave, but that doesn't make it legal. The operative reg is probably in the FAR/AMT, not the FAR/AIM. I'm at home now, but will look it up tomorrow when I'm in the office. This was an area emphasized in Carol Carpenter in the LSRM-A course at Rainbow Aviation, so at least graduates of that program should be aware of the requirement (even if pilots aren't).

Rotax makes a couple of versions of the 912. Most of us fly the 912-ULS (I'm guessing the UL stands for ultralight), which costs $19,000 new in the crate. The certified model is the 912-S, and is used in a few IFR-certified S-LSAs. It costs $38,000. I'm told the two engines are manufactured in the same assembly line, by the same workers, from the same components that came out of the same parts bins. The only difference is the data plate. That extra cost pays for Rotax' liability exposure and legal fees, I guess.

Evektor makes an IFR version of the SportStar Max. It costs about $35k more than the VFR version, and uses the 912-S. Figure $18k more for the certified engine, a little more for a certified prop, and the rest of that price increment pays for the heated pitot, alternate static source, avionics, etc. To my knowledge, only two of the IFR models were ever sold in the US. One is here in Pennsylvania, and the other in California.

[dstclair]

Paul,

Until you can do your research, I pulled the following from the EAA site:

FAR Part 23 does not apply to light-sport aircraft in any way. For Special Light-Sport Aircraft (SLSA) the FAA operating limitations allow the aircraft to be operated under IFR if the aircraft is equipped in accordance with FAR 91.205. However, in order to legally operate the SLSA under IFR the aircraft and engine manufacturer must also document that they allow the aircraft to be operated under IFR as well. If either the airframe or engine manufacturer prohibit the aircraft from operating under IFR it cannot be operates as such even if the FAA allows it via the operating limitations.

In essense, doesn't the owner who takes an S-LSA to E-LSA become the 'manufacturer'? I believe this is the concept in the EAB world.

[drseti]

Paul,

Until you can do your research, I pulled the following from the EAA site:

However, in order to legally operate the SLSA under IFR the aircraft and engine manufacturer must also document that they allow the aircraft to be operated under IFR as well.

Ah, I think I see where this is going, Dave. Since Rotax explicitly prohibits the 912-ULS from being operated IFR, but permits IFR operation using their certified 912-S, I believe we have an answer (at least in the case of Rotax-powered LSAs).

In essence, doesn't the owner who takes an S-LSA to E-LSA become the 'manufacturer'? I believe this is the concept in the EAB world.

Well, I know that's the case for an E-AB. The owner/builder (i.e., the "manufacturer") is free to make any modifications he or she wants, and the aircraft remains sport pilot eligible as long as those modifications don't take the aircraft out of the LSA operating limitations. But, my understanding of E-LSA is that it's a different animal. To be an E-LSA, it has to be based upon an S-LSA, and can't be modified in any way that would cause it to deviate from the original S-LSA, unless a letter of authorization is obtained from that aircraft's manufacturer.

So, for example, if you build an RV-12 and license it as an E-LSA, I believe modifications must be approved by Van's. Otherwise, you'd best have licensed your RV-12 as an E-AB (which is allowed, and gives you more flexibility).

That's my understanding, at any rate. But, better ask the Van's Air Force guys about this; they would know better than I.

[drseti]

Back to the original question of the Zodiac, that aircraft is Continental O-200 powered. The O-200 is (a) a certified engine, and (b) its manufacturer allows it to be used under instrument flight rules. This explains why there are IFR legal Zodiacs out there (licensed variously as S-LSA, E-LSA, and E-AB).

[nbjeeptj]

Back to the original thought, even as a slsa 601 per the maintenance manual it says that the owner can perform many maintenance task but still requires annual inspection by an a&p. Everyone is different but it allows me to do most everything that I would want to do myself.

[Jack Tyler]

"So, for example, if you build an RV-12 and license it as an E-LSA, I believe modifications must be approved by Van's."

Paul, I'm afraid that's incorrect. For fun you could visit this one l-o-n-g thread at VAF, all of which is based on the fact that E-LSA builders, once they host the DAR and receive approval, can do any mod they wish. Vans is not involved in any of these mods. Naturally, mods that take the a/c out of LSA standards remove the a/c from any legal use whatsoever.

http://www.vansairforce.com/community/s ... hp?t=64145

This is also documented in some of the other EAA/AOPA references we've posted elsewhere here.

[Edit Addition: Here's an example of other info that addresses this issue.
"Also worth mentioning here are aircraft originally certified as SLSA, but subsequently re-certified as ELSA to eventually allow for easier maintenance, alteration, and inspection requirements, per FAR 21.191(i)(3)-the "(i)(3) ELSA." Moving an SLSA to ELSA will require changes to the aircraft’s placards, the size of the N number, an aircraft inspection, and the issuance of a new airworthiness certificate and operating limitations. You’ll have to balance the depreciation of the aircraft and additional insurance costs with the benefits of the reduced maintenance and inspection requirements."
Cite is: http://www.askbob.aero/node/598, item #4

Also, according to the local FSDO guys that were attending the 2011 Sebring LSA Expo (and several other sources), an E-LSA is an 'E' a/c - meaning it's an Experimental. Experimental a/c fly IFR legal without certified engines, and so an E-AB LSA and E-LSA a/c must comply with the scheduled inspections and equipment requirements (e.g. at least one VOR nav aid) but do not require a certified engine. Yet another benefit of changing an S-LSA to an E-LSA, not that there aren't other benefits to remain S-LSA. Of course, 'soft' IFR is probably the most that is reasonable to expect from an LSA a/c.

For those of you who wonder about the terms...a 'non-certified' engine is built the same as a certified engine but lacks the paperwork, processing costs and other fees associated with certification.

[drseti]

still requires annual inspection by an a&p.

Yes, on an S-LSA, the annual and/or 100 hour condition inspection can be performed by an A&P (no IA required), but also by an AMT with an LSRM rating.

[dstclair]

Jack - that's what I thought and have read as well.

So, looks like you can add a Garmin 430w for around $10K and cut an E-LSA size hole in some clouds. I agree, though, 'soft IFR' would be best course.