LSA Sting to be certified for IFR in IMC

Talk about airplanes! At last count, there are 39 (and growing) FAA certificated S-LSA (special light sport aircraft). These are factory-built ready to fly airplanes. If you can't afford a factory-built LSA, consider buying an E-LSA kit (experimental LSA - up to 99% complete).

Moderator: drseti

Nomore767
Posts: 853
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2013 8:30 pm

Re: LSA Sting to be certified for IFR in IMC

Postby Nomore767 » Thu Oct 01, 2015 4:13 pm

MrMorden wrote:
SportPilot wrote:"Mr FAA, please create a class of airplane and a certificate so I can fly without a medical." Done, we now have LSA and Sport Pilot. "Mr FAA, thank you, but now, I am no longer satisfied. Please let me exercise my Private and Instrument privileges without a medical." We are never satisfied and always want more.


Welcome to the human condition. There are few people making $100,000 per year who would not like to be making $200,000.

Constantly wanting to improved our conditions is kind of how we got into skyscrapers from caves.


But we HAVE improved things…that's how we got sport flying. Now we can fly 120 kt airplanes up to 10k feet across the country with very sophisticated modern airplanes with advanced avionics and only a DL for a medical.
Its efficient and specific to the type of flying pilots said they wanted, and cost effective.

User avatar
MrMorden
Posts: 1733
Joined: Fri Aug 17, 2012 7:28 am
Location: Athens, GA

Re: LSA Sting to be certified for IFR in IMC

Postby MrMorden » Thu Oct 01, 2015 4:23 pm

Nomore767 wrote:
MrMorden wrote:
SportPilot wrote:"Mr FAA, please create a class of airplane and a certificate so I can fly without a medical." Done, we now have LSA and Sport Pilot. "Mr FAA, thank you, but now, I am no longer satisfied. Please let me exercise my Private and Instrument privileges without a medical." We are never satisfied and always want more.


Welcome to the human condition. There are few people making $100,000 per year who would not like to be making $200,000.

Constantly wanting to improved our conditions is kind of how we got into skyscrapers from caves.


But we HAVE improved things…that's how we got sport flying. Now we can fly 120 kt airplanes up to 10k feet across the country with very sophisticated modern airplanes with advanced avionics and only a DL for a medical.
Its efficient and specific to the type of flying pilots said they wanted, and cost effective.


I agree, and I'm happy about it. I don't want a medical, I don't want to fly IMC. I would like to occasionally fly briefly after sunset.

Yes, things have improved. So do we stop looking for any future improvement? Caves to mud huts should be enough? :lol:
Andy Walker
Athens, GA
Sport Pilot ASEL, LSRI
2007 Flight Design CTSW E-LSA

User avatar
MrMorden
Posts: 1733
Joined: Fri Aug 17, 2012 7:28 am
Location: Athens, GA

Re: LSA Sting to be certified for IFR in IMC

Postby MrMorden » Thu Oct 01, 2015 4:30 pm

Nomore767 wrote: The FAA DO allow for flying at night along with other levels of training and privileges…it's called the PPL. If that's what you want to do, fly as a PPL. If you don't then fly as a sport pilot.


Jeez, that sounds like you are arguing "that's how it is because that's how it is." In logic that is called a tautology, and doesn't really advance an argument.

I know what I CAN do now. I'm telling you how I think things SHOULD work. Are all rules correct and right, simply because they are the rules? Or can we apply a little critical thinking and try to think up ways to improve them?

BTW, I was never advocating for a "light IMC" Sport Pilot rule. That came up in regard to airceaft capability, and then somehow jumped over to pilot certification. I DO advocate a VFR night flight endorsement for Sport Pilots, as an extension of their VFR mission.
Andy Walker
Athens, GA
Sport Pilot ASEL, LSRI
2007 Flight Design CTSW E-LSA

Nomore767
Posts: 853
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2013 8:30 pm

Re: LSA Sting to be certified for IFR in IMC

Postby Nomore767 » Thu Oct 01, 2015 4:41 pm

Welcome to the human condition. There are few people making $100,000 per year who would not like to be making $200,000.

Constantly wanting to improved our conditions is kind of how we got into skyscrapers from caves.[/quote]

But we HAVE improved things…that's how we got sport flying. Now we can fly 120 kt airplanes up to 10k feet across the country with very sophisticated modern airplanes with advanced avionics and only a DL for a medical.
Its efficient and specific to the type of flying pilots said they wanted, and cost effective.[/quote]

I agree, and I'm happy about it. I don't want a medical, I don't want to fly IMC. I would like to occasionally fly briefly after sunset.

Yes, things have improved. So do we stop looking for any future improvement? Caves to mud huts should be enough? :lol:[/quote]

No we should continue to improve but why establish a new category of flying, such as light sport, which was designed to meet what a group of pilots said they wanted (day vfr, up to 10k feet, no night, no fir, 3 statute miles and ground contact, no medical other than DL) and then proceed to morph it towards what we already have at the PPL level?

" I don't want a medical, I don't want to fly IMC. I would like to occasionally fly briefly after sunset." Well, you can't as a sport pilot, but you can as a PPL. You choose.
Why even think about changing sport flying rules just so that someone can 'occasionally fly briefly after sunset'?

Nomore767
Posts: 853
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2013 8:30 pm

Re: LSA Sting to be certified for IFR in IMC

Postby Nomore767 » Thu Oct 01, 2015 5:15 pm

MrMorden wrote:
Nomore767 wrote: The FAA DO allow for flying at night along with other levels of training and privileges…it's called the PPL. If that's what you want to do, fly as a PPL. If you don't then fly as a sport pilot.


Jeez, that sounds like you are arguing "that's how it is because that's how it is." In logic that is called a tautology, and doesn't really advance an argument.

I know what I CAN do now. I'm telling you how I think things SHOULD work. Are all rules correct and right, simply because they are the rules? Or can we apply a little critical thinking and try to think up ways to improve them?

BTW, I was never advocating for a "light IMC" Sport Pilot rule. That came up in regard to airceaft capability, and then somehow jumped over to pilot certification. I DO advocate a VFR night flight endorsement for Sport Pilots, as an extension of their VFR mission.


I'm not arguing that's how it is…it already IS. You seem to be arguing that we ought to change the rules simply because you occasionally feel the brief need to fly for a little bit at night…and so we should be able to do that. I'm saying you already can…the catch is you have to fly as a PPL and the rules and regulations for that are already in place. The training and equipment requirements are already in place.

So what are you advocating, a new rule set for 'occasionally brief flights after sunset'? So for how long? How far? You said you're uncomfortable thinking about flying 400 mile flights at night. What weather conditions would apply, what visibility and how do they change because it's now dark? What medical changes would be required? If there is an endorsement what if a medical was now required for that? What equipment requirements and changes would be required to now operate after sunset? What about lighting, inside and out? Operating airport lighting? How much training would be required? Is there a test or is it a flight with a CFI and a logbook endorsement? Is there a currency requirement? etc etc

Didn't say you were advocating a 'light IMC' for sport flying rule but the point is the same as flying at night. What is light IMC? How do you separate light IMC with planes flying IFR? What about light IMC and a night sport endorsement? Are they the same or separate?
What is night flying for a sport pilot? Is it different than night flying for a PPL? What restrictions would be required if any? What training would be required. Would it include more instrument flying to to allow for flying at night over unlighted ground, water or terrain?

Jacks's example was being able to take-off and climb through a 'light layer' to better weather. What happen's if there's an emergency or engine failure? What if it's a patchy fog 'light layer' that has now drifted over the runway? What if there's another plane on an actual IFR flight plan executing an approach whilst the IMC endorsed sport pilot mulls over taking off through the light layer?

My point is that we already have licenses in place which cover the things you say you'd like as an improvement so why build a forest when we already have the tree?

User avatar
dstclair
Posts: 946
Joined: Thu Mar 06, 2008 11:23 am
Location: Allen, TX

Re: LSA Sting to be certified for IFR in IMC

Postby dstclair » Thu Oct 01, 2015 6:06 pm

Jacks's example was being able to take-off and climb through a 'light layer' to better weather. What happen's if there's an emergency or engine failure? What if it's a patchy fog 'light layer' that has now drifted over the runway? What if there's another plane on an actual IFR flight plan executing an approach whilst the IMC endorsed sport pilot mulls over taking off through the light layer?

My point is that we already have licenses in place which cover the things you say you'd like as an improvement so why build a forest when we already have the tree?


FWIW. I think the SP with the current endorsement options is a perfect starting point and the PP provides an excellent upgrade path. I see only small advantages to creating an endorsement path the essentially morphs an SP to a PP. If PBOR2 passes, the SP would only need to pass a medical ONCE when getting their PP.

No one was ever proposing a light IMC endorsement for an SP. The topic is about having an S-LSA that could have IMC (light or otherwise) operating limits. A PP with an current IR would be required to fly it in the US. "light" IMC could be specified just as specific Part 23 (and the precursors) aircraft are IMC certified but restricted from going into known icing. Who determines if the aircraft operating limits are appropriate for the conditions -- the pilot. "Light" IMC would be no different.

S-LSAs do not exist solely for SPs.
dave

User avatar
MrMorden
Posts: 1733
Joined: Fri Aug 17, 2012 7:28 am
Location: Athens, GA

Re: LSA Sting to be certified for IFR in IMC

Postby MrMorden » Thu Oct 01, 2015 6:38 pm

Nomore767 wrote:
I'm not arguing that's how it is…it already IS. You seem to be arguing that we ought to change the rules simply because you occasionally feel the brief need to fly for a little bit at night…and so we should be able to do that. I'm saying you already can…the catch is you have to fly as a PPL and the rules and regulations for that are already in place. The training and equipment requirements are already in place.

So what are you advocating, a new rule set for 'occasionally brief flights after sunset'? So for how long? How far? You said you're uncomfortable thinking about flying 400 mile flights at night. What weather conditions would apply, what visibility and how do they change because it's now dark? What medical changes would be required? If there is an endorsement what if a medical was now required for that? What equipment requirements and changes would be required to now operate after sunset? What about lighting, inside and out? Operating airport lighting? How much training would be required? Is there a test or is it a flight with a CFI and a logbook endorsement? Is there a currency requirement? etc etc

Didn't say you were advocating a 'light IMC' for sport flying rule but the point is the same as flying at night. What is light IMC? How do you separate light IMC with planes flying IFR? What about light IMC and a night sport endorsement? Are they the same or separate?
What is night flying for a sport pilot? Is it different than night flying for a PPL? What restrictions would be required if any? What training would be required. Would it include more instrument flying to to allow for flying at night over unlighted ground, water or terrain?

Jacks's example was being able to take-off and climb through a 'light layer' to better weather. What happen's if there's an emergency or engine failure? What if it's a patchy fog 'light layer' that has now drifted over the runway? What if there's another plane on an actual IFR flight plan executing an approach whilst the IMC endorsed sport pilot mulls over taking off through the light layer?

My point is that we already have licenses in place which cover the things you say you'd like as an improvement so why build a forest when we already have the tree?


There is no safety reason to NOT allow night flight. I never said anything about an endorsement for "brief" night flight, other than that is how I would fly at night. The endorsement should allow any night flight that a PP allows. Not because it's what I want. Because there is no safety reason not to. IMC is NOT the same as night flight, which is VFR.

As a Sport Pilot, I need an endorsement to fly in D, C, and B airspace. Should I not be able to get such an endorsement, since a Private Pilot can already fly in those spaces? I guess if I want to go there I should just get a PP, instead of "building a forest". Maybe every CFI should have to get a CFII, since the CFI requirements already exist in CFII...why build a new forest?

There is overlap in certificate privileges, and why shouldn't there be if there is no safety reason not to? Not every pilot has to fall into some cookie cutter idea of how they should fly.
Andy Walker
Athens, GA
Sport Pilot ASEL, LSRI
2007 Flight Design CTSW E-LSA

3Dreaming
Posts: 1971
Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2010 6:13 pm
Location: noble, IL USA

Re: LSA Sting to be certified for IFR in IMC

Postby 3Dreaming » Thu Oct 01, 2015 6:41 pm

Nomore767 wrote: Jack, if you're instrument rated , and so is your airplane, you can decide to file IFR and depart under much reduced minimums from the VFR guy. To you its a temporary ground layer and your study and experience as an instrument rated pilot allows for a feel for it to break up in a short while but meanwhile you can go. That's the benefit of the IR. To the sport pilot with say a 'light IMC' endorsement he might now be tempted into something best left alone and if all he wants really is to enjoy sport flying, waiting out the light ground layer to lift is a tinny price to pay.
On the other hand your neighbor, the sport pilot, sees you go but knows he needs 3 statute miles and constant ground contact. He can leave in an hour after the layer lifted.
Problem arises with legality and what constitutes light IMC, IMC , or worse. They would have to develop a whole rule set to determine light IMC such that the sport pilot with the IMC endorsement could now legally operate. Would they now likely have to require that the sport pilot with IMC now has to meet the medical requirements of a PPL? What about insurance?

How do you propose to rectify LSAs designed for sport flying specifically so that a tiny minor it 'may' want occasionally to fly in light IMC or at night?
I believe the Rotax engine isn't certified for IFR and maybe not for night. Plus, then the plane has to be certified as regards pitot static, transponder etc
What if that light layer was actually freezing fog?


I will repeat what someone else said earlier. You are mixing Light Sport Aircraft (LSA) with sport pilot privileges. While the two go hand in hand they are two different things. I don't think anyone is advocating for a change in pilot privileges, but rather to be able to exercise their privileges in the aircraft of their choice. You can take a standard category LSA Piper Cub, certify it for IFR (with many modifications), and a private pilot with instrument rating can file and fly IMC if they want. I think it is silly that you can't do the same with a SLSA like your RV12.
While the airplane does somewhat determine the mission of the aircraft, the pilot privileges are just as important in making the determination.

Nomore767
Posts: 853
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2013 8:30 pm

Re: LSA Sting to be certified for IFR in IMC

Postby Nomore767 » Thu Oct 01, 2015 6:56 pm

"Not that I want to go making 400 mile cross country legs in the dead of night. But it would be good occasionally to not have to "race the sun" to get back to my home airfield when flying around the local area with friends."

Why would you not want to make a 400 mile cross country leg 'in the dead of night' if there is no safety reason not to?

I would argue that there is a difference to flying night VFR over a well lit area versus say over desert or larger stretches of water. I feel safe in saying that there is a need, at night, to include a better instrument scan than during day VFR. Probably why most simulators train in night conditions and why there is night training included in the PPL.
Last edited by Nomore767 on Thu Oct 01, 2015 7:12 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Nomore767
Posts: 853
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2013 8:30 pm

Re: LSA Sting to be certified for IFR in IMC

Postby Nomore767 » Thu Oct 01, 2015 7:10 pm

"I don't think anyone is advocating for a change in pilot privileges, but rather to be able to exercise their privileges in the aircraft of their choice."

Isn't Andy advocating changing pilot privileges by adding a night endorsement to the sport license?

3Dreaming
Posts: 1971
Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2010 6:13 pm
Location: noble, IL USA

Re: LSA Sting to be certified for IFR in IMC

Postby 3Dreaming » Thu Oct 01, 2015 7:44 pm

Nomore767 wrote:"I don't think anyone is advocating for a change in pilot privileges, but rather to be able to exercise their privileges in the aircraft of their choice."

Isn't Andy advocating changing pilot privileges by adding a night endorsement to the sport license?


You are right that he is talking about a change, but the thread is about a LSA being certified for IFR in IMC. I was trying to stay on point. My statement that you quoted was directed to the topic of the thread, and not towards Andy's thoughts on night flight.

User avatar
MrMorden
Posts: 1733
Joined: Fri Aug 17, 2012 7:28 am
Location: Athens, GA

Re: LSA Sting to be certified for IFR in IMC

Postby MrMorden » Thu Oct 01, 2015 8:36 pm

Nomore767 wrote:"I don't think anyone is advocating for a change in pilot privileges, but rather to be able to exercise their privileges in the aircraft of their choice."

Isn't Andy advocating changing pilot privileges by adding a night endorsement to the sport license?


Yes.
Andy Walker
Athens, GA
Sport Pilot ASEL, LSRI
2007 Flight Design CTSW E-LSA

Wm.Ince
Posts: 581
Joined: Sun Nov 17, 2013 3:27 pm
Location: Clearwater, FL

Re: LSA Sting to be certified for IFR in IMC

Postby Wm.Ince » Thu Oct 01, 2015 8:42 pm

MrMorden wrote:
Nomore767 wrote:Isn't Andy advocating changing pilot privileges by adding a night endorsement to the sport license?
Yes.

Make that two of us.
Bill Ince
CTSW
Retired Heavy Equipment Operator

User avatar
MrMorden
Posts: 1733
Joined: Fri Aug 17, 2012 7:28 am
Location: Athens, GA

Re: LSA Sting to be certified for IFR in IMC

Postby MrMorden » Thu Oct 01, 2015 8:46 pm

Nomore767 wrote:Why would you not want to make a 400 mile cross country leg 'in the dead of night' if there is no safety reason not to?

I would argue that there is a difference to flying night VFR over a well lit area versus say over desert or larger stretches of water. I feel safe in saying that there is a need, at night, to include a better instrument scan than during day VFR. Probably why most simulators train in night conditions and why there is night training included in the PPL.


Because it's beyond my personal safety margins. I can also legally fly across the Gulf of Mexico right now if I want to, but I wouldn't do that either. That would not magically change if my certificate said PP instead of SP. But from a regulatory standpoint, I'd argue that a properly trained SP flying at night below 10,000 feet is not inherently less safe than a PP doing the same thing. Is there a reason I'm wrong about that?

Of course open deserted areas are more dangerous at night and make pilots more prone to disorientation. That is not different for any human being, regardless of what's printed on the card they carry...so why can't a SP do it, but a PP can, if it's all considered VFR?

Look, this is not a deal breaker for me. I'm happy with my SP license, and I have flown over large swaths of the nation with it. I don't feel it unduly hinders me, and I love not having to deal with the bureaucratic mess of medicals, SIs, etc. My only point is I'd be happiER if the FAA would allow night flight with an endorsement.

I'm sure a lot of pilots agree, and I have not met anybody yet who will cite a safety problem with the idea. If the regulations exist for safety and not just for the sake of bureaucracy, then that should be sufficient.

If you disagree I can respect that and we can move on. Reasoned differences of opinion are healthy.
Last edited by MrMorden on Thu Oct 01, 2015 8:49 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Andy Walker
Athens, GA
Sport Pilot ASEL, LSRI
2007 Flight Design CTSW E-LSA

User avatar
MrMorden
Posts: 1733
Joined: Fri Aug 17, 2012 7:28 am
Location: Athens, GA

Re: LSA Sting to be certified for IFR in IMC

Postby MrMorden » Thu Oct 01, 2015 8:47 pm

3Dreaming wrote:
Nomore767 wrote:"I don't think anyone is advocating for a change in pilot privileges, but rather to be able to exercise their privileges in the aircraft of their choice."

Isn't Andy advocating changing pilot privileges by adding a night endorsement to the sport license?


You are right that he is talking about a change, but the thread is about a LSA being certified for IFR in IMC. I was trying to stay on point. My statement that you quoted was directed to the topic of the thread, and not towards Andy's thoughts on night flight.


Sorry for the thread drift, my fault. But at least it's a somewhat *related* topic! ;)
Andy Walker
Athens, GA
Sport Pilot ASEL, LSRI
2007 Flight Design CTSW E-LSA


Return to “Light Sport Aircraft”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests