AVweb Video on Vashon Ranger + Aviation Consumer Article

[TimTaylor]

The higher weight limit for a float version LSA has nothing to do with anything. The limit is 1320 with wheels and 1430 with floats. Presumably, the floats weigh around 100 pounds but also add some compensating lift.

[dstclair]

Paul Bertorelli posted a new blog in response to MTOW statements in the video: https://www.avweb.com/blogs/insider/Mor ... 797-1.html
I believe the reason the LSA MTOW comes up for discussion from time-to-time is that it is viewed as regulatory vs. designed (for Part 23 and the prior regs). If I recall correctly, my Cherokee 180 had an MTOW of 2550 lbs and exceeding this really put you in uncharted territory. Some LSA manufacturers have models that have been designed for higher weights such as Cubs, some Jabirus, some Tecnams, Stings and I'm sure there are others. There is a natural desire to fly these same models in the US at a the higher MTOW to increase the utility of the plane. I'm not so sure that if one does that this puts you in the same risk group as flying my Cherokee over gross. Of course, this is against the regs but I'm not sure this stops some pilots. We also know that highway speed limits aren't followed by many drivers. It seems Paul B. point is that some pilots do fly over gross and he neither condones or condemns them.

[drseti]

It seems Paul B. point is that some pilots do fly over gross and he neither condones or condemns them.

I can't speak for Paul B., Dave, but you and I, as CFIs, have a legal and moral obligation to condemn such action.

[FastEddieB]

I watched that portion of the video again, and his, "And let's be honest here girls, you could just fly 50 or 100 lbs over gross, which is what much of LSA-dom actually does.", does seem to paint it as a realistic option, and the "girls" remarks borderlines on implying its the macho thing to do.

At least that was my impression.

[TimTaylor]

Flying is serious business. I would never condone or encourage violation of any regulations.

[Warmi]

As dstclair alluded, his point is that some LSAs are demonstrably safe to fly overgross because these planes were certified for higher weights and , in these cases, illegal not equals unsafe . In other words, lot of people will have no problem violating regulations if they think that these regulations are meaningless and don’t contribute in any way to their safety/well being.

Paul B always seemed very unabashedly practical in his approach covering aviation related topics and this particular issue is no exception.

[TimTaylor]

OK, then. I guess the rest of us who are Private, Commercial, or ATP with an instrument rating can fly at night and IFR if the plane is so equipped. Since we can ignore the regulations, I guess it's up to us to decide what instruments we deem are actually needed for safe IFR flight.

If you want to fly your LSA as certified in some other country, move to that country.

[3Dreaming]

OK, then. I guess the rest of us who are Private, Commercial, or ATP with an instrument rating can fly at night and IFR if the plane is so equipped.

Yep, and no need to ignore the regulations. If it is allowed by the operating limitations and has the equipment all of what you mentioned is perfectly legal.

[TimTaylor]

OK, then. I guess the rest of us who are Private, Commercial, or ATP with an instrument rating can fly at night and IFR if the plane is so equipped.

Yep, and no need to ignore the regulations. If it is allowed by the operating limitations and has the equipment all of what you mentioned is perfectly legal.

Not if you're flying with Sport Pilot privileges and no FAA medical or no Basic Med. Otherwise, why fool around with LSA? I definitely would not be flying LSA if I qualified for Basic Med. But thanks for chiming is, as usual.

[FastEddieB]

OK, then. I guess the rest of us who are Private, Commercial, or ATP with an instrument rating can fly at night and IFR if the plane is so equipped.

Yep, and no need to ignore the regulations. If it is allowed by the operating limitations and has the equipment all of what you mentioned is perfectly legal.

Not without a medical, which I think was Tim Taylor’s point*.

Alleviated by BasicMed, which Tim just barely missed the “deadline” for.

And to reiterate, safe or not, operating over LSA weight limits puts one’s license at risk. Any accident or incident under those conditions, even it weight was not a causal factor, may result in license suspension or worse. How important that is obviously varies pilot to pilot. It is important to me.

*I see from Tim’s response up I was right.

[Warmi]

OK, then. I guess the rest of us who are Private, Commercial, or ATP with an instrument rating can fly at night and IFR if the plane is so equipped.

Yep, and no need to ignore the regulations. If it is allowed by the operating limitations and has the equipment all of what you mentioned is perfectly legal.

Not if you're flying with Sport Pilot privileges and no FAA medical or no Basic Med. Otherwise, why fool around with LSA? I definitely would not be flying LSA if I qualified for Basic Med. But thanks for chiming is, as usual.

Cause some people like to fly for fun and thus like LSA and fly them regardless of medical or any other considerations.
I for one, wouldn't even bother getting into this, if all I had available to me was 40 year olds Mooney's, Cessnas and other ancient technology - if there ever comes a day when I need a fast cross country plane, I will possibly look into Cirrus or Diamond , if I can even afford it ...RV otherwise.

[TimTaylor]

That was a rhetorical question. If I had Basic Med, I would have bought my friend's 1968 Mooney M20C that was fully decked out and had all the 201 mods, new paint and new leather interior. It would be much preferrable to the SkyCatcher and Remos GX I currently fly or any other LSA I know of. I have over 400 hours in that airplane and love it.

If you're a new Sport Pilot, without an instrument rating, and all you've ever flown is an LSA, you're not in a position to criticize a well maintained, fully updated, highly capable standard category airplane.

[Warmi]

I have flown a few times but that’s not the point - I personally don’t like old planes , just like some people don’t like old cars or Harley bikes or whatever ... I program computers for living and frankly don’t care about IFR or commercial flying or any other advanced ratings - I fly for fun I don’t plan to bother with it all.

It doesn’t matter really - it was simply a response to you implying that flying LSA is done purely out of necessity.

[TimTaylor]

I have flown a few times but that’s not the point - I personally don’t like old planes , just like some people don’t like old cars or Harley bikes or whatever ... I program computers for living and frankly don’t care about IFR or commercial flying or any other advanced ratings - I fly for fun I don’t plan to bother with it all.

It doesn’t matter really - it was simply a response to you implying that flying LSA is done purely out of necessity.

My question was directed at Private, Commercial, and ATP pilots with an instrument rating. It was a rhetorical question. Some people fly LSA because they want to, others because they have to unless they want to fly ultra-lights or gliders. I enjoy flying LSA, but I have no other viable choice.

And the point is, FOLLOW ALL REGULATIONS. Don't pick and choose which one's you want to follow and which one's you want to ignore.

[ShawnM]

I have to agree with Warmi, I dont like flying planes older than I am either, updated or not, You can only put so much lipstick on a pig.

Your friends 1968 Mooney is as old as I am and I for one would much rather fly a new, state of the art aircraft with all the bells and whistles. Not a 50 year old plane covered in lipstick. I do fly LSA for the sheer enjoyment of it and not out of necessity. I have zero medical issues and have no need for a PPL. My LSA aircraft and my SPL give me more fun and enjoyment than I could ever ask for.

If anyone is "stuck" flying LSA they should be thankful there's still a way to fly these amazing and very cool aircraft. Just sayin'