Page 2 of 2

Re: Aviation Consumer article about SLSA Weight - Super Lege

Posted: Fri Apr 29, 2016 10:21 pm
by MrMorden
3Dreaming wrote:
Andy,
I have never said the exact same model of airplane could not fly at a higher weight in a different country and the same model be a LSA here in the USA. What I said was that an airplane can not be certified at a higher weight any where and still be a LSA.

I think you are misunderstanding the meaning of certified. An airplane is certified when it is issued a airworthiness certificate. This is done on a individual airplane basis. What the airworthiness certificate is certifying is different based on what type of airworthiness certificate is issued. This is why any airplane since its original certification can not be a LSA if it had a gross weight higher than 1320lb for a land plane. The fact that other airplanes of the same model have been certified at a higher gross weight means nothing when it comes to certification of a LSA aircraft other than to show design strength.
If by "an airplane can not be certified at a higher weight any where and still be a LSA" you mean an individual airframe, then we agree. The confusion I was trying to clear up is the use of "airplane" to mean an individual airplane, but it's also used to mean a type of airplane. Just making sure we're clear on terms. :)

I understand certification. Experimental Amateur Built (EAB) airplanes have an airworthiness certificate, but no certification (unless you count the DAR as 'certifying' that the airplane meets general safe build practices). Factory built airplanes are certified under Part 23 standards, S-LSA & E-LSA are certified under ASTM consensus standards.

Re: Aviation Consumer article about SLSA Weight - Super Lege

Posted: Sat Apr 30, 2016 10:53 am
by 3Dreaming
MrMorden wrote: If by "an airplane can not be certified at a higher weight any where and still be a LSA" you mean an individual airframe, then we agree. The confusion I was trying to clear up is the use of "airplane" to mean an individual airplane, but it's also used to mean a type of airplane. Just making sure we're clear on terms. :)

I understand certification. Experimental Amateur Built (EAB) airplanes have an airworthiness certificate, but no certification (unless you count the DAR as 'certifying' that the airplane meets general safe build practices). Factory built airplanes are certified under Part 23 standards, S-LSA & E-LSA are certified under ASTM consensus standards.
Airplane is a singular noun, and I have always used it that way. If I wanted to convey it differently I would have said type of airplane or airplanes.

An airworthiness certificate says right on it what it certifies. For airplanes that are issued a pink airworthiness certificate the certificate says that it certifies that the airplane was in compliance with all applicable CFR's at the time of issue.

For standard category the airworthiness certificate says at the time it was inspected for issuance it conformed to the type certificate.

The type certificate is issued to the manufacture when the airplane design has been proven to meet the certification requirement set forth in the CFR's. It should be pointed out that the current certification standards are found in prat 23, but the standards for a particular model of airplane are listed in the Type Certificate Data Sheet. Not all type certified airplanes being built are produced under part 23, and many times they are a mix of old and new standards.

SLSA are not certified under ASTM standards, they are built under the standards. The manufactures are audited to make sure they are following the standards, but I don't think any certifications are given to the design.