Increasing speed/weight limits for LSA?

[Warmi]

I don’t think anybody does their SP in 20 hours nor there is significant difference between PP and SP training. A few more basic instrument lessons , night landings and a bit longer cross country.
None of that makes any significant sdifference in terms of new pilots abilities to fly planes - the real learning begins the day you get your license and how well you manage from that point on.
At least that was the case with my training ... I did PP cross country and few other bits required for PP - the only thing I didn’t do is to take the PP checkride which I probably will anyway precisely because there is hardly any difference between training regimes and PP gives you a lot more options for just a bit more effort.

[TimTaylor]

I'm not talking about what someone does. I'm talking about the REQUIREMENTS for Sport Pilot. If they were to significantly change the definition of LSA, they should rethink the requirements for Sport Pilot. If they simply increase MTOW from 1320 pounds to 1420 pounds, then maybe not.

[MrMorden]

2000 pounds? Why not 6000 pounds? At what point would they decide you need a medical or Basic Med? Any significant change to LSA should be accompanied by an total reevaluation of the Sport Pilot certificate. When is 20 hours of training no long enough?

Personally, I would say never, I don’t think class three medicals serve a useful purpose for light aircraft. Once again...opinions.

BTW, the Sport Pilot has to accomplish every task on their checkride that a Private Pilot does, with the exception of radio navigation.

[Jim Hardin]

2000 pounds? Why not 6000 pounds? At what point would they decide you need a medical or Basic Med? Any significant change to LSA should be accompanied by an total reevaluation of the Sport Pilot certificate. When is 20 hours of training no long enough?

Personally, I would say never, I don’t think class three medicals serve a useful purpose for light aircraft. Once again...opinions.

BTW, the Sport Pilot has to accomplish every task on their checkride that a Private Pilot does, with the exception of radio navigation.

I agree too for what it is worth...

Could never understand why I need a Basic Medical or higher to touch a Propeller Control. Or why I can fly a Glider or an LSA amphibian with retractable gear but Never in an LSA landplane.

[Warmi]

2000 pounds? Why not 6000 pounds? At what point would they decide you need a medical or Basic Med? Any significant change to LSA should be accompanied by an total reevaluation of the Sport Pilot certificate. When is 20 hours of training no long enough?

Personally, I would say never, I don’t think class three medicals serve a useful purpose for light aircraft. Once again...opinions.

BTW, the Sport Pilot has to accomplish every task on their checkride that a Private Pilot does, with the exception of radio navigation.

I agree too for what it is worth...

Could never understand why I need a Basic Medical or higher to touch a Propeller Control. Or why I can fly a Glider or an LSA amphibian with retractable gear but Never in an LSA landplane.

Well, if the powers that be decide that a distinction needs to be made between Sport Pilot and PP certificates or between LS planes
and certified planes, they have to come up with some kind of criteria for that and , well, sometime these are completely arbitrarily invented just to justify the original distinction - or at least often seems that way

[Sling 2 Pilot]

Ill believe it when its in print. That said, while out in LA the week before last, there was talk on the very subject of this thread. It was stated that a ruling on the subject of weight could come during OSH. Again, I gotta see it to believe it.

[MrMorden]

Ill believe it when its in print. That said, while out in LA the week before last, there was talk on the very subject of this thread. It was stated that a ruling on the subject of weight could come during OSH. Again, I gotta see it to believe it.

I'm with you, this has been discussed since 2004, and nothing has come of it. That said, there does seem to be increased chatter in the last six months or so from "insiders" stating that is happening, or at least a consideration at FAA. Time will tell!

[dstclair]

If the MTOW is ever increased, I believe there is an S-LSA mechanism to increase the gross weight. Around 10 years ago, Evektor allowed an increase in the MTOW (to 1320lbs) of their existing fleet by adding VGs -- right, Paul? I would extrapolate that an S-LSA manufacturer could issue some type of document in the same manner, even if no changes were required to the particular airplane. I would also guess that they would charge for the re-certification.

[drseti]

Around 10 years ago, Evektor allowed an increase in the MTOW (to 1320lbs) of their existing fleet by adding VGs -- right, Paul?

That's correct, Dave, but it was a multi-step process. The Evektor EuroStar preceeded the US LSA rule. It would not pass the 45 KCAS clean stall speed US requirement at a 1320 MTOW, but of course stall speed varies with weight. So for the US market, Evektor set the MTOW to 1268 and branded it the SportStar. A couple of years later, they introduced the SportStar Max, a SportStar with just enough VGs added to pass the stall speed requirement at 1320. Still later, they came up with a mod kit and service bulletin, allowing one to convert a SportStar to a Max just by adding VGs, and having a new Airworthiness Certificate issued by the local FSDO. Most of the original SportStars have now been upgraded to the Max.

As for cost, you're right, Evektor charged for the upgrade. A set of VGs would cost $200. But since you're converting from one model to another, you also need a new data plate, Maintenance manual, Aircraft Operating Instructions, and Operating Limitations sheet. So, they made up a very complete kit (they even included decals saying "Max" to add to the cowling, and four rivets for installing the new data plate). The cost was around $2000.

I'm pretty sure most of the extra $1800 went to the corporate lawyers. Increased liability and all that...

[Sling 2 Pilot]

Can anyone share insight into the possibility the FAA will increase speed &/or weight limits for LSAs in the near future? IMO, it seems illogical to handicap these excellent aircraft at such low, artificially-limited restrictions. Such a move would open a new venue for LSA sales for those of us who like to fly cross country.

Here is the latest from Airventure...

https://www.avweb.com/avwebflash/news/L ... 209-1.html

[Warmi]

If the MTOW is ever increased, I believe there is an S-LSA mechanism to increase the gross weight. Around 10 years ago, Evektor allowed an increase in the MTOW (to 1320lbs) of their existing fleet by adding VGs -- right, Paul? I would extrapolate that an S-LSA manufacturer could issue some type of document in the same manner, even if no changes were required to the particular airplane. I would also guess that they would charge for the re-certification.

If offered, would you even consider paying ,say , 2k for the re-certification of your Sting to , say, 1500 lbs and the ability to install a constant prop ?

Just curious ...

[Wm.Ince]

Just for the sake of discussion . . . the Sling 2 can be built and registered as S-LSA, E-LSA or E-AB.
If the aircraft is registered as an LSA, the MTOGW is limited to 1320 lbs.
But if the airplane is registered as an E-AB, its MTOGW is 1540 lbs.
All 3 airplanes are identical in basic construction.

Here's the question:

If the airplane is built and registered under LSA rules (MTOGW 1320 lbs.), but subsequently, a weight limit increase (let's say 1540 lbs.) is initiated for LSA's, under FAR's, what would be the chances of obtaining an increase in the weight limit to 1540 lbs, since the airframe is built to those specs to begin with?

[dstclair]

If the MTOW is ever increased, I believe there is an S-LSA mechanism to increase the gross weight. Around 10 years ago, Evektor allowed an increase in the MTOW (to 1320lbs) of their existing fleet by adding VGs -- right, Paul? I would extrapolate that an S-LSA manufacturer could issue some type of document in the same manner, even if no changes were required to the particular airplane. I would also guess that they would charge for the re-certification.

If offered, would you even consider paying ,say , 2k for the re-certification of your Sting to , say, 1500 lbs and the ability to install a constant prop ?

Just curious ...

MTOW increase -- no, I wouldn't pay to recertify my particular plane. I've stated a few times in this forum that my S3 allows me to have a full tank, my wife, myself and ~60lbs of stuff which meets my mission. An increase in MTOW would not increase my utility.

Constant speed, or more likely variable pitch prop -- probably, depending on the $$$. But would not bother with doing the upgrade until it was time to replace or, perhaps, overhaul my DUC prop.

[drseti]

If the airplane is built and registered under LSA rules (MTOGW 1320 lbs.), but subsequently, a weight limit increase (let's say 1540 lbs.) is initiated for LSA's, under FAR's, what would be the chances of obtaining an increase in the weight limit to 1540 lbs, since the airframe is built to those specs to begin with?

That's the 220 pound question, Bill. We just don't know how the FARs, Service Bulletins, Letters of Authorization, and ASTM Standards are going to align (if at all).

We also don't know how upgrading the MGTW is going to impact compliance with other ASTM LSA restrictions (such as Vh and Vso).

[drseti]

Constant speed, or more likely variable pitch prop -- probably, depending on the $$$. But would not bother with doing the upgrade until it was time to replace or, perhaps, overhaul my DUC prop.

If you have the DUC Swirl prop, its blade flexibility already gives you many of the advantages of a constant speed prop, while remaining within LSA restrictions. Probably nothing to be gained by upgrading.