LSA Requirements

[Boeing B-17G 42-231465]

I was wondering, do any of you think that the weight requirements for the light sport aircraft ever be changed to incorporate other aircraft? Small, slow planes like the Cessna 120/140, Luscombe 8E, and Cessna 150/152 and others are heavier than the light sport limitations, but are all small, two seat aircraft, slow and perform like light sports. Does anybody foresee this happening?

[kscessnadriver]

I was wondering, do any of you think that the weight requirements for the light sport aircraft ever be changed to incorporate other aircraft? Small, slow planes like the Cessna 120/140, Luscombe 8E, and Cessna 150/152 and others are heavier than the light sport limitations, but are all small, two seat aircraft, slow and perform like light sports. Does anybody foresee this happening?

No, it will never happen. Be glad they got the gross weight up to 1320 as it is.

[Bill]

Be glad the LSA limitation is 1320 lbs instead of the original limit. The FAA was fully aware of the characteristics of the Cessna 120/140, Luscombe 8E, and Cessna 150 and 152 when they set the limit and chose to exclude those aircraft. Why would they change the limit now?

[WWhunter]

Do a search on your very question and you may find that it has been asked a BUNCH of times. Seems like everyone without an LSA complient plane is trying everything they can do to get 'their' plane included. Lot of people hoping and praying for a miracle from our friendly FAA. LOL

[Floatsflyer]

I'm pleased to start the "yes it will" side of the debate. Why? Because precedent has already been set. Terrafugia(the flying car) has successfully applied for and been granted a weight increase waiver to accomodate the automobile safety standard requirements. And I have it on good authority that Icon has also applied for a waiver in order to provide their many A5 buyers/depositers with the much desired combination of electric wing folding and retractable gear. It takes organizations like the FAA great amounts of time to consider and make changes to anything but creating precedents have a way of eroding(through the courts and otherwise), over time, heretofor seemingly set in stone requirements.

[WWhunter]

Floatsflyer,
Boy oh boy I sure hope you are on to something there!!!
I own An LSA complient RANS S-7, a highly modified Champ that luckily is also LSA complient, and a 172 that of course is not LSA complient. Unfortunately due to a medical issue I will eventually have to fly SP if I want to continue to fly. I have owned the 172 for 25 years and probably could fly it in my sleep. I personally think the weight limit, where it was placed, was nothing but a political point. I feel it was complete BS that they wanted the weight kept low for safety reasons.
The new excemption that the EAA and AOPA are proposing is definitely a step in the right direction and I hope and pray that it is approved if we are going to save any semblence of General Aviation as we know it. EVERY pilot I have spoken to (asked) about their flying and the continual downward spiral of the amout of time they fly, usually ends up with a discussion on the ever increasing amount of rules and regulations that makes it more of a burden then an enjoyable experience. Of course fuel costs are also brought up.
Our worthless government is so power hungry all they can seem to do is regulate and try to control every aspect of our lives. Rant out.

[Boeing B-17G 42-231465]

Be glad the LSA limitation is 1320 lbs instead of the original limit. The FAA was fully aware of the characteristics of the Cessna 120/140, Luscombe 8E, and Cessna 150 and 152 when they set the limit and chose to exclude those aircraft. Why would they change the limit now?

Why would they choose to exclude those aircraft? Why excude a Luscombe 8E or the Cessna 120/140? Its not like those aircraft are hard to fly, or are high performance things. Each of my listed are slow, limited use airplanes. What was the original light sport limit? I'd say that anything with a lighter maximum weight wouldn't be all-too safe...

[Joe LaMantia]

I don't expect the current LSA weight to change, but I am hopeful that the Third-Class waiver being proposed by AOPA/EAA will allow a lot of us to fly our Skyhawks and Cherokees under Sport Pilot like rules in the near future.

Joe

[S3flyer]

Terrafugia(the flying car) has successfully applied for and been granted a weight increase waiver to accomodate the automobile safety standard requirements

Terrafugia made a successful and logical argument that there were additional requirements for a roadable aircraft that were analogous to an LSA float plane. They received the same weight limit as the LSA float plane. I would expect any roadable aircraft to get the same treatment. I wouldn't hold my breath for that to apply non-float/non-roadable LSAs.

[Bill]

What was the original light sport limit?

1232 lbs.

The reasons for the increase to 1320 lbs were, according to the FAA preamble, "Some commenters wanted the weight increased to permit stronger aircraft structures, use of four-stroke or type-certificated engines, electrical systems for avionics, starters for engines, or ballistic recovery systems. The FAA is increasing the weight limitation of the light-sport aircraft from the proposed 1,232 pounds (560 kilograms) to 1,320 pounds (600 kilograms). The originally proposed weight limitation was based on the 1,200-pound weight limitation proposed by the ARAC’s light-sport aircraft working group. The FAA agrees that there may be a safety benefit to light-sport aircraft designs to include provisions for currently produced type-certificated four-stroke engines and ballistic parachute recovery systems. Commenters submitted data that indicated that an additional 60 to 70 pounds would accommodate four-stroke aviation powerplants, and that an additional 30 to 40 pounds would accommodate the ballistic parachute recovery systems. For these reasons, the FAA has revised its proposed maximum takeoff weight limitation to 1,320 pounds (600 kilograms) for aircraft designed for operation on land."