Last published report had the FAA delaying a promised September decision to the end of 2012. Searches online and going to the usual suspect websites has resulted in no updated info on the subject.
Do any of my fellow members/intrepid flyers have any "Insider Knowledge" that you can share?
FWIW - this was the last post on the Icon Aircraft Facebook page, dated January 17: "This week we achieved another major production milestone: the fuselage design drawings were released to our tooling supplier. The release of these drawings allows composite manufacturing of the A5 fuselage to begin at Cirrus Aircraft and is a significant advancement toward first customer deliveries this year."
Going back a number of posts on the page, and I see no mention of the weight increase exemption mentioned.
Zack
Zack
Ya, they've been moving forward with production related stuff at a furious pace in the last few months. They must know something we don't or they possess over the top confidence!
To the best of my knowledge, Icon never ever acknowledged or publicized their request for weight exemption. Not on Facebook, not anywhere. It was found long after filing by their competitor, Independent Aircraf, who went to the pains of designing to existing limits, and were upset. It was long enough for the original request for comment period expiring. After a brief outrage, the comments on the proposed rulemaking were re-opnened. Icon is still silent on this even though everyone who cares can easily know about the issue. And why would they comment? If they come out and say that they cannot deliver on their promises of LSA, there's going to be a massive deposit exodus and a wave of bad publicity outside of narrow aviation circles. If they keep silence, then it's just commentary in fringe forums like this one. The story is in media blackout, and that's to Icon's advantage. They will not mention it as long as they can.Originally Posted by Zack Baughman
Remember the deal with Lotus to design structural interior parts? Being a beginner in airplanes, I don't know how desperate for weight savings one has to be to turn to structural interior, this late in the game too. Nobody in the press paid slightest attention to that hint, they just regurgitated Icon's presser.
Your knowledge is absolutely correct zaitcev. The only place where I differ with you is with the fallout aspect if they don't get the excemption. In that event(which BTW I do not believe will happen), it's well speculated that Icon will go for certification in the Primary Category even though that goes against their marketing and target consumer philosophy and strategy. Approximately one-third of the total deposit holders(about 1000) are non-pilots so they'll probably only lose those or most of those and those few with medical issues.
Last edited by Floatsflyer; 01-23-2013 at 04:33 PM.
Honestly, I would have to say that I oppose this and any similar exemption requests. Otherwise, what's the point of the LSA category in the first place?
At 1,320 lbs (599 kg) for a landplane and 1,430 (649 kg) for a seaplane/amphibian, the LSA weight limits are already quite generous for two-seat aircraft of modest power and performance. Compare those with the European microlight regulations of 450 kg for a landplane and 495 kg for a seaplane/amphibian!
For example, the Volmer VJ-22 Sportsman, designed in the 1950s, comes in at 1,000 lbs empty and 1,500 lbs gross with a Continental C-85, Aeronca Champ wings and a fiberglass-covered plywood hull. With today's lighter but more powerful Rotax engine, modern composite materials, lighter instruments, etc. it just shouldn't be that hard to come in under 1,430 lbs.
Exemptions will simply encourage companies to push the limits to the point that LSA performance parameters will be so close to standard aircraft that the FAA might well simply eliminate the LSA category and Sport Pilot rating.
*******
Matthew Long, Editor
cluttonfred.info
A site for builders, owners and fans of Eric Clutton's FRED
and other safe, simple, affordable homebuilt aircraft
They're already down to no flaps and having to choose between retractable gear or power wing folding mechanism (sorry, can't have both).
Ryan Winslow
EAA 525529
Stinson 108-1 "Big Red", RV-7 under construction
I do not entirely agree with the view that LSA limits are "quite generous", and frankly comparison with Europeis even more dubious. European governments often do what they can to destroy personal aviation (Italians are particularly adept at that). If they limit something to 450 kg, it's not even a sign of sanity, let alone good regulatory policy. Most countries that have useful airplanes in this class actually regulate to 750 kg, with the only exception being Brazil that accepted another European limit of 600 kg. The 750kg countries would allow Cessna 150, which is not a flying fortress by any stretch.
80% of people that start GA flight training never finish it according to AOPA research. Maybe some of those well-healed non-pilots will find out the "Let's buy a cool airplane first and then become a pilot" wasn't as straightforward as they thought. ["Gee Honey, this is a bit more than just buying a "boat with wings"."]
Then a bunch of A-5s will come on the used market at a big price discount for the rest of us!
-Buzz
Late Monday 4/15/13, on the Federal Register website, an update to Icon's weight exemption request was posted:
http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketD...=FAA-2012-0514
The odd thing is that it does not specifically answer the exemption request but instead goes in to detail about the new FAA SLSA Strategic Plan. It would seem to bode well for Icon given that the plan calls for increased innovation and safety but with no precise mention of Icon its hard to tell what this is saying.
Any thoughts?
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote