Icon A5 Request For Weight Increase Exemption Status

[kmhd1]

A new document was posted today (5/13/13) by the USDOT / FAA concerning the Icon weight exemption request :

http://www.regulations.gov/#!documen...2012-0514-0123

Below is what the pdf contained:

RECORD OF CONTACT WITH PETITIONER
Reference Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2012-0514

On May 7, 2013, at 0900 CDT, Pat Mullen, Steve Thompson, and Wes Ryan of the FAA Small Airplane Directorate had a conversation via telephone with ICON Aircraft Vice President of Engineering, Mr. Matthew Gionta. Mr. Gionta sought clarification of an April 25, 2013, FAA letter that requested additional information in support of the FAA’s analysis of ICON Aircraft’s petition for exemption for the Model A5. Mr. Gionta sought clarification of the first sub-bullet under the first main bullet on Page 2 of the April 25, 2013 FAA letter, which reads:

• A description of the manner in which ICON Aircraft confirmed the Model A5 meets the requirements of those § 23.221(a)(2) standards that encompass other Part 23 sections which differ from the consensus standards for light-sport aircraft, i.e.:

− In confirming the Model A5 meets the requirements of § 23.221(a)(2)(i) and § 23.221(a)(2)(ii) , did ICON Aircraft use the wings level stall maneuvers of ASTM International Standard F2245, or those of 14 CFR § 23.201?

Mr. Gionta said that because § 23.221(a)(2)(ii) is not related to wings level stalls, this sub-bullet of the FAA letter appeared to be a mistake. The FAA explained that the requested information pertains to the wings level stall conditions ICON Aircraft used in setting up the tests of § 23.221(a)(2)(ii). The FAA noted the portion of § 23.221(a)(2)(ii) that references the power and airplane configuration requirements of § 23.201.

Mr. Gionta said the FAA’s clarification was helpful and that ICON Aircraft would supply the requested information.

[Floatsflyer]

After trying to read that, my only response is I need clarification of the clarification. I never learned to speak government.

[kmhd1]

Agreed. Hopefully the actual conversation between the parties contained a bit more useful information...

[rwanttaja]

Nahhh. All the references to stuff like "§ 23.221(a)(2)(i)" have to be carefully parsed when you read them, but it'd be very difficult to write an unambiguous response without them. I'm not saying it's easy to read, but the way it's worded, it doesn't leave much leeway for misinterpretation...accidental or otherwise. Icon certainly understood it, and that's all that matters.

Ron Wanttaja

[kayla95]

After trying to read that, my only response is I need clarification of the clarification. I never learned to speak government.

Would you care to comment on my post or direct me to where i should post about icon . Kayla95 page11 thanks

[Floatsflyer]

Would you care to comment on my post or direct me to where i should post about icon . Kayla95 page11 thanks

Hi Kayla95,

Re your post #106 here: When I first viewed that spin demonstration a year ago, I was only focused on the entire aircraft and did not see any particular tail flutter. Your question encouraged me to look closer at it again and your astute observation appears to confirm that flutter is indeed apparent.

I don't know why your communications with Icon became silent after you mentioned it to whomever you were in contact with about buying one. I'm going to assume that your conversations were with a sales person who's only responsibility/goal is to try to sell you an Icon A5. Perhaps he was intending to forward your inquiry to someone who was far better qualified to answer but he dropped the ball.

All I can tell you, from my own experience with Icon, is that they don't shy away from criticsm or controversial subjects concerning their aircraft. When I learned that they were eliminating flaps, I emailed them to voice my displeasure and concern. They responded quickly saying that one of their staff would contact me to arrange a time/date to discuss the subject on the phone. That phone conversation took place within a few days. He spoke his piece and I spoke mine and I concluded by saying I hoped that they would reconsider their position. Well, I don't know if this conversation alone had any influence on any decision making but within a few months the flaps were back on.

I am neither an aerodynamicst or aero engineer or anything remotely close to either, so I'm therefore completely unqualified to provide an explanation for the apparent tail flutter. However, there are people on this forum who possibly can and so I'm attaching the link for the demo(can be seen at about 2:25 in).

I also want to tell you that another direct experience with Icon did not go as well. I had the opportunity to talk to CEO Hawkins at their booth at Oshkosh a few years ago. While we were both standing next to the mock-up he answered my questions and listened politely to some comments and suggestions. The exchange was a good one I thought. I asked him if I could try the airplane on for fit and comfort by sitting in it. He responded by asking if I had put down a deposit. I said no, and he said, then you can't sit in it. Not expecting this, I soon recovered by asking if he was being serious. He said he was and smirked. Trying not to be confrontational, I said he he had a lot to learn about selling and influencing the sales of airplanes and let him know that I would never make a blind commitment to buy without at least sitting in his plane and having a demo flight. I then just left feeling quite sour and 2nd class about the entire experience. But on an emotional level I love the airplane.

http://youtu.be/bsQcfzNWJWc

[MEdwards]

your astute observation appears to confirm that flutter is indeed apparent.

How would one recognize the difference between tail flutter (which I think is an unstable situation that tends to increase in magnitude until something breaks) and just vibration caused by the stall buffet? If they were sure it was the latter, seems like they should have replied to that effect immediately.

[Bill Greenwood]

Floats, the CEO probably did you a favor by being impolite when you asked to sit in the demo. His rudeness saved you any chance of spending money with people like that. Better to keep it and/or use it with good folks who have proven airplanes. I don't know of any pie that doesn't taste better on the ground than in the air.

Years ago, the CAF had a P-47 on display at Midland that was whole, but really needed some tender care which equates to money.
I was and am a lifetime member of CAF since the 80's but I don't own or wear a uniform. I went up to the old guy, who looked about like the old white conservative southern not so good ole boys who make up much of the organization. I asked a little about the plane and then asked if I could sit in it. He told me no, and said something like the planes were too important or too fragile to let the public in them. It certainly was not in pristine condition, didn't have any new paint or fancy avionics that might be fragile. I could have gone to get some of the top guys like Lefty and gotten to sit in it. But instead I just walked away and any idea of my sponsoring it went with me. To be honest, I wasn't all that taken with a big plane like that, but I had the $5000, and maybe even $10,000. But that guy couldn't sell ice in the desert, and I know that for years it was short on sponsors. Linda Finch did sponsor it some and flew it a bit. I know that not all the CAF guys have such a selfish attitude as that one, and there have been efforts to broaden the base, with some limited success.

Another time there was a guy in Ft. Lauderdale that had one of the former Dominican Mustangs advertised for sale. I phoned him, set up a time to see the plane and went down to Florida and he never even bothered to show up. So once again, I and my checkbook left. I don't think I would have brought the plane outright, but I very well might have put down a substantial deposit with a partner. He called me the next week when he heard that I had come to the airport and said he didn't know that I was serious; not even really an apology.
I grew up in Texas where when you give your word it is supposed to mean something, and I learned a lesson that this doesn't apply to lots of other people in other places especially about money. There are a lot of people whose honesty is variable and in inverse proportion to how much money is involved.

[Floatsflyer]

Bill, you're being very polite by using the word "impolite" to describe Hawkins behavior. At the time(and still as I recall it) it felt more like you're nobody because you haven't bought one, so f**k you and don't come back until you're prepared to do so. Big ego meets arrogant, pompous prick. I think I'll go take a shower again.

[Bill Berson]

Would you care to comment on my post or direct me to where i should post about icon . Kayla95 page11 thanks

That wasn't flutter ( as i saw it in video) it was normal tail buffeting in a stall. Tail buffeting, caused by the T - tail entering the edge of the wing wake in slow, high angle of attack flight, is desirable in that it warns the pilot of the stall. Flutter is high frequency and would not be tolerated for certification.

Having said that, I think promoting an airplane as spin resistant at idle power is a complete joke.
What good is spin resistance at idle power?