Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: Making LSA's Safe

  1. #1
    Montana_Jim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Montana
    Posts
    1

    Making LSA's Safe

    My biggest complaint with the whole LSA requirements is the designers use the FAA's average pilot weight of 190 lbs. In my humble opinion, the FAA guys failed to comprehend that the 190 lbs is a "middle" number and there are heavier folks. Basically they are discriminating against the heavier folks on that number.


    I would like to see them revise the LSA rules to state that max gross weight of the plane sans pilot and passenger is 1320. Allow the plane to carry a total of 500 lbs between pilot and passenger with 50 pounds of luggage. That still makes it lighter than a 172 with an improved safety margin. Bottom line, you could actually take two people safely with full fuel. Something you can not do currently in most LSA's if you and your passenger are over the 190 lb limit.



    We need to fix this.

  2. #2
    Dana's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    927
    It's not just an LSA thing... have you ever tried to squeeze two big guys into a C-150 (which is not an LSA)? Or into, say, a T-Craft or Aeronca (which, though LSA compliant, existed long before the LSA rules)? One could say that it's physics and not the FAA that discriminates against big guys. Ultralights have the same problem. You have to draw the line somewhere, and if I'm not mistaken, the LSA rules were crafted to have similar limits to the European microlight category.

  3. #3
    Matt Gonitzke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Wichita, KS
    Posts
    332
    The FAA will not re-define maximum gross weight in such a way, as that would create a huge gray area (not to mention it would be different from the definition of maximum gross weight for every other category of aircraft). The aircraft is designed to the maximum gross weight, so if you re-define it such that it does not include the pilot or passenger, then it is not maximum gross weight anymore. How would the designers know what maximum weight to design it to? Each company would design the aircraft for a different pilot/passenger weight of their choice, and there probably wouldn't be any way of knowing what it was without consulting the designers. This is why maximum gross weight is defined the way it is...

  4. #4
    rosiejerryrosie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Carlisle, PA
    Posts
    392
    Montana Jim has erred, as so many do, in not understanding the weight limit placed on LSA. The weight described is the MAXIMUM GROSS TAKEOFF WEIGHT as designed into the airplane (ie the recommended maximum take off weight allowed without seriously endangering the components of the aircraft). It is not the maximum weight of the airplane. For example, the empty weight of an Aeronca 65LA is around 920 pounds (depending on how much extra equipment has been added to the original airplane) and the Max Gross Takeoff Weight is 1150 pounds. 1150 pounds is a design limitation - not a limitation imposed by the FAA.
    Cheers,
    Jerry

    NC22375
    65LA out of 07N Pennsylvania

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Marietta, GA
    Posts
    963
    Jim is asking for a gross weight increase, which is an entirely different issue than fixing a safety concern.

    Gross weight is only a safety concern if you choose to exceed it, and at that point it is a pilot choice issue, not an airplane problem.

    I understand the payload/range/gross issue, but that faces every segment of the aircraft market. If you need more payload/range/speed, you need to move up a category.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •