Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 27

Thread: Light Sport

  1. #11
    robert l's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Location
    Heath Springs, S.C.
    Posts
    590
    Quote Originally Posted by DaleB View Post
    Dude... do NOT get me started on that. Please, you really don't want to hear it. Let's just say the rules don't have to make any sense, they just "are".
    Well, like I've said before; "Sometimes, just be's dat way" ! LOL

  2. #12
    dclaxon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Giffordl, IL
    Posts
    105
    Quote Originally Posted by martymayes View Post
    LSA rules were designed to accomplish a goal and being consistent with motor vehicle rules was not one of them.
    And it doesn't matter anyway, because as far as I'm concerned, they missed the goal they were designed to accomplish, and by a wide margin. It was supposed to make "affordable" aircraft possible, but someone has a WAAAAAY different definition of affordable than I have.

    Dave

  3. #13

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Alabama
    Posts
    2,236
    I'll take a stab at this, as I actually understand their thinking and why they arrived at the arbitrary number they did.

    Short version:

    The thing to remember in all of this is that the Light Sport Rules were never meant to be a substitute for the Private Pilot certificate, but something new and unique from it.

    Long version:

    While there was a lot said about "affordable aircraft" and "innovation" around Light Sport, the truth of the matter is that the FAA had a problem with ultralights.

    Ultralights were getting "fat" and pretty high performance with no real way to police it, and two seat ultralights, thanks to technological advances and some really smart people, were up and coming. No pilot certificate is required at all to pilot an ultralight, and no inspection of any sort was required on the aircraft itself.

    Pick any motivation one desires - a genuine concern for safety or an over powerful government agency seeking to wrap its tentacles around the last vestige of freedom in aviation - but the FAA looked around and saw how Europe handled light aircraft. Being Americans, they sought to adapt and improve them.

    The compromise to the fat ultralight problem was to come up with a new program that would codify pilot training with relaxed medical standards and determine a new class of aircraft to fit within it. The ultralight pilots could get hotter aircraft honestly, the training requirements weren't onerous, and the limitations matched what they were doing anyway.

    The actual upper gross weight, stall and cruise speeds, as well as other characteristics of the new Light Sport class were determined in conference starting from a blank sheet of paper. Current aircraft - both amateur built and certified - were not considered in the negotiations. Indeed, the 1320 pound gross weight number is actually higher than what was originally suggested. Big fans of metric measurements in that room, as it's a nice round 600 kg.

    The LSA standards are universal, though, so if a production aircraft fell within the criteria it was open to Light Sport rules. Champs and Cubs were in, the Cessna 150 was out. It is what it is.

    Furthermore, the FAA wisely decided that Private Pilot certificate holders could fly under Light Sport rules. This includes the medical portion - a PPL with an expired Class III physical could legally pilot an LSA aircraft with just his driver's license to cover it.

    [edit]

    The Light Sport program's goals worked a treat for me. I built my LSA compliant aircraft for less than 15,000 USD, and my pilot training cost around 5,000. So for 20K I'm a pilot up in the air. Even I can afford that.
    Last edited by Frank Giger; 10-03-2017 at 12:16 PM.
    The opinions and statements of this poster are largely based on facts and portray a possible version of the actual events.

  4. #14
    DaleB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    KMLE
    Posts
    654
    Oh, heck... one constant in life is that ANYWHERE you have to draw a line, there will always be "edge cases" that fall on the wrong side of the line for no really good reason. And those people will always be a little disgruntled and feel a bit ill-used, whether they actually are or not. In this particular case, I just happen to be one of those people. Light Sport or Basic Med - take your pick.
    Measure twice, cut once...
    scratch head, shrug, shim to fit.

    Flying an RV-12. I am building a Fisher Celebrity, slowly.

  5. #15

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    WA
    Posts
    1,205
    No logical reason why there can't be more "lines" for different levels of pilot skill.
    The Light Sport rules and the unfortunate ending of the trainer excemption has resulted in a lack of ultralight trainers in the 400 pound range. A net reduction of safety for the lightest end.
    Last edited by Bill Berson; 10-03-2017 at 05:20 PM.

  6. #16
    robert l's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Location
    Heath Springs, S.C.
    Posts
    590
    Very good explanation Frank, makes perfect sense. Now if I can find a 150 that only weighs 1320 lbs. LOL
    BTW, What did you build!
    Bob

  7. #17

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Alabama
    Posts
    2,236
    Quote Originally Posted by Bill Berson View Post
    No logical reason why there can't be more "lines" for different levels of pilot skill.
    The Light Sport rules and the unfortunate ending of the trainer excemption has resulted in a lack of ultralight trainers in the 400 pound range. A net reduction of safety for the lightest end.
    Where the FAA screwed people over from the ultralight world was by NOT telling them well in advance that flight time they logged in ultralights (CFR 61.52) counts towards either Sport Pilot or Private Pilot certificates - and that includes for Sport Pilot CFI ratings. I don't know any ultralight pilots who actually log their flight time in the prescribed manner AND has those logs certified by an FAA recognized ultralight organization.

    An experienced, logged ultralight pilot only needs 15 hours of dual training, as his solo work has probably already been done. He needs to take the written test, of course, and the check ride, but figuring 250 bucks an hour (instructor plus rental), 100 for the test, and 200 for the check ride (if the FAA isn't around to do it), we're talking just 4,050 bucks for the Sport Pilot ticket. Just five years ago I spent 200 bucks an hour (instructor plus rental), so mine would have been a grand less.

    The somewhat naive notion on the FAA's part is that all those ultralight instructors would gleefully become SP-CFI's and just continue on. They totally misread the ultralight community on that score.

    [edit]

    There's a builder's thread - soup to peanuts (and a wreck and repairs) in the Homebuilder's section of the forum here - of my little Nieuport 11.
    Last edited by Frank Giger; 10-03-2017 at 09:30 PM.
    The opinions and statements of this poster are largely based on facts and portray a possible version of the actual events.

  8. #18

    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    1,609
    Frank logged time flying an ultralight did NOT count towards any certificate. Never has never will. If the FAA would have allowed this then things may be a bit different from what we see today.

  9. #19
    Joda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Oshkosh, Wisconsin, United States
    Posts
    226
    Frank,

    You make a lot of good points, and give a pretty good historical overview. Here are a few more points to add to the discussion....

    Quote Originally Posted by Frank Giger View Post
    While there was a lot said about "affordable aircraft" and "innovation" around Light Sport, the truth of the matter is that the FAA had a problem with ultralights.
    This is quite true. The discussions that ended up morphing into what became the Sport pilot/Light-sport aircraft rules originally were focused solely on solving the problem FAA was having with so many two-seat "ultralights" being operated under the flight training exemption that were not actually being used for flight training. At one meeting I attended, we were given an industry statistic showing that there were approximately 10 two-seat "ultralights" sold for every one legal single-seat ultralight. Certainly no need for that many "trainers", so they knew something was up that they needed to deal with.

    Quote Originally Posted by Frank Giger View Post
    The compromise to the fat ultralight problem was to come up with a new program that would codify pilot training with relaxed medical standards and determine a new class of aircraft to fit within it. The ultralight pilots could get hotter aircraft honestly, the training requirements weren't onerous, and the limitations matched what they were doing anyway.

    The actual upper gross weight, stall and cruise speeds, as well as other characteristics of the new Light Sport class were determined in conference starting from a blank sheet of paper. Current aircraft - both amateur built and certified - were not considered in the negotiations. Indeed, the 1320 pound gross weight number is actually higher than what was originally suggested. Big fans of metric measurements in that room, as it's a nice round 600 kg.
    The discussion was originally focused solely on the ultralight issue, and didn't involve certification of new aircraft, nor did it include any discussion on inclusion (or exclusion) of existing aircraft. In fact, the initial discussion placed the maximum gross weight at only 900 lbs! As discussions continued, the maximum weight got raised to 1000 lbs, and then 1100 lbs. By the time the Notice of Proposed Rule Making (NPRM) was published, the maximum gross weight had crept up to 1232 lbs. As we know, the final rule raised the maximum gross weight to what we have now, 1320 lbs. It could have been much lower!

    The fact that the rule was written so that any existing aircraft that meets the LSA definition could be operated by sport pilots is really a bonus, since the FAA could have easily limited the sport pilot to flying only those aircraft that were specifically certificated as LSA. And no matter where you draw the line, there will be some aircraft that's just a bit over the limit, and people will say "why didn't they make it so that the [insert aircraft] was eligible?" But again, they weren't discussing existing aircraft, and the fact that they are included is a bonus that shouldn't be sneered at. Is the rule perfect? Probably not, but it certainly is a step in the right direction. As time goes on it may be possible to get the FAA to take a fresh look at the SP/LSA rule package and make appropriate modifications. Just keep flying safely so the data will so that SP/LSA is working!
    Cheers!

    Joe

  10. #20

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Alabama
    Posts
    2,236
    Quote Originally Posted by 1600vw View Post
    Frank logged time flying an ultralight did NOT count towards any certificate. Never has never will. If the FAA would have allowed this then things may be a bit different from what we see today.
    We're both right and wrong.

    Looks like it counted if one logged before 2013, when they ended the permission. Why they put a time limit on it is beyond me.

    https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-id...#se14.2.61_152

    §61.52 Use of aeronautical experience obtained in ultralight vehicles.
    (a) Before January 31, 2012, a person may use aeronautical experience obtained in an ultralight vehicle to meet the requirements for the following certificates and ratings issued under this part:

    (1) A sport pilot certificate.

    (2) A flight instructor certificate with a sport pilot rating;

    (3) A private pilot certificate with a weight-shift-control or powered parachute category rating.

    (b) Before January 31, 2012, a person may use aeronautical experience obtained in an ultralight vehicle to meet the provisions of §61.69.

    (c) A person using aeronautical experience obtained in an ultralight vehicle to meet the requirements for a certificate or rating specified in paragraph (a) of this section or the requirements of paragraph (b) of this section must—

    (1) Have been a registered ultralight pilot with an FAA-recognized ultralight organization when that aeronautical experience was obtained;

    (2) Document and log that aeronautical experience in accordance with the provisions for logging aeronautical experience specified by an FAA-recognized ultralight organization and in accordance with the provisions for logging pilot time in aircraft as specified in §61.51;

    (3) Obtain the aeronautical experience in a category and class of vehicle corresponding to the rating or privilege sought; and

    (4) Provide the FAA with a certified copy of his or her ultralight pilot records from an FAA-recognized ultralight organization, that —

    (i) Document that he or she is a registered ultralight pilot with that FAA-recognized ultralight organization; and

    (ii) Indicate that he or she is recognized to operate the category and class of aircraft for which sport pilot privileges are sought.

    [Doc. No. FAA-2001-11133, 69 FR 44865, July 27, 2004, as amended by Amdt. 61-125, 75 FR 5220, Feb. 1, 2010]
    Joe,

    I am just wowed at the creation and implementation of Light Sport rules - it's one case where the government came up with a pretty darn good solution to a problem and even solved a few more that were ancillary to the issue.
    It made aviation a whole lot more affordable to me, and fit my needs as ideally as if I had written them myself.
    Last edited by Sam Oleson; 10-05-2017 at 09:10 AM.
    The opinions and statements of this poster are largely based on facts and portray a possible version of the actual events.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

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