Re: Effect of Light Sport on General Aviation

[Gilan]

I think you haven't seen that many message threads on SP/LSA because they
get so heated like discussions on religion or politics. Maybe folks are
burned out arguing over the subject. Of course there really isn't anything
to argue about. I think the new LSA will be a good thing and have a message
group dedicated to just that subject.
--
Have a good day and stay out of the trees!
See ya on Sport Aircraft group
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Sport_Aircraft/



Florida Flying Gators
http://www.flyinggators.com

[Jay Honeck]

> I think you haven't seen that many message threads on SP/LSA because they
> get so heated like discussions on religion or politics.

Anything that expands General Aviation at the "Joe Lunchbox" level is a good
thing, IMHO.

With the passing of the World War II generation, we're losing the pilot
population. If we don't make flying more affordable and available --
soon -- the infrastructure of G.A. will continue to crumble beneath our
feet.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[RobertR237]

In article et>, "Gilan"
> writes:

>
>I think you haven't seen that many message threads on SP/LSA because they
>get so heated like discussions on religion or politics. Maybe folks are
>burned out arguing over the subject. Of course there really isn't anything
>to argue about. I think the new LSA will be a good thing and have a message
>group dedicated to just that subject.
>--
>Have a good day and stay out of the trees!
> See ya on Sport Aircraft group
>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Sport_Aircraft/
>
>
>
>Florida Flying Gators
>http://www.flyinggators.com
>
>

It's time to just wait and see. If it happens then we will see what sort of
results will come of it.


Bob Reed
www.kisbuild.r-a-reed-assoc.com (KIS Builders Site)
KIS Cruiser in progress...Slow but steady progress....

"Ladies and Gentlemen, take my advice,
pull down your pants and Slide on the Ice!"
(M.A.S.H. Sidney Freedman)

[James M. Knox]

(RobertR237) wrote in
:

> It's time to just wait and see. If it happens then we will see what
> sort of results will come of it.

I asked Phil Boyer what he thought of it, namely would it help attract new
pilots. He said essentially no, he expected pretty close to zero (and
admittedly any is better than none) new pilots.

What he *did* expect, and was pleased with, was an increase in the total
number of active pilots from passage of SLA. These would come from
returning pilots who had lost their medical, plus additional retention of
the older pilot population as they keep flying longer.

As you say, we'll see.

-----------------------------------------------
James M. Knox
TriSoft ph 512-385-0316
1109-A Shady Lane fax 512-366-4331
Austin, Tx 78721
-----------------------------------------------

[RobertR237]

In article >, "James M. Knox"
> writes:

>
>> It's time to just wait and see. If it happens then we will see what
>> sort of results will come of it.
>
>I asked Phil Boyer what he thought of it, namely would it help attract new
>pilots. He said essentially no, he expected pretty close to zero (and
>admittedly any is better than none) new pilots.
>
>What he *did* expect, and was pleased with, was an increase in the total
>number of active pilots from passage of SLA. These would come from
>returning pilots who had lost their medical, plus additional retention of
>the older pilot population as they keep flying longer.
>
>As you say, we'll see.
>
>-----------------------------------------------
>James M. Knox
>

That is the same benefit that I have seen coming out of SA but it could make
getting into flying a little cheaper which could also be a plus.

Bob Reed
www.kisbuild.r-a-reed-assoc.com (KIS Builders Site)
KIS Cruiser in progress...Slow but steady progress....

"Ladies and Gentlemen, take my advice,
pull down your pants and Slide on the Ice!"
(M.A.S.H. Sidney Freedman)

[Morgans]

"James M. Knox" > wrote in message
...
> (RobertR237) wrote in
> :
>
> > It's time to just wait and see. If it happens then we will see what
> > sort of results will come of it.
>
> I asked Phil Boyer what he thought of it, namely would it help attract new
> pilots. He said essentially no, he expected pretty close to zero (and
> admittedly any is better than none) new pilots.
>
> What he *did* expect, and was pleased with, was an increase in the total
> number of active pilots from passage of SLA. These would come from
> returning pilots who had lost their medical, plus additional retention of
> the older pilot population as they keep flying longer.
>
> As you say, we'll see.
>
> -----------------------------------------------
> James M. Knox
--
Jim in NC


I think he is wrong. I, for example, will be one!

[Brent Rehmel]

"James M. Knox" > wrote in message
> I asked Phil Boyer what he thought of it, namely would it help attract new
> pilots. He said essentially no, he expected pretty close to zero (and
> admittedly any is better than none) new pilots.

I don't know. I would think that being able to buy a brand new Zodiac 601
XL, ready-to-fly for $42,500 would be welcome news to flight schools. The
Rotax engine will also burn 90 octane mogas which should be welcome as well.
The Zodiac has aluminum skin and can be tied down, rather than hangared; it
should work almost identically to a Piper Tomahawk for less money. Perhaps
this could translate to more introductory rides and perhaps to a larger
rental fleet.

I think this could compliment local EAA chapters since this same plane can
be assembled from a kit. The really nice part of this is that with Light
Sport, the kit could be more than 49% assembled by the factory. With more
complete assembly and higher volumes, the cost could also drop a bit as
efficiency would increase.

[Morgans]

"sleepy6" > wrote >
>
> Interesting that you are so positive in your decision when you can't be
> sure what the requirements will be until the final version is
> published:)
>
> What happens if the DOT inserts the medical requirements like they did
> for Rec pilot?
>
> It makes sense to see the final version BEFORE you invest any time or
> money in Sport Pilot.
>

Definitely. I just really really hope that it goes my way.

Interestingly, about the time it comes into being, I may finally be able to
get a medical. My back surgery seems to be successful, but the recovery is
long. That was the only thing standing in my way.
--
Jim in NC

[James M. Knox]

"Brent Rehmel" > wrote in
news:dNpbb.540612$o%2.237741@sccrnsc02:

> I don't know. I would think that being able to buy a brand new Zodiac
> 601 XL, ready-to-fly for $42,500 would be welcome news to flight
> schools. The Rotax engine will also burn 90 octane mogas which should
> be welcome as well. The Zodiac has aluminum skin and can be tied down,
> rather than hangared; it should work almost identically to a Piper
> Tomahawk for less money. Perhaps this could translate to more
> introductory rides and perhaps to a larger rental fleet.

Hopefully you will be correct. A significant part of the per hour cost of
a rental is the "return on investment" - especially for the rare school
that has nicer looking (newer) planes.

It's not entirely clear yet exactly how all this could translate for those
pursuing a regular PP-ASEL. For example, could you do all your training in
a Zodiac certificated under Light Sport but still get a regular PP ticket?

-----------------------------------------------
James M. Knox
TriSoft ph 512-385-0316
1109-A Shady Lane fax 512-366-4331
Austin, Tx 78721
-----------------------------------------------

[Brent Rehmel]

"James M. Knox" > wrote in message
...

> It's not entirely clear yet exactly how all this could translate for those
> pursuing a regular PP-ASEL. For example, could you do all your training
in
> a Zodiac certificated under Light Sport but still get a regular PP ticket?

Yes, you can. The main distinction is the Instructor's rating. You can train
in a Light Sport aircraft under a Light Sport instructor and get a Light
Sport Pilot's License. However, if your instructor has a regular instructor
rating then the aircraft is promoted and counted the same as a certified
aircraft; you could get a full PP License from a regular instructor in a
Light Sport aircraft. If your instructor only has a Light Sport instructor
rating he can only train in Light Sport aircraft and you can only get a
Light Sport license from him.

However, even if you train under a Light Sport Instructor, there is nothing
to stop you from adding the extra hours and extending your rating to a full
Private Pilots License. Basically, all of your flight hours from Light Sport
count toward a PP License. There would be some additional ground school and
a little more instructor time (with a regular instructor) since Light Sport
does not include night flying or landing at controlled airports. You would
also need a medical since Light Sport doesn't require this. In other words,
most people solo in 10 - 20 hours and then need to fly additional hours to
have 40 before they can get a PP License. If you had 40 hours logged flight
time under Light Sport then you would only need the extra instruction but
not additional flight time to get a PP License.

The reason this is significant is because in the past we have had only two
kinds of aircraft: certified and experimental. I don't believe you are
allowed to do instruction in an experimental, but even if you can, this
wouldn't be practical anyway since a flight school would have to asemble 51%
of each aircraft. In contrast, Light Sport becomes a third classification;
you can buy a non-certified Light Sport aircraft already assembled and
flyable. And, you are allowed to do instruction in this aircraft.
Interestingly enough, some of the characteristics of Light Sport aircraft
get promoted depending on the Pilot's rating. So, for example, a Light Sport
pilot flying a Light Sport aircraft cannot fly at night, however, if the
pilot has a PP license then the aircraft can. In other words, the aircraft
is limited by the pilot's rating, with a PP License you can treat the
aircraft the same as a certified aircraft.

This should provide exactly what we need which is a step in between
ultralights and certified aircraft. For example, right now, ultralight time
counts for nothing. However, many ultralights could be designated Light
Sport and the time could actually be logged after some intial Instructor
time. Yes, there is a distinction between weight shift and regular control;
you could not, for example, obtain a Light Sport License with only weight
shift time and then fly regular aircraft, you would need time and an
instructor endorsement similar to a type rating.

[Brent Rehmel]

"James M. Knox" > wrote in message

> It's not entirely clear yet exactly how all this could translate for those
> pursuing a regular PP-ASEL. For example, could you do all your training
in
> a Zodiac certificated under Light Sport but still get a regular PP ticket?

In case my previous post is confusing, I'll try to make this a bit more
orderly.

1. Ultralight. Time in an ultralight can be logged and used toward a sport
pilot certificate.The ultralight would not need to be classed as a
light-sport aircraft. 20 hours of logged ultralight time with proper
instruction would make the pilot eligible for a sport pilot certificate.
Ultralight time cannot however be used for a higher rating than sport pilot.
This would make most current ultralight pilots eligible for a sport pilot
certificate with only a little ground school and an instructor's
endorsement.

2. Sport pilot. You can receive a sport pilot certificate with 20 hours
flight time. With 150 logged hours and 100 hours as pilot in command, you
can apply for a flight instructor certificate with sport pilot rating; this
is not the same as a regular instructor certificate. This is basically a
sport pilot with an instructor rating; and this instructor can only give
instruction for sport pilot. The distinction is that this instructor could
have 100 hours in an ultralight counting as part of his hours and only needs
50 hours in a regular aircraft.

3. Higher ratings. All logged time and instruction for sport pilot is
credited to higher ratings.

4. You should be able to obtain a private pilot certificate in a light-sport
aircraft (like a Zodiac) if the instructor has a regular instructor rating
and not merely a sport pilot instructor rating. Because the pilot has a
rating higher than sport pilot, the aircraft is counted the same as a
certified aircraft.

5. A private pilot certificate encompasses sport pilot; so, the holder of a
private pilot's license is already qualified for everything in sport pilot
except as regards specific type ratings. For example, to fly a powered
chute, the private pilot would still need instruction for a powered chute
and a logbook endorsement from reviewer who was not the instructor. This is
basically the same as is currently done for sailplanes, lighter than air,
and hot air balloons. The new regulations simply add weight shift and
powered chutes as distinct types.

Similarly, a regular instructors rating encompasses the sport pilot
instructors rating. Regular instructors can give instruction for sport
pilots without any additional requirement other than a minimum of 5 hours
logged pilot in command time in the specific make and model used for
instruction.

[Morgans]

"Brent Rehmel"

> I don't believe you are
> allowed to do instruction in an experimental, \

You can, for example buy a homebuilt, them hire an instructor to give you
dual in your homebuilt.
--
Jim in NC

[Brent Rehmel]

"Morgans" > wrote in message
> You can, for example buy a homebuilt, them hire an instructor to give you
> dual in your homebuilt.

Okay, that's what I thought. A flight school couldn't use one. This is quite
a difference because flight schools will be able to use light-sport
aircraft.

[Eric Miller]

"Brent Rehmel" > wrote
> I don't believe you are
> allowed to do instruction in an experimental, but even if you can, this
> wouldn't be practical anyway since a flight school would have to asemble
51%
> of each aircraft.

As an instructor you can instruct in your own homebuilt with an EAA
exemption... but not primary instruction.

Check out "Experimental Aircraft Rentals":
http://www.avweb.com/news/homeblts/182021-1.html

Eric

[Gig Giacona]

But.... A sport pilot certificate is only for a particular model of sport
aircraft. If I get a SP Cert for a Zenith 601XL I can't go fly a Zenith 701
though both should qualify under SP.


"Brent Rehmel" > wrote in message
et...
>
> "Eric Miller" > wrote in message
>
> > The proposed regs as written are still somewhat vague about the ATP
> > weight-shift category and class...
> > Maybe no one meets the MINIMUM weight requirements! =D
>
> It doesn't really matter since current ultralights count as time for a
> sport-pilot certificate. So, this should encompass everything now flying.
>
>

[Rick Pellicciotti]

"Gig Giacona" > wrote in message
...
> But.... A sport pilot certificate is only for a particular model of sport
> aircraft. If I get a SP Cert for a Zenith 601XL I can't go fly a Zenith
701
> though both should qualify under SP.
>
You can fly the 701 by simply getting a check-out and endorsement in it once
you have a SP license. This is similar to getting a tail-wheel endorsement
on your PPL after you have been flying 152/172 for your entire career.

Rick Pellicciotti

[Ace Pilot]

"James M. Knox" > wrote in message:
> I asked Phil Boyer what he thought of it, namely would it help attract new
> pilots. He said essentially no, he expected pretty close to zero (and
> admittedly any is better than none) new pilots.
>
> What he *did* expect, and was pleased with, was an increase in the total
> number of active pilots from passage of SLA. These would come from
> returning pilots who had lost their medical, plus additional retention of
> the older pilot population as they keep flying longer.
>
> As you say, we'll see.
>
> -----------------------------------------------
> James M. Knox
> TriSoft ph 512-385-0316
> 1109-A Shady Lane fax 512-366-4331
> Austin, Tx 78721
> -----------------------------------------------

Keep in mind that AOPA and EAA are very competitive over the Sport
Pilot initiative. EAA views it as “their” concept and are
positioning themselves to take full credit for lobbying for and
obtaining all of the perceived benefits, while emphasizing to their
membership that AOPA, in comparison, has done little to advance the
whole idea. At the same time, AOPA views the concept as mostly
benefiting ultralight pilots – a segment of the pilot community
that AOPA has traditionally shunned. The only benefit AOPA sees is the
driver’s license medical, which AOPA tried to extend to the
Recreational Pilot certificate and failed to do so.

So it is not surprising to hear Phil Boyer making statements that
downplay the Sport Pilot rule, except for the part that he has lobbied
for.

[Brent Rehmel]

"Bryan Martin" > wrote in message
...
> in article , James M. Knox at
> wrote on 9/22/03 9:38 AM:
>
> > For example, could you do all your training in
> > a Zodiac certificated under Light Sport but still get a regular PP
ticket?
>
> Not without a night flight restriction.

Bryan, what are you talking about; what night flight restriction? There is
no night flight restriction when a pilot with a private pilots license or
higher gets into a light-sport aircraft. That restriction only applies when
the pilot in command has a sport pilot certificate. We are assuming that the
intructor is a regular instructor and not a sport pilot instructor; if the
instructor were sport pilot then the night restriction would apply.