Sport Pilot has left the OMB building.

eom

Juan Jimenez wrote:

eom

is that good news, or bad?

Juan Jimenez wrote:

eom

is that good news, or bad?

And what is eom?????

"G EddieA95" wrote in message
...
Juan Jimenez wrote:

eom

is that good news, or bad?

And what is eom?????
End Of Message
eom

..
"Richard Lamb" wrote in message ...
Juan Jimenez wrote:

eom

is that good news, or bad?


http://www.sportpilot.org/news/040713_sportpilot.html

--
Dan D.
http://www.ameritech.net/users/ddevillers/start.html


..

I though it was -30-

--
Cy Galley
Safety Programs Editor
EAA Sport Pilot

"Rob Turk" wrote in message
. nl...
"G EddieA95" wrote in message
...
Juan Jimenez wrote:

eom

is that good news, or bad?

And what is eom?????
End Of Message
eom

On Fri, 16 Jul 2004 23:39:47 GMT, Richard Lamb
wrote:

Juan Jimenez wrote:

eom

is that good news, or bad?

Yeah, did it go to the printer or the recycler?

--
dillon

When I was a kid, I thought the angel's name was Hark
and the horse's name was Bob.

Its good news. Its expected to be published in the federal register "in
a few days". It's gonna be probably THE topic at Oshkosh next week. As
soon as its published in the FR, we'll find out the details.

Hopefully it was accepted as proposed at a minimum (esp. the drivers
license medical), and maybe better (slightly higher gross weights to
include small production aircraft like 150/152's).

However, IMHO, if the drivers license medical isn't there, or is so
restricted in someway to make it worthless, then its a complete waste.

John

Well, looks like it's happening...

I've suddenly received a lot of inquiries about WHEN I'm going to put
the Texas Parasol into kit production. While the idea is tempting,
the amount of overhead involved in something like that (and the depth
of pockets required) is to me still prohibitive.

But as a plans built project, I think it will still qualify - easily.

I'm thinking that a plans project would qualify for LSA if the design
meets the LSA performance limits, and complies with the requirements
for an experimental airworthness certificate.

Refering back to the FAA's 'Amateur Built Aircraft Reference Material'
book, the guidelines are well defined.

There is a long check list that is used to determine of the project
would be eligible. This is the so called 51% rule - detailed in black
and white.

There is no mention of how complete the kit should be - materials or
parts wise - just the amount of labor required by the builder.



---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The following was clipped from the www.sportpilot.org web page.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The FAA currently issues two major types of airworthiness
certificates-
standard and special.

The special airworthiness certificate includes six categories-primary,
restricted,
limited, provisional, special flight permits, and experimental. We
propose to add
a seventh category of special airworthiness certificate-light-sport. You
could use
aircraft issued a special light-sport airworthiness certificate for
sport and
recreation, flight training, or rental.

The special airworthiness certificate would ensure that aircraft used
for these
purposes are designed and manufactured to an identified standard. The
FAA would
exclude gyroplanes for this certificate.

The FAA currently issues special experimental certificates for eight
purposes.
We propose to add a new purpose-to operate light-sport aircraft-for
issuing an
experimental certificate.

There would be three ways to get an experimental certificate for the
purpose
of operating light-sport aircraft. First, if you operate a light-sport
aircraft
that does not meet the existing definition of ultralight vehicle in 14
CFR 103.1,
you would have to apply for an experimental airworthiness certificate
for your
aircraft under this provision. You would have to apply to register your
aircraft
not later than 24 months after the effective date of the final rule. You
would
then have your aircraft inspected and an airworthiness certificate
issued not
later than 36 months after the effective date of the final rule. You
could use
aircraft with an airworthiness certificate issued for this experimental
purpose
for sport and recreation, and flight training. For a period of 3 years
after the
effective date if the final rule, you could operate these aircraft for
compensation
or hire, while conducting flight training.

Second, you could get an experimental airworthiness certificate for
an aircraft
you assembled from an eligible kit. You could use these aircraft only
for sport and
recreation, and flight training.

And finally, you could get an experimental airworthiness certificate
to operate
a light-sport aircraft if it previously had been issued a special,
light-sport aircraft
airworthiness certificate and you do not want to comply with the
operating limitations
associated with a special light-sport certificate. For example, you
could do this if
you wanted to alter the aircraft without the manufacturer's
authorization, or you
choose not to comply with the mandatory safety-of-flight actions.
You could use these aircraft only for sport and recreation, and flight
training.

"Richard Riley" wrote in message
...

What about the top speed limitation? That's going to be impossible to
enforce. It will split between underpowered airplanes, and people who
lie. It would have been so much simpler if they had just stuck to a
max wing loading spec. (not that you'll have a problem with the top
speed, but many, like the Sonex, will)

Here's the Sonex info. Looks like it will do just fine:

http://www.sonex-ltd.com/press_release_010401.html