Opinions wanted please on purchase or rental of LSA

drseti · Post by **drseti** » Sun Sep 11, 2011 8:17 pm

rsteele wrote:Owning your plane while learning is probably going to save you some money. You will fly more often, because your costs are mostly fixed and you won't feel the need to take a loan for every lesson. Flying more often will cause you to learn faster, speeding up the whole process.

All good points, Ron. One thing to check out in advance, though: many CFIs decline to instruct in an E-AB. So, Bob needs to make sure whatever plane he's considering comes equipped with a cadre of instructors!

shasta · Post by **shasta** » Sun Sep 11, 2011 8:44 pm

drseti thanks for the link on the other thread. It makes sense now. I remember reading earlier, on Rainbow's website, that you could not do annuals on homebuilts. It did not make sense to me then but now it clicks. I was not thinking of them as two different classes.

On a related not I see quite a few of the newer type Kitfoxes on Barnstormers are being built LSA compliant at 1320 pounds gross, instead of the 1550 they can be rated. I think that is probably a pretty good idea for the builders as it opens up quite a few more potential buyers if they ever want to sell them.

drseti · Post by **drseti** » Sun Sep 11, 2011 8:55 pm

shasta wrote:I see quite a few of the newer type Kitfoxes on Barnstormers are being built LSA compliant at 1320 pounds gross, instead of the 1550 they can be rated.

That would make them Sport Pilot eligible (a good thing, to be sure), but does not automatically make them LSAs! Whether a plane is an E-LSA or an E-AB is determined by the type of Airworthiness Certificate it was issued -- nothing else. So (to repeat a previously made point), be sure to check the Airworthiness Certificate before assuming who can or cannot maintain or inspect a particular airplane.

rsteele · Post by **rsteele** » Mon Sep 12, 2011 11:46 am

I think what's being demonstrated here, which won't come as a surprise to anyone that's been around SP/LSA for more than an hour: ITS TOO COMPLICATED!
None of the previous discuss even talks about Part 23 "plain old normal airplanes", which the owner can to very little maintenance on.

Some home built kits, notably the Vans RV12, can be built as either E-LSA or E-AB. I'm not sure if Kitfox are doing this or not. Last I knew Kitfoxen were all E-AB. But things change.
You can have three identical planes, from propeller to the elevator, that are completely different in the eyes of the FAA. (E-AB, E-LSA, S-LSA).

To repeat, check the Airworthyness Certificate.

People new to this frequently confuse the sport pilot rules and the LSA rules. They are two distinct rules which overlap a bit. A sport pilot can fly (almost*) any plane that meets the LSA rule for passengers/performance etc, whether it's an S-LSA, E-LSA, E-AB or Part 23. How the plane is certificated makes no difference with regards to pilot eligibility, but all the difference in the world to who can work on it.

* - A plane must have always been LSA compliant. You can't take a plane that falls outside the LSA rule RE sport pilot eligibility and modify it to become eligible. For instance if a plane manufactured with a 1300 GW were modified to say a 1400 GW, you can not "un-modify" it to become sport pilot eligible. This is an issue with both E-AB and Part 23. Beware Ercoupes with this regard. Most "C" models are SP eligible, "D" are definitely not. There is also a "C-D" which I'm not sure about.

Clear as mud?

Ron

drseti · Post by **drseti** » Mon Sep 12, 2011 12:27 pm

rsteele wrote: Beware Ercoupes with this regard. Most "C" models are SP eligible, "D" are definitely not.

Actually, what Ron probably meant to say is that Ercoupe 415C models would originally have been SP eligible. Currently, most are not. That's because, decades ago (long before SP was even a gleam in EAA's eye), Univair sold an STC taking the max gross weight up from 1260 to 1400. Most 415Cs complied with that STC (it was a paperwork change only, so there was absolutely no reason not to).

There is a common misconception that complying with that STC automatically converted a 415C to a 415D. That's not so, even though the 415D is a 1400 pound airplane, because the STC did not change the airworthiness certificate, just the max gross weight. So, the bulk of these old Ercoupes are still 415Cs, but because the STC can never be undone, they are emphatically not SP eligible.

I went through this issue last year with a student who bought an Ercoupe. We did finally find him one that was still SP eligible, but those are getting scarce now (and the prices reflect it).

We saw several 415Cs advertised in TAP and Barnstormers that were alleged to be "LSAs" (of course, what the seller really meant was "Sport Pilot Eligible"). Most were, on closer inspection, not. You have to check the 337s on file with the FAA to find out if that STC was ever issued to a particular plane -- it probably doesn't show up in the logbooks (if the plane even has complete logbooks). For $10, the FAA will sell you a CD containing all records they have on a given plane. I'd strongly urge anyone considering buying an Ercoupe (or any plane, for that matter) to get one, and study it carefully.

Daidalos · Post by **Daidalos** » Mon Sep 12, 2011 12:41 pm

The rules can be very confusing. I have seen this happen in other areas of federal rules (FCC), New technology causes new rules (FADFEC is another exapmle) that are sometimes in conflict or overlap existing ones.

With regard to the limited owner performed maintenance on an aircraft. I believe the rule specifies the holder of a Private Pilot or higher. That would leave a Sport Pilot with his only option an E-AB or E-LSA if they want to perform maintenance without an LSRM certificate. But I could be wrong on this, check your FAR's,

When I owned a PA28 I performed all the maintenance I could legally perform but only after I was tutored by an A&P. I even did supervised annuals. The cost savings were significant but there was also a "peace of mind" factor.

bob.s · Post by **bob.s** » Mon Sep 12, 2011 3:41 pm

Being able to work on my own plane is the only way I could ever afford to own one outright. My family, sadly, has gotten used to eating everyday and having a roof over their heads! It's a shame too, because I see a lot of older Cessnas and Pipers for sale for decent prices, that would be really nice with some TLC, but I have to go the kit route.

It's also a "peace of mind" factor for me as well, but in the reverse. I've always worked on my own cars/motorcycles/etc, and I'm just not comfortable with someone else working on something I'm trusting my life in. I've seen too many "trained" mechanics do stupid things. A guy I used to ride with had the local Harley shop mount a new front tire for him. He got 50 yards from the shop went bouncing over the train tracks there and the front wheel fell off.

bob.s · Post by **bob.s** » Mon Sep 12, 2011 3:44 pm

BTW, even though I use a tricycle gear primary trainer (mostly because of insurance costs), I teach in it as though it were a taildragger. My students have to land it on the mains, nosewheel high, keep working the rudders, doing the traditional taildragger dance with their feet, and keep increasing back pressure on the stick as the plane slows down, to keep the nosewheel off the ground (just as though they were trying to keep a tailwheel planted). Once the stick is all the way back in their gut, they have to keep it there until they're stopped and chocked (especially after the nosewheel comes down, so they don't get in the habit of relaxing when that happens). With that kind of primary training (which you too can get, if you train in a tricycle gear), the transition to tailwheel is much easier.

You sound like my kind of instructor, if you were in town I'd go with you for that reason alone.

drseti · Post by **drseti** » Mon Sep 12, 2011 4:00 pm

bob.s wrote:It's also a "peace of mind" factor for me as well, but in the reverse. I've always worked on my own cars/motorcycles/etc, and I'm just not comfortable with someone else working on something I'm trusting my life in.

I understand that completely, Bob. I'm not an A&P (just an LSA mechanic), so when I've owned certified aircraft, I always found a compatible A&P/IA who would work with me. For all practical purposes, I was doing the maintenance and the mechanic was supervising (and sometimes training) me. I'd pay the standard shop rate for an annual inspection, with the understanding that I would do all the grunt work, and such repairs as I could handle myself, with the mechanic looking over my shoulder, keeping me out of trouble, and signing off the logbooks. This is what's known as an Owner Assisted Annual (or, as some mechanics call it, an Owner Hindered Annual). You'd be pleasantly surprised how many qualified mechanics are happy to work with you on this basis.

If a mechanic ever said "sorry, you're not allowed in the shop -- insurance regulations," I'd reply, "sorry, you're not allowed to work on my plane without me there -- insurance regulations." And then I'd go find another mechanic!

Helen · Post by **Helen** » Mon Sep 12, 2011 7:51 pm

Get your ticket first but consider buying a plane soon after. A couple of things:

1. Buying a plane to motivate you to fly is a lousy idea and doesn't work. Go to any airport and you'll note that the majority of personal planes don't fly. Along those same lines, I get a surprising number of phone calls that start off "I owned X number of planes back in the 70's when I first decided I'd like to learn to fly. I'm thinking now that I have a more free time and money, it would be a good time to finish my flight training." If you think you need a plane to find time to fly, there's a bigger underlying problem that the plane isn't going to fix.

2. During the course of your training you are going to learn a tremendous amount about what your options for owning really are. You'll be in a much better position to make a good choice after you have your ticket in hand.

3. Finding a CFI to training you in your personal plane can be a problem, especially so if it is an experimental. For an experimental, finding a DPE to do the checkride can also be a problem. Finding someone to do transition training after you are certificated is much easier.

4. Insurance for a student pilot to solo a kit plane? Good luck. You may be able to get liability insurance but don't count on getting hull insurance.

Now all of that said, I think your question is really two fold first "before or after my ticket" and second "renting vs. buying." I've discussed the first. The second comes down to "do I want to own a plane?" Renting almost always makes more sense from an economic stand point. The only good reason to own a plane is because you want to. It's like owning a pet. You don't save money owning a cat or a dog, to the contrary you have all sorts of expenses, spend a lot of time maintaining them, and have a lot of responsibility to them. But wouldn't life be dull without them?

Helen