Light Sport Limitations

[Jfly67]

What short comings have you found flying your light Sport aircraft that stop you from completing your mission.

[designrs]

I’d like 3,000 ft/min vertical climb.

Cruise Speed: Seriously, I found cruise speed to be limiting when I was flying in the Northeast. It wasn’t uncommon for a destination to be 1.5 to 3 hours away. SOMETHING was ALWAYS marginal, ceiling, winds, visibility etc. THEN if you actually want to DO SOMETHING at your destination, even something as simple as a long lunch with a friend, there may not be enough hours in a day.

Got a 20 kt headwind? Uh oh! Forget about returning during daylight, or on available fuel.

Often, an overnight was required... and if the weather wasn’t good the next day then it was 2 nights in a hotel! 140+ kts cruise might have allowed me to get home safely, the same day.

Local flying for an hour was easy, but going places could be tough!

A friend of mine in the Northeast has an RV-9 that cruises at 140 kts... it makes a big difference!

On the other hand, going places in Florida is easy! There are always at least 3 or 4 destinations less than one hour away... AND I know that there is a 90% chance that I’m getting home the same day.

Sure, I’ve done long trips from Florida to PA in the same day in my Light Sport... but time and weather have to be right. Faster cruise opens up more options!

[FastEddieB]

What short comings have you found flying your light Sport aircraft that stop you from completing your mission.

Best to clarify that there are both aircraft and pilot limitations.

For a Sport Pilot flying a Light Sport, the increased visibility required and inability to occasionally fly without reference to the surface (loosely read as over an overcast layer), along with not being able to fly at night, have the most impact, I think. The 10,000’ limitation less so.

For a Private, Commercial or ATP flying a Light Sport, not much different than a “certified” aircraft, depending on the Operating Limitations of a particular aircraft. The 1,320 lb limit always has to be considered, and will effect the maximum weight of a passenger and/or baggage, and will often reduce the fuel one can carry.

Just my thoughts, I’m sure others will have different opinions.

[Warmi]

Probably the 1320 lbs limit ... and only if flying with a passenger.

[designrs]

Get rid of the LSA “speed limit!” Of course, then the gross weight would have to go up for motor, fuel and airframe to keep it all flying.

Or just make it legal to fly whatever you want without a medical, as long as a DPE and/or CFI signs you off, and you’re not flying for hire.

Then again, that would cost A LOT more to operate. (sigh)

Hmmm... our little LSA’s do a great job!

[designrs]

Then again, I know of Bristells with retractable gear and constant-speed props in Europe. FAST!! I don’t see how a medical effects my ability to press an extra button and operate another control lever.

Hmm... come to think of it, those “wing lockers” on my SportCruiser might have been used for retractable gear in Europe.

[drseti]

As most of you know, I used to fly bigger, faster, complex, expensive. My routine trips from Central PA to Central FL took me 7 Hobbs hours. When I upgraded to LSA, those trips took 9 (a small inconvenience, at a small fraction of the cost). With the advent of Basic Med, I could go back to flying a Beechcraft - but I really have no desire to. Most of my trips are solo. So why pay a bunch of dough for a bunch of empty seats?

My point is, those of us who qualify for basic Med have been given the option to (as Richard suggests) fly anything we want. But, depending upon our mission, at least some of us are perfectly content to stick with LSA. The only change I would like to see is the option to file and fly IFR.

[Wm.Ince]

What short comings have you found flying your light Sport aircraft that stop you from completing your mission.

Without hesitation, unacceptable weather.

[Wm.Ince]

. . . . I used to fly bigger, faster, complex, expensive. My routine trips from Central PA to Central FL took me 7 Hobbs hours. When I upgraded to LSA, those trips took 9 (a small inconvenience, at a small fraction of the cost). With the advent of Basic Med, I could go back to flying a Beechcraft - but I really have no desire to. Most of my trips are solo. So why pay a bunch of dough for a bunch of empty seats?

My point is, those of us who qualify for basic Med have been given the option to (as Richard suggests) fly anything we want. But, depending upon our mission, at least some of us are perfectly content to stick with LSA. The only change I would like to see is the option to file and fly IFR.

I can relate to that.
Concur totally.

[designrs]

change I would like to see is the option to file and fly IFR.

IFR is HUGE for cross-country flying, especially in the Northeast. A qualified pilot filing IFR could punch through many “easy IMC” days and be on their merry way, above it all!

[Warmi]

What short comings have you found flying your light Sport aircraft that stop you from completing your mission.

Without hesitation, unacceptable weather.

That’s not a limitation to me - since I fly for fun my only missions is fun and there is no fun flying in bad weather ..

[designrs]

That’s not a limitation to me - since I fly for fun my only missions is fun and there is no fun flying in bad weather ..

I think it’s fun to fly through a few easy clouds, legally. I’ve never experienced hard IMC but I’d really like to with a qualified pilot & aircraft.

[Atrosa]

If I had a magic wand i would just make the ppl medical requirements equal to the drivers license rule. It sort of does away with the sport cert.

Here is what I propose:
30 hour "basic PPL"
5 hour night add-on
40 instrument add-on
Etc....

I can drive a 26,000 pound RV with 10 people in it zipping down the highway at 70 mph yet i can't fly my family around in a Cirrus SR20. Old 1950s thinking. I'm not an astronaut piloting an Apollo rocket.... Its just a plane.

[drseti]

If I had a magic wand i would just make the ppl medical requirements equal to the drivers license rule.

That's pretty much where we're heading, although it will take a while. Basic Med came about partially because of a dozen years of positive experience with SP flying with a driver's license. Once we have a dozen years of positive experience with Basic Med, the next logical step will be to eliminate the Class 3 entirely.

It sort of does away with the sport cert.

Well, not entirely. There are some who are perfectly able to pass a 3rd Class medical, yet opt to go for the SP certificate for reasons completely separate from health concerns. Those folks often use SP as a quick and easy entry level license, and later use it as a stepping-stone toward higher ratings. About 25% of my students fall into this category.

[Scooper]

I don't find there to be any light sport limitations that interfere with my missions. My SLSA that is now recertificated as experimental is approved for night flight and IFR flight in IMC according to the operating limitations that are part of my airworthiness certificate since my LSA is in compliance with FAR 91.205(c) and (d).

"N601KE Operating Limitations November 29, 2016 - IFR Flight

Day VFR flight is authorized.

Night flight operations are authorized if the instruments specified in FAR 91.205(c) are installed, operational, and maintained in accordance with the applicable requirements of part 91.

Instrument flight operations are authorized if the instruments specified in FAR 91.205(d) are installed, operational, and maintained in accordance with the applicable requirements of part 91. All maintenance or inspection of this equipment must be recorded in the aircraft maintenance records and include the following items: date, work performed, and name and certificate number of person returning the aircraft to service."

Speedwise, there is very little difference between my old C172 and my LSA. BasicMed lets me as a private pilot fly my LSA at night and doesn't limit my altitude below 18,000 feet.

With my light sport repairman-inspection certificate I perform my own maintenance and condition inspections, and that combined with low operating costs (5.5 gph fuel consumption) result in cost of ownership much lower than my old 172.

That basically leaves useful load and number of seats as the only differences between flying my 172 and flying my Zodiac. Neither of those limitations are important to me as I usually fly alone on long cross-country flights with full fuel, and can take a passenger on local flights of less than two hours without baggage. If I want to carry more passengers I can rent a 172 or 182 from the local FBO.