if only it were slower

Constructive topics of interest related to aviation that do not match the other section descriptions below (as long as it is somewhat related to aviation, flying, learning to fly, sport pilot, light sport aircraft, etc.). Please, advertisements for Viagra will be promptly deleted!"

Moderator: drseti

Merlinspop
Posts: 999
Joined: Mon Apr 08, 2013 2:48 pm
Location: WV Eastern Panhandle

Re: if only it were slower

Post by Merlinspop »

I agree with 3D's statement. The current LSA rules come real close to meeting a sizable chunk of my needs.

I agree with MO's wish that the medical requirement be addressed (hopefully sooner rather than later). I disagree with the sentiment that we should be happy with what we have and not wish for more.

Controllable propeller - I would support including these. Modern designs are light, (relatively) inexpensive and the gains in efficiency, performance and arguably safety are worth bringing this onto the table for discussion.

Retractable gear - Aerodynamics can do so much to clean up gear drag (see the Lancair/Corvalis/TTX speed vs Mooney). I'm not sure what can be gained by folding the gear is worth the additional weight (or reduced strength if weight is the same), maintenance, cost, etc.

Max Weight - This horse has been beaten into individual atoms. Sure, I would like to see a bit of additional weight. I'm 6'3, in good shape (my doctor advises AGAINST me losing weight) and I'm in the 230# range. At that, there are all that many LSA that truly have the ability to hold ME, another adult, full fuel and baggage (as was mentioned above). Perhaps our souls, but not our Earthly bodies.

Speed - Fast is nice for going places, but I really like low and slow Cub-like flying anyway. If I want to go further with more people or stuff, my F150 can handle the mid-range needs, and those big aluminum tubes can handle the longer distances just fine for me. If I really want to fly cross country in an LSA, the focus would be on the trip and not the destination anyway. But on the other hand, fast is cool.

Again, the current rules satisfy enough of my needs that I'm okay with it as is, but it would be nice if...
- Bruce
MovingOn
Posts: 632
Joined: Fri Dec 20, 2013 5:34 pm

Re: if only it were slower

Post by MovingOn »

.......
Last edited by MovingOn on Sat Aug 16, 2014 6:28 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
MrMorden
Posts: 2184
Joined: Fri Aug 17, 2012 7:28 am
Location: Athens, GA

Re: if only it were slower

Post by MrMorden »

MovingOn wrote:
MrMorden wrote:
MovingOn wrote:Then they wouldn't be LSA, would they? Since you can fly whatever you want, what is your issue? Go fly whatever you want. LSA limits are what they are, not for political reasons, but to make them as safe as possible for very low time, novice pilots. They meet that objective pretty well.
I guess the point is that not all people flying LSA are low time pilots, and there will come a time when there are very high time pilots with Sport certificates. Then that reasoning makes little sense.
When LSA no longer meets your needs, you need to fly something that does. If that requires a Private, then go get a Private. If you don't have a medical, go get a medical. If you can't pass a medical, then you need to stick with LSA. Let's hope that changes soon and they do away with 3rd class medicals for all of us.

The problem people don't seem to recognize or choose to ignore, if you change the definition of LSA significantly, you may no longer have an aircraft safe for low-time, novice pilots and you defeat the original intent of Sport Pilot.
I agree, if the medical requirements change then all of this becomes better, and IMO, more consistent from a logic standpoint within the regs.

The "LSA is for novice pilots" argument, though, makes little sense to me. Are the tens of thousands of pilots who made their first solo in a 172 just damn lucky to have survived? I know this is the FAA's logic and not yours we are discussing, I'm just pointing out where the rules and the intent don't seem to match up very well.
Andy Walker
Athens, GA
Sport Pilot ASEL, LSRI
2007 Flight Design CTSW E-LSA
MovingOn
Posts: 632
Joined: Fri Dec 20, 2013 5:34 pm

Re: if only it were slower

Post by MovingOn »

.......
Last edited by MovingOn on Sat Aug 16, 2014 6:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.
3Dreaming
Posts: 3132
Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2010 6:13 pm
Location: noble, IL USA

Re: if only it were slower

Post by 3Dreaming »

While it is true that sport pilot requires less training time than the private, the sport pilot gets more training time directed towards basic flying skills that the private pilot does. This is based on the minimum hours and the regulatory requirements for training.
As for testing, the sport pilot gets tested to same standards as the private pilot for the basic flying skills. What the sport pilot lacks is the night training, instrument training, the additional cross country training, and the extra solo time.
User avatar
drseti
Posts: 7236
Joined: Sat Nov 28, 2009 6:42 pm
Location: 1C9, Hollister CA
Contact:

Re: if only it were slower

Post by drseti »

snaproll wrote: Sport Pilot was created to enable a larger portion of the population fly a class of aircraft with less training, less dual time, no instrument time, no night time, and no physical.
Wrong, Don. Sport Pilot was created by FAA specifically to reign in those anarchistic scofflaws flying dangerous, uncertified, un-inspected, slapped-together aircraft, without benefit of standards, training, or pilot's licenses -- Part 103 Ultralight flyers! :wink:
The opinions posted are those of one CFI, and do not necessarily represent the FAA or its lawyers.
Prof H Paul Shuch
PhD CFII DPE LSRM-A/GL/WS/PPC iRMT
AvSport LLC, 1C9
[email protected]
AvSport.org
facebook.com/SportFlying
SportPilotExaminer.US
Post Reply