Can somebody explain to me the general disdain for SP?

[Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe]

Thanks for this thread...I've been considering the options of getting my SP vs my PP and have been getting the mixed reviews from people.

You will get a lot of mis-information.

Some will tell you that you need to meet the requirements for a third class medical even if you don't get the medical for S.P. Not true. Check what the FAA actually says in the aeromedical FAQ.

Some will point toward the 20 hour minimum for S.P. - but the bottom line is that you still need to learn to fly the airplane. S.P. skips just a few things (like night) that save a few hours, but it's not like it's twice as easy compared to a P.P.

Then there are those that claim that light sport aircraft are so expensive compared to real airplanes. They will compare the price of a factory new LSA with a 40 year old POS 150. They conveniently ignore the fact that you can buy two and one half brand new LSAs for the price of one new Cessna 172. They also ignore the fact that there are lots of used aircraft that qualify as LSAs in the $20k - $30k range. Now, if you compare used to used, you do get more airplane for the money for non-LSA aircraft, but it's not $100k for the LSA vs $20k for something else.

Then of course, there are those who will tell you that an LSA is worthless for traveling because you can't go IFR, you can't carry 6 people, you can't cruise at 200 knots, you don't have FIKI, etc. Some people have a hard time understanding that airplanes can be fun.

Now, there is not that much advantage to getting an S.P. if you have the medical, but if it does the job for you, then - why not? One less FAA bureaucracy hoop to jump through, one less potential for problems.

 

[wabower]

Some people don't finish HS and instead get a GED. Some attend Juco and stop after AA degree. Some continue for a BS/BA, some attend grad school. Who's to say which choice is best?

I'm personally more inclined to value the opinions of those who have been all the way through the drill and seen all sides rather than those who took 101 and then quit.

Then of course, there are those who will tell you that an LSA is worthless for traveling because you can't go IFR, you can't carry 6 people, you can't cruise at 200 knots, you don't have FIKI, etc. Some people have a hard time understanding that airplanes can be fun.

Now, there is not that much advantage to getting an S.P. if you have the medical, but if it does the job for you, then - why not? One less FAA bureaucracy hoop to jump through, one less potential for problems.

 

[Silvaire]

I disagree with the idea that one of the goals of SP was so that people who couldn't pass a 3rd class medical could still fly. I know it has resulted in that but if a known medical condition exists, even for a SP,aren't they technically required to ground themselves just as a PPL would? Is it not true that a PPL who has failed a medical cannot fly as a SP?

So in regards to that and in regards to the training I would say that although the requirements are less they aren't THAT much less and it would be somewhat foolish to obtain your training from a SP (only) instructor knowing that it could not be used to step up to PPL at a later date. For one thing, as a new student pilot taking your first lessons there is no way for you to know for certain what it will lead to in a year or three or five. You wouldn't want to have to start all over again just to fulfill the numbers if you decided to upgrade at a later time.

 

[O-200]

One less FAA bureaucracy hoop to jump through, one less potential for problems.

This.^^^^

 

[bflynn]

SP is a restricted pilot with an airplane that is just as expensive. It was sold as being a way to get more pilots into flying, but in reality it just restricts pilots.

If the standard becomes to be a SP and putter around the patch a little while, we will have lost a lot of aviation.

 

[maddog52]

I understand why you guys think the PPL is "better" if that's a fair assessment coming from PPL holders, but how is Sport Pilot not considered "on the way" to PPL, as opposed to being often misrepresented as some time wasting detour? I'm just not able to reconcile the root of this mischaracterization.

It's not a time wasting detour if you want to fly as PIC as soon as practical. Apparently alot of people don't actually know the requirements or limitation of SP. It's 20 hours minimum versus 40 for PP. Our average student takes a check for SP at 27 hours. The average for PP is around 55 hours. That gets you in the air as PIC about $4200 SOONER than PP. Thats $4200 worth of experience, fun, traveling and satisfaction that would have been wasted if you never want fly at night. A SP can go into anyairspace in the US a PP can with the proper training and endorsements. A SP can even fly above 10k MSL if needed to clear terrain.

If you go SP and then later decide to go PP the ONLY additionl expense would be a PP ground school ($130 on line), the PP written ($90), and PP practical ($400). That's assuming your CFI is not a CFI SP, and you can get your solo cross country long enough to meet PP requirement. And if you train in an LSA with a VH of greater than 87 KCAS, you'lll even have to get some of the instrument hood time required for PP. I can guarentee that the confidence and skills you learned as PIC as SP will make the process of continuing on to PP smoother, quicker and cheaper.

The biggest drawback to SP is the relative lack of available rentals. It's getting better but PP has what, an 80 year head start on SP. If you plan on buying, that isn't an issue.

To summarize, you can go PP initialy and be required to spend thousands of dollars for flight training you might never need. Or you can go SP initially and will have spent only about $700 extra if you decide later to go PP.

Do what fits best for you. Just get all the info first like you are doing.

 

[weilke]

If the standard becomes to be a SP and putter around the patch a little while, we will have lost a lot of aviation.

The current standard are airports that look like they have been neutron bombed, planes that sit on tiedowns with flat tires and some old carmudgeons who tell us how great things were. SP is not a threat.

 

[NineThreeKilo]

... a 40 year old POS 150....

So you're saying the tried and true, cheap and easy to maintain, spin worthy, 150 is a POS... compared to what, cessna's flycatcher and that low wing czech/piper thing???

... do tell me more about your certificates and aviation experience Captian!

 

[Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe]

So you're saying the tried and true, cheap and easy to maintain, spin worthy, 150 is a POS... compared to what, cessna's flycatcher and that low wing czech/piper thing???

... do tell me more about your certificates and aviation experience Captian!

I'm saying that some of the used, abused, clapped out, runout POS C150s that I've flow are PsOS. And you will find that said POS cost less than a factory new airplane - LSA or not.

I asume you are not saying that the tried and true, cheap and easy to maintain, spin worthy Champ will cost $100,000 like some people claim that LSAs cost?

My aviation experiences date back to the 1970's when I leared to fly in a Cessna 120. I'm sure you have more ratings and hours than I do.

 

[valittu]

Just because Sport Pilot doesn't require instrument training doesn't mean a Sport Pilot couldn't get under the hood time from a CFI, right? I mention this because this idea of lack of preparedness has been mentioned as a down side to Sport Pilot training. How is that different from a Private Pilot who trained in, say, Arizona who never saw adverse weather during his training getting himself in a situation for which he's not prepared? I don't think the rating is the determining factor in that instance.

What about the person who has a medical situation a week after passing his 3rd class medical that's good for five years? Who's going to police him into doing the right thing? Again, I don't think the rating has as much to do with Pilots acting responsibly as their own gut. Ratings or not, some people are freaking wreckless and take dangerous shortcuts. That probably existed way before Sport Pilot.

 

[weilke]

Just because Sport Pilot doesn't require instrument training doesn't mean a Sport Pilot couldn't get under the hood time from a CFI, right? I mention this because this idea of lack of preparedness has been mentioned as a down side to Sport Pilot training. How is that different from a Private Pilot who trained in, say, Arizona who never saw adverse weather during his training getting himself in a situation for which he's not prepared? I don't think the rating is the determining factor in that instance.

The record of private pilots flying into IMC is pretty awful, it seems that 3hrs of hood time 15 years ago has a rather modest influence on the average VFR pilots ability to handle an inadvertent IMC encounter.

 

[SoloEqs]

What's behind the bias?

You must be new to aviation, or you would know that pilots are biased against EVERYTHING that is different from what they're doing.

If you want the flying equivalent of dropping a pint of blood into a shark tank, go to your local pilot's lounge and ask which is better, Cessna or Piper . . ?

One of the Great Secrets of Aviation is that there's a difference between BIAS and EXPERIENCE. Pilots with a lot of experience don't see anything wrong with SP, LSA, tricycle landing gear, ultralights, helicopters, sailplanes, etc -- no matter the banter they may offer. They recognize that each has its benefits.

The only evolutionary dead end in pilot certificates is the Recreational class. Otherwise, go find the way to fly what and how you want to fly -- if SP fills your needs, there's no need to do anything else.

Most Sport Pilots discover that they want PPL, so get your training done by a CFI who can sign you off for those requirements that your SP training fits. If you have to pick one training track or the other, go with PPL unless you have an issue with the 3rd Class Medical.

In other words, go for as many options as you can squeeze in, but don't pay attention to what anyone else says about your choices. YOU are the PIC, and the decisions are all yours.

 

[NineThreeKilo]

I'm saying that some of the used, abused, clapped out, runout POS C150s that I've flow are PsOS. And you will find that said POS cost less than a factory new airplane - LSA or not.

....

Gotcha, I thought you were saying the 150 was a POS aircraft.

The same can be said about newer LSAs too, only takes a few years of abuse and poor mx to turn a late model plane into a POS.

And agree 10000% on the champ, learned to fly on a 7AC myself, great aircraft!

 

[Henning]

This is just what I've seen so take what you like and leave the rest. Sport pilot was mainly designed for people that can't get a medical and I believe gave people a cheaper option for getting their license with restrictions. .

Wrong! This is completely incorrect. SP was mainly designed to provide a MINIMUM of training for people flying the 2seat 'fat' ultralights which fell between the regulatory cracks of Pt 103 and Pt 91 where too many passengers were getting killed by people who received NO training. SP & LSA were not intended to make things easier to attract business, they were intended to make things more difficult to save lives in the business that already existed. Notice they didn't give a full medical exemption, if you lost a medical to a denial, you are barred from using LSAs as a loophole.

 

[Henning]

SP is a restricted pilot with an airplane that is just as expensive. It was sold as being a way to get more pilots into flying, but in reality it just restricts pilots.

If the standard becomes to be a SP and putter around the patch a little while, we will have lost a lot of aviation.

It was only sold as that by the charlatans making money in the training industry.

 

[somorris]

Hi Marvin. Welcome to PoA .

I'm with KW. Flying is an experience like no other. If you are thinking SP will meet your needs, go for it. I think the advice here to use a CFI that is not restricted to SP is a good one. Nothing wrong with SP. A PPL has restrictions also, and there are many PPL's flying around without an IR that will die if they fly into IMC, just like a SP. Pilots are, as a group, a confident, self-reliant lot, and each thinks he knows best which is as it should be. That's why you see so much arguing here, I think.

Enjoy the learning experience, just try not to get boxed in by learning from and instructor not qualified to teach the PPL. Welcome to aviation!

 

[valittu]

Maybe disdain wasn't the best term to use.

In as much as Sport Pilot will satisfy literally 100% of what I want to experience in an airplane, my reluctance to purchase an LSA is going to force me to train for a PPL as it is. I've read some crazy stories about ownership and though I could afford to burn a money torch at both ends, I can list a ton of things I'd rather do with my hard earned loot. I still want to fly though, so in order to participate in this amazing hobby, I will either have to drive 60-90 miles from home to both be licensed AND fly Sport Pilot or drive a mile to a PPL flight school, train 20 hours beyond the Sport Pilot competence benchmark and join the club, just to futz around the pattern maybe once a week. I'm not complaining. It's worth it. The more I fly, the better I'll be. Besides, I got a better understanding of the differences just by asking some real honest questions in this thread. I just wanted to know what the push back was about.

 

[Henning]

Glad you got your answer. BTW, as I said before, there's nothing to keep you from flying an LSA on a PP. You also have an entire litany of Experimental AB planes at your avail that neither require the 'certified money tree' nor meet the performance and load restrictions of LSA. What I have observed in some of the LSAs being manufactured now to meet the 1320 lb limit concerns me.

 

[RJM62]

Okay, look, let's make it easy...

The SP Rule was created with things like this in mind:

That's the truth of the matter. Too many "fat ultralight" pilots were bending the EAA and USUA "training" exemptions to the breaking point, taking pax up for sightseeing flights under the guise of "flight training." It had gotten completely out of hand.

FAA wanted to rein them in, and sweetened the pot with the DL medical, the ability to legally carry a non-student passenger, the prestige of an FAA-issued certificate, and a much higher weight limit and fuel capacity than "fat" ultralights were ever allowed. But they still expected that the aircraft would be very simple, easy-to-fly machines.

The aircraft manufacturing industry surprised everyone by building very fancy, conventional-looking airplanes within the LSA parameters, however, which is one of the reasons that the training takes a lot longer than the 20-hour minimum for SP-Airplane.

So medical aside, the value of SP depends on what you want to fly. If you want to fly fancy airplanes with glass cockpits and some practical usefulness in terms of actually getting you somewhere, I'd say go PP. If there are medical issues, pay a visit to Doc Bruce to see if they can be cleared up.

But if you just want to annoy the birds and waste gasoline, then maybe SP's more up your alley. Or just go rogue altogether and fly ultralights. Then you can buy your replacement parts at Tractor Supply and CarQuest, and no one at the FSDO will even care.

In my case, the first thing I ever piloted was an ultralight airplane, when I was 15. And you know what? I've come full circle. I still prefer ultralights to any other flying machines except possibly for a Cub or a Champ.

-Rich

 

[Silvaire]

I think the bottom line is this: nobody is (or should) be pursuing a Sport Pilot ticket because they can't register a pulse and fog a mirror to get a 3rd calss medical certificate. The amount of perceived "savings" in regards to the training requirements are pretty much all but completely wiped out when all is said and done by the undeniable fact that there are virtually no SP aircraft for rent.

So unless you are going to purchase your own aircraft you're pretty much hamstrung. A new SP aircraft is in the $100k category and a legacy SP qualified aircraft is normally going to be a bare bones, non electric 65 hp conundrum. It's quite obvious that when the rules were written they were designed to specifically eliminate an entire fleet of very capable aircraft (such as the Cessna 150) because SOMEBODY with influence didn't want the market flooded with perfectly good, affordable and plentiful existing aircraft.

That's the main reason it has been an abject failure.

 

[ClimbnSink]

All the pp is better arguments are rationalising an insult to ego. Forget the rule minutia you are a pilot when you can go flying with a passenger of your choice. Pre SP the bar was X high, now it is lower. ****** new pilots don't have to walk barefoot in the snow uphill to the airport, yet they still get to call themselves pilots and have a gov issued card to back up their claims. We've spent stupid money getting ratings but to all the great unwashed(especially the pretty things we like to believe we impress) a SP powered parachute certificate is the same as your PP/IFR/Complex/tail wheel papers. Waaah no fair....

 

[Henning]

I think the bottom line is this: nobody is (or should) be pursuing a Sport Pilot ticket because they can't register a pulse and fog a mirror to get a 3rd calss medical certificate. The amount of perceived "savings" in regards to the training requirements are pretty much all but completely wiped out when all is said and done by the undeniable fact that there are virtually no SP aircraft for rent.

So unless you are going to purchase your own aircraft you're pretty much hamstrung. A new SP aircraft is in the $100k category and a legacy SP qualified aircraft is normally going to be a bare bones, non electric 65 hp conundrum. It's quite obvious that when the rules were written they were designed to specifically eliminate an entire fleet of very capable aircraft (such as the Cessna 150) because SOMEBODY with influence didn't want the market flooded with perfectly good, affordable and plentiful existing aircraft.

That's the main reason it has been an abject failure.

Industry tried to get it even higher, the FAA gave the extra weight over the 450kg initially suggested because manufacturers said 'we can make the 2 seat ultralights safer if you give us a bit more weight.' They specifically kept the 150 type weights out of it because they want people to hold a PP to fly planes of that caliber, they did not envision the entire plethora of 'real plane' look a likes to develope. Remember, these rules were developed to reign in 'maverick pilots' already flying, not to expand the light aircraft industry. The FAA reall wants nothing to do with the SP or LSA side of the industry except to make sure the pilots hauling passengers have a modicum of experience.

 

[Henning]

All the pp is better arguments are rationalising an insult to ego. Forget the rule minutia you are a pilot when you can go flying with a passenger of your choice. Pre SP the bar was X high, now it is lower. ****** new pilots don't have to walk barefoot in the snow uphill to the airport, yet they still get to call themselves pilots and have a gov issued card to back up their claims. We've spent stupid money getting ratings but to all the great unwashed(especially the pretty things we like to believe we impress) a SP powered parachute certificate is the same as your PP/IFR/Complex/tail wheel papers. Waaah no fair....

No, pre SP the bar did not exist, you could take a person up in a 2 seat ultralight like an Eipper MXII or G-500 with NO training, license or medical review whatsoever, not even a drivers license, no requirements at all, no hoops, zip, nada, nothing, teach yourself to fly and take up your buddy and kill him leaving behind a widow and 4 fatherless kids, or take up your wife and leave 4 orphans. This happened on a too regular basis, that is why there is SP and LSA.

 

[poadeleted21]

No, pre SP the bar did not exist, you could take a person up in a 2 seat ultralight like an Eipper MXII or G-500 with NO training, license or medical review whatsoever, not even a drivers license, no requirements at all, no hoops, zip, nada, nothing, teach yourself to fly and take up your buddy and kill him leaving behind a widow and 4 fatherless kids, or take up your wife and leave 4 orphans. This happened on a too regular basis, that is why there is SP and LSA.

Wasn't the ultralight association supposed self regulate and issue flight instructor certificates for the two seaters?

 

[Geico266]

You must be new to aviation, or you would know that pilots are biased against EVERYTHING that is different from what they're doing.

If you want the flying equivalent of dropping a pint of blood into a shark tank, go to your local pilot's lounge and ask which is better, Cessna or Piper . . ?

One of the Great Secrets of Aviation is that there's a difference between BIAS and EXPERIENCE. Pilots with a lot of experience don't see anything wrong with SP, LSA, tricycle landing gear, ultralights, helicopters, sailplanes, etc -- no matter the banter they may offer. They recognize that each has its benefits.

The only evolutionary dead end in pilot certificates is the Recreational class. Otherwise, go find the way to fly what and how you want to fly -- if SP fills your needs, there's no need to do anything else.

Most Sport Pilots discover that they want PPL, so get your training done by a CFI who can sign you off for those requirements that your SP training fits. If you have to pick one training track or the other, go with PPL unless you have an issue with the 3rd Class Medical.

In other words, go for as many options as you can squeeze in, but don't pay attention to what anyone else says about your choices. YOU are the PIC, and the decisions are all yours.

Well said.

 

[Geico266]

Wasn't the ultralight association supposed self regulate and issue flight instructor certificates for the two seaters?

Yes, I were one.

I had to pass a written instructor's exam, and take a check ride to hold an instructor's certificate.

This is how I could legally take passengers flying. They were "students".

 

[RJM62]

I think the bottom line is this: nobody is (or should) be pursuing a Sport Pilot ticket because they can't register a pulse and fog a mirror to get a 3rd calss medical certificate. The amount of perceived "savings" in regards to the training requirements are pretty much all but completely wiped out when all is said and done by the undeniable fact that there are virtually no SP aircraft for rent.

So unless you are going to purchase your own aircraft you're pretty much hamstrung. A new SP aircraft is in the $100k category and a legacy SP qualified aircraft is normally going to be a bare bones, non electric 65 hp conundrum. It's quite obvious that when the rules were written they were designed to specifically eliminate an entire fleet of very capable aircraft (such as the Cessna 150) because SOMEBODY with influence didn't want the market flooded with perfectly good, affordable and plentiful existing aircraft.

That's the main reason it has been an abject failure.

The dearth of LSA rentals is only true if you define "aircraft" as something that looks like a conventional airplane, and even then only in some markets. In others, there are plenty of LSA and legacy-eligible aircraft available for rent.

You're really losing sight of what the SP rule was intended to do, namely, rein in the cowboys in the Part 103 community. To that extent, it's been pretty successful. Not that anyone in the community's all that happy about it, and it has created a few new problems of its own; but it has in fact curbed the abuses that FAA wanted to correct.

As for availability of aircraft, remember, again, the kind of aircraft FAA had in mind when crafting the SP rule. If you want to fly a perfectly-functional LSA in the "ultralight tradition," for lack of a better way to put it, there are plenty of them out there, new and used.

Think Quicksilver MXL-II, Air Creation GT-500, Northwing Scout, etc., and all of the sudden the field opens up. Now you can buy a used LSA that will pass its annual condition inspection for less than $20K, or even less if you don't mind putting some work into it to make it pass. And most of time time you won't even need to pay for a hangar. You can just trailer your bird behind you and park it in the driveway.

If that's not your cup of tea, then so be it. But realize that there are many pilots out there for whom it's exactly their cup of tea.

-Rich

 

[1600vw]

Okay, look, let's make it easy...

The SP Rule was created with things like this in mind:

That's the truth of the matter. Too many "fat ultralight" pilots were bending the EAA and USUA "training" exemptions to the breaking point, taking pax up for sightseeing flights under the guise of "flight training." It had gotten completely out of hand.

FAA wanted to rein them in, and sweetened the pot with the DL medical, the ability to legally carry a non-student passenger, the prestige of an FAA-issued certificate, and a much higher weight limit and fuel capacity than "fat" ultralights were ever allowed. But they still expected that the aircraft would be very simple, easy-to-fly machines.

The aircraft manufacturing industry surprised everyone by building very fancy, conventional-looking airplanes within the LSA parameters, however, which is one of the reasons that the training takes a lot longer than the 20-hour minimum for SP-Airplane.

So medical aside, the value of SP depends on what you want to fly. If you want to fly fancy airplanes with glass cockpits and some practical usefulness in terms of actually getting you somewhere, I'd say go PP. If there are medical issues, pay a visit to Doc Bruce to see if they can be cleared up.

But if you just want to annoy the birds and waste gasoline, then maybe SP's more up your alley. Or just go rogue altogether and fly ultralights. Then you can buy your replacement parts at Tractor Supply and CarQuest, and no one at the FSDO will even care.

In my case, the first thing I ever piloted was an ultralight airplane, when I was 15. And you know what? I've come full circle. I still prefer ultralights to any other flying machines except possibly for a Cub or a Champ.

-Rich

Out of all these post this post is right on the money. You nailed it. I know a lot of people for whom the SP certificate was written and they fly single seat eab's.
You can buy these all day for under 10 grand. These are nice get up in the air go no where airplanes. No one needs a 100 grand airplane to fly SP. You spend that much on a LSA why not go PP.
Like another poster said PP have an EGO that is bigger then most airplanes. They hate to be told they are wrong, just read some of my post and you will see this. They will circle you like wolfs and eat you alive, unless you are made of steel.
You have it nailed. Anyone whom knows anything knows this. I laugh at the rest......

 

[Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe]

Maybe disdain wasn't the best term to use.

In as much as Sport Pilot will satisfy literally 100% of what I want to experience in an airplane, my reluctance to purchase an LSA is going to force me to train for a PPL as it is. I've read some crazy stories about ownership and though I could afford to burn a money torch at both ends, I can list a ton of things I'd rather do with my hard earned loot.

?????????????????????????????????????????????

What is going to be different if you buy a non-LSA qualified aircraft? Or is it "buy vs. rent"?

 

[valittu]

Quote:
Originally Posted by valittu View Post
Maybe disdain wasn't the best term to use.

In as much as Sport Pilot will satisfy literally 100% of what I want to experience in an airplane, my reluctance to purchase an LSA OR ANY AIRCRAFT is going to force me to train for a PPL as it is. I've read some crazy stories about ownership and though I could afford to burn a money torch at both ends, I can list a ton of things I'd rather do with my hard earned loot.


?????????????????????????????????????????????

What is going to be different if you buy a non-LSA qualified aircraft? Or is it "buy vs. rent"?

It's buy vs rent for now. Until I either build a flying machine and learn to maintain it myself or learn more about proven ultralights, ownership is a bit down the road.

 

[Henning]

Wasn't the ultralight association supposed self regulate and issue flight instructor certificates for the two seaters?

Sure to be an instructor, thing is, there was no requirement to be or have an instructor to own or operate one. It's the same a SCUBA diving, you can avoid getting instruction by buying dive gear and a compressor, the only time you "need" a card is to rent gear or get a tank filled.

 

[ClimbnSink]

No, pre SP the bar did not exist, you could take a person up in a 2 seat ultralight like an Eipper MXII or G-500 with NO training, license or medical review whatsoever, not even a drivers license, no requirements at all, no hoops, zip, nada, nothing, teach yourself to fly and take up your buddy and kill him leaving behind a widow and 4 fatherless kids, or take up your wife and leave 4 orphans. This happened on a too regular basis, that is why there is SP and LSA.

Now those ultralight chumps have a gov issued real pilots license, same as you and me. Not a cracker box one as before SP. More mental work to shunt them out of the perceived in group. Mommy my ego has a booboo.

 

[warthog1984]

Reading all the replies and laughing. Sooo much disinformation and misunderstanding.

1) A SP certificate should not be the "good enough" goal for anybody. The little extra training for PPL is *absolutely* worth it. Should people not consider SP? Not at all. SP is a wonderful thing for anybody who just wants to fly on nice days, with simple planes, and maybe bring a buddy/wife/child with them. However, the SP is best used by ex-PPLs and others who have a medical condition under well-regulated control, but who cannot pass (or cannot afford to pass) the recurring medical due to the "if in doubt, deny" mindset of FAA medical. I believe the training should be to PPL standards but restricted to lighter planes with no medical (see below).

2) Is LSA worthwhile? Yes and no. LSA came about due to a combination of fly-by-nighters in 2seat part 103 (think "fly with no time" ultralights in the 80s), "fat" ultralights, and the desire of older pilots who know they are still capable of flying but can't pass the medical to... go flying in a real plane. Insofar as LSA got rid of the trainer exemption abuse and provided at least one path to flying for DL-using pilots, it worked.

What was either a critical error or malice aforethought is the fact that it set a weight limit of 600kg to catch the then-current ultralights instead of somebody at FAA looking at commonly available "real" planes (150/152) and going "yes, a licensed pilot able to possess a DL can and should be able to fly that on clear days and when they are healthy".

So: SP works, LSA sorta does, the mentality that "I don't need X training to fly"... doesn't.

 

[Tristar]

Sport pilot is indeed difficult to obtain in some areas. I think Lincoln, NE is one of the few places that has the sport pilot opportunity. Columbus, NE is rumored to be another. We were debating too if this little expensive airplane was really going to "take off." It took it a while but it did, but I think it did because it was the cheapest not really that it's a sport plane. I personally wish they'd up the weight a little on the sport although I do agree that I think it was really designed for ultralight type aircraft and Piper and Cessna wanted into the industry. It's not any harder to fly a cessna 150 than it is a skycatcher and they're way cheaper but if you did increase the weight, the skycatchers would never be bought and I think someone out there knows that. I doubt it'll be changed anytime soon. You can't put two typical sized male adults in them.

I try to think of it like hanggliding though. I love to hangglide and wish I could learn it as a hobby but living in Nebraska and really any of the central states makes that impossible. It's flat and windy. So if I want to learn it, I'll have to go and find somewhere that teaches it but also debate if its worth having. Although, if I want to fly powered aircraft I can just go to my local airport. SP vs PP can sometimes have the same glitches.

 

[ClimbnSink]

Payout tow winches for hanggliders are cheap, someone in the area must have one. The limits we face are created by us.

 

[Tristar]

I've gone on to the ushpa.org website and looked for instructors. None are listed in nebraska. I wouldn't be able to do it this year anyways but I have looked. There is a typical glider club north of Omaha but thats as close as you're going to get.

 

[deltafox]

Reference: http://www.sportpilot.org/learn/cfi_guide.pdf

The chart on page 13 might be helpful.

 

[SoloEqs]

If the standard becomes to be a SP and putter around the patch a little while, we will have lost a lot of aviation.

There's a certain irony in this being posted by a guy who shows having flown in four states.

 

[SoloEqs]

so expensive compared to real airplanes. They will compare the price of a factory new LSA with a 40 year old POS 150. They conveniently ignore the fact that you can buy two and one half brand new LSAs for the price of one new Cessna 172. They also ignore the fact that there are lots of used aircraft that qualify as LSAs in the $20k - $30k range. Now, if you compare used to used, you do get more airplane for the money for non-LSA aircraft, but it's not $100k for the LSA vs $20k for something else.

There are plenty of 150s in good shape in the $15,000 price range. No, they're not new, but still going strong with thousands of hours. These can only be compared with new LSA, because older LSA don't match the equipment and performance.

The only reason that the 150 doesn't meet LSA standards is weight -- and the FAA issued waivers to the Icon A5 which give it higher MTOW than the 150 has, so I suspect that we will soon see this exploited as the way to get the 150 and similar classic planes in the hands of Sport Pilots, simply because of their records of safety.

 

[frfly172]

There are plenty of 150s in good shape in the $15,000 price range. No, they're not new, but still going strong with thousands of hours. These can only be compared with new LSA, because older LSA don't match the equipment and performance.

The only reason that the 150 doesn't meet LSA standards is weight -- and the FAA issued waivers to the Icon A5 which give it higher MTOW than the 150 has, so I suspect that we will soon see this exploited as the way to get the 150 and similar classic planes in the hands of Sport Pilots, simply because of their records of safety.

Don't think you will ever see the 150 qualify for light sport,The cessnas and Cherokee 140 s are to plentifull and to cheap to purchase which could kill the sales of the new LSAs.cessna launched their own lsa to compete and piper had a try at it.