LSA Market larger than some think

Do the CTs still lead the list?
 
Legend and Carbon Cubs were beating CT recently, but since CT was such as success for so long, they still can't touch the total fleet numbers. But if things go as they do, they'll be there eventually.

BTW, American Legend sells something like 3x Cubs over CubCrafters, and I almost never hear about them (well, I sat in one back in 2012 -- it still had heel brakes).
 
zaitcev said:
Legend and Carbon Cubs were beating CT recently, but since CT was such as success for so long, they still can't touch the total fleet numbers. But if things go as they do, they'll be there eventually.

BTW, American Legend sells something like 3x Cubs over CubCrafters, and I almost never hear about them (well, I sat in one back in 2012 -- it still had heel brakes).
Click to expand...

Wait till people figure out that CTs are missing a critical placard :rofl:
 
I do think that we'll start seeing RV-12s on the flight lines of schools within the next few years. At some point we have to move into the present, we can't keep flying the same planes built 30 or more years ago.
 
Well, by my count, the year 2013 saw the addition of 320 light sport aircraft to the FAA registration database. 217 were Special Light Sport, 178 were aircraft (vs. weight shift, etc.).

Of the 320 total:

17 were Cessna Skycatchers.
15 were Technams
47 were Cub Crafters
11 were American Legend
16 were Czech Sport Sportcruisers
10 were Flight Design (9 CTLS, 1 CTLW)
16 were Pipistrels
65 were Vans RV-12s.

Of the RV-12s:

17 were Special Light Sport Aircraft
48 were Experimental Light Sport Aircraft

Ron Wanttaja
 
RV-12s are really catching on. Prices have jumped way up on the used ones, and the SLSA ones are being presold before they are even finished. Even partially completed kits are bringing more money that the price of the kits.
 
wanttaja said:
47 were Cub Crafters
11 were American Legend
Click to expand...
So I got it completely backwards, at least for the last year, with 4:1 for Cub Crafters, despite being generally more expensive.

wanttaja said:
16 were Czech Sport Sportcruisers
Click to expand...
Hahaha, take that Evektor! Bring back the inexpensive Sport Max and stuff your stupid Harmony where sun does not shine.

wanttaja said:
10 were Flight Design (9 CTLS, 1 CTLW)
Click to expand...
Ouch that gotta hurt. I bet they laughed when Remos collapsed. BTW, that "CTLW" is probably CTSW, unless they have a new model I do not know.

wanttaja said:
65 were Vans RV-12s.
Click to expand...
Apparently the castered nosewheel is not _that_ bad. And it worked for Grummans.
 
zaitcev said:
Apparently the castered nosewheel is not _that_ bad. And it worked for Grummans.
Click to expand...

I learned in Grummans, the castered nosewheel is just fine. You still steer with your feet, it's just the tops of them rather than the middle.
 
zaitcev said:
BTW, that "CTLW" is probably CTSW, unless they have a new model I do not know.
Click to expand...

Yes, you're right...I got it wrong. N245CT.

Have to point out that in *addition* to those 65 SLSA/ELSA RV-12s, eight Experimental Amateur-Built RV-12s were added last year.

In addition, another 47 RV-12s with indefinite airworthiness status was added to the rolls in 2013. They're not listed as Light Sport, they're not listed as Experimental, they've just got a blank in the Airworthiness category entry. Most have a code that translates to, "N-Number Assigned and Registered." Probably just means a reserved number, the code is not always corrected after the plane flies.

There are 6 CTLS aircraft in that same limbo; none in the Experimental/Amateur-Built rolls.

Ron Wanttaja
 
Last edited:
Even Dan may be missing some. A significant number of aircraft which meet the FAA definition of LSA (FAR 1.1) and can legally be flown by Sport Pilots are not registered LSA. (Dan feels the need to differentiate them as "Sport Pilot eligible" for some reason, but the FAA defines them as Light Sport Aircraft.)

I know of two flight schools here in the west which have restored certificated Ercoupe C models for rental to Sport Pilots, and nearly all gyroplanes also qualify as LSA, but are registered as EAB.

In particular, since Autogyro GmbH began importing their machines into the US in kit form two years ago, there are now more than 50 registered EAB here, and US sales are accelerating. The German gyros have been the best selling LSA in Europe (called "ultralights" there) for the past few years. They're outselling all fixed-wing LSA combined, with over a thousand registered.
 
Last edited:
There's an interesting gotcha in this: some fully certificated airplanes are "Sport Pilot eligible" but would not be an LSA (Ercoupe 415-C is one) if built today, or are not LSAs (ACA 7AC Champ). This is because the ASTMs formula for determining what is LSA and what is not includes hoursepower and useful load. Champ is too heavy and has too little useful load to qualify as an LSA even if ACA wanted to build one. So, you can have an airplane that an LSA for FAA but not an LSA for ASTM... and! just to make it more fun, FAA will not issue an LSA airworthiness certificate for it, because 21.190(a)(c)(ii) requires a compliance with ASTM.

The gyro situation is a shame, but Calidus people claim that their quick-build option allows one to put a gyro together in 1 week. Dunno how true that is, but that's what they say.
 
zaitcev said:
There's an interesting gotcha in this: some fully certificated airplanes are "Sport Pilot eligible" but would not be an LSA (Ercoupe 415-C is one) if built today, or are not LSAs (ACA 7AC Champ).
Click to expand...

If it has a standard AW certificate, why does it matter?

This is because the ASTMs formula for determining what is LSA and what is not includes hoursepower and useful load. Champ is too heavy and has too little useful load to qualify as an LSA even if ACA wanted to build one.
Click to expand...

Got a reference for that? The only requirements I ever knew about were the 1,320 lb gross weight and the 120 knots straight and level cruise speed.


So, you can have an airplane that an LSA for FAA but not an LSA for ASTM... and! just to make it more fun, FAA will not issue an LSA airworthiness certificate for it, because 21.190(a)(c)(ii) requires a compliance with ASTM.
Click to expand...

Again, why does it matter if it has a standard AW cert?
 
zaitcev said:
There's an interesting gotcha in this: some fully certificated airplanes are "Sport Pilot eligible" but would not be an LSA (Ercoupe 415-C is one) if built today, or are not LSAs (ACA 7AC Champ). This is because the ASTMs formula for determining what is LSA and what is not includes hoursepower and useful load. Champ is too heavy and has too little useful load to qualify as an LSA even if ACA wanted to build one. So, you can have an airplane that an LSA for FAA but not an LSA for ASTM... and! just to make it more fun, FAA will not issue an LSA airworthiness certificate for it, because 21.190(a)(c)(ii) requires a compliance with ASTM.
Click to expand...
Not correct.

"LSA" is defined in the FARs as an airplane that meets the weight / speed / seat / etc. requirements. How the aircraft is certificated is not relevant. ASTM standards are not relevant in determining if the aircraft is an LSA as defined by the regulations.

The ASTM standards are relevant if and only if you want to certify an aircraft under the rules for S-LSA or E-LSA certificates as opposed to standard / utililty or E-AB certificates.

In 2007 American Champion re-introduced the 7EC as an LSA using the old CAR 4 type certificate http://www.amerchampionaircraft.com/newac/champ/chpspecs.htm

FAR 1.1:

Light-sport aircraft means an aircraft, other than a helicopter or powered-lift that, since its original certification, has continued to meet the following:
(1) A maximum takeoff weight of not more than—
(i) 1,320 pounds (600 kilograms) for aircraft not intended for operation on water; or
(ii) 1,430 pounds (650 kilograms) for an aircraft intended for operation on water.
(2) A maximum airspeed in level flight with maximum continuous power (VH) of not more than 120 knots CAS under standard atmospheric conditions at sea level.
(3) A maximum never-exceed speed (VNE) of not more than 120 knots CAS for a glider.
(4) A maximum stalling speed or minimum steady flight speed without the use of lift-enhancing devices (VS1) of not more than 45 knots CAS at the aircraft's maximum certificated takeoff weight and most critical center of gravity.
(5) A maximum seating capacity of no more than two persons, including the pilot.
(6) A single, reciprocating engine, if powered.
(7) A fixed or ground-adjustable propeller if a powered aircraft other than a powered glider.
(8) A fixed or feathering propeller system if a powered glider.
(9) A fixed-pitch, semi-rigid, teetering, two-blade rotor system, if a gyroplane.
(10) A nonpressurized cabin, if equipped with a cabin.
(11) Fixed landing gear, except for an aircraft intended for operation on water or a glider.
(12) Fixed or retractable landing gear, or a hull, for an aircraft intended for operation on water.
(13) Fixed or retractable landing gear for a glider.
Click to expand...
 
zaitcev said:
The gyro situation is a shame, but Calidus people claim that their quick-build option allows one to put a gyro together in 1 week. Dunno how true that is, but that's what they say.
Click to expand...

Experimental Amateur Built has always been about tasks, not time required. The 2011 update of the FAA's "scorecard" for determining 51% compliance for gyroplanes was prepared with input from the US distributor for Magni Gyro, an Italian company. It really cleared the way for fast-build versions of the European gyros.

The Calidus and MTOsport both use welded, stainless steel frames which come pre-assembled from the factory. Here is a build thread in which two guys finished an MTOsport in four days.
 
PW_Plack said:
Even Dan may be missing some. A significant number of aircraft which meet the FAA definition of LSA (FAR 1.1) and can legally be flown by Sport Pilots are not registered LSA. (Dan feels the need to differentiate them as "Sport Pilot eligible" for some reason, but the FAA defines them as Light Sport Aircraft.)
Click to expand...
Oh, I agree with Dan and use the same terminology. IMHO, the FAA erred in using the same name for a general definition of features as well as a certification type. It's too confusing to non-specialists.

It's why guys like me keep getting asked why someone can't license a Fly Baby as an ELSA... "But it's Experimental, and it MEETS the FAA definition of a Light Sport Airplane....?"

"Sport Pilot Eligible" is a good term for the *intent* of the FAA's Light Sport Definition: To define those airplanes that can be operated by Sport Pilots.

Ron Wanttaja
 
Personally, I love LSA and what it has done for aviation. A whole world of innovation, invention, improvement, safety enhancement and overall betterment of the product, while much of the rest of the industry plods along, pathetically.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top