MOSAIC comment period extended

[Michael Gallagher]

I see the FAA extended the comment period until January at the request of AEA. What is the play here? Is AEA trying to get more (V speeds, passengers, etc) on behalf of sport pilots or trying to restrict it on behalf of LSA manufacturers that might feel threatened by legacy aircraft being allowed?

FAA Extends MOSAIC Comment Period

The FAA has announced a 90-day extension for the comment period on its Notice of Proposed Rulemaking titled Modernization of Special Airworthiness Certification (MOSAIC).

www.flyingmag.com

 

[DFH65]

Honestly there are not enough legacy aircraft left around to worry about.

 

[Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe]

Per the EAA https://www.eaa.org/eaa/news-and-pu...faa-grants-extension-to-mosaic-comment-period
"The FAA granted the extension in response to a request by eight industry associations representing primarily the maintenance and repair communities. These associations include the Aircraft Electronics Association, Aeronautical Repair Station Association, Aviation Suppliers Association, Aviation Technician Education Council, Helicopter Association International, International Air Response, Inc., Modification and Replacement Parts Association, and NATA (formerly known as the National Air Transportation Association)."

The maintenance part of the proposal seems to be pretty sketchy, so more work required?

 

[Baked Potato]

Booo...
I wanna solo a 172 nowwww

Darn bureaucrats!

 

[DaleB]

Booo...
I wanna solo a 172 nowwww

Darn bureaucrats!

Don't hold your breath. Even without the extension, my money is on nothing happening before the end of 2025 anyway. Maybe later.

 

[Baked Potato]

Don't hold your breath. Even without the extension, my money is on nothing happening before the end of 2025 anyway. Maybe later.

Well, damn.
Know of any reputable cryosleep businesses in the DC metro area?

 

[X3 Skier]

The maintenance part of the proposal seems to be pretty sketchy, so more work required?

I think they are trying to protect the monopoly on parts and maintenance so any expansion of owner maintenance or less than current parts/mechanic requirements is a problem to them but this might just me starting a conspiracy theory

 

[Bell206]

The maintenance part of the proposal seems to be pretty sketchy, so more work required?

Its not that it is sketchy, its they have completely rewritten the maintenance repairman and repair/alteration side. For one, the proposal shifts a LSR-M from a 120 hour course to an ACS standards course, i.e., the same standards used for an A&P. It would only cover a certain number of those standards applicable to the rating but its a big move which, in my understanding, was a main item that led to the extension request. Basically, the NPRM put a lot of unknowns on the table from a mx perspective especially with the inclusion of helicopters and powered-lift into the light sport arena.

In my opinion, this move is similar to what most wanted to see in the Primary Non-Commercial attempt. Which ironically was part of the foundation to MOSAIC. So for those that have pushed for a "A&P-Lite" type rating in the past, this move gets things pointed in the right direction. And if this is what the collective majority actually want, I'd be supporting the move to the ACS standards by entering as many comments as you can over the next 90 days.

 

[frfly172]

No big surprise,things were moving along too quickly

 

[jbarrass]

Its not that it is sketchy, its they have completely rewritten the maintenance repairman and repair/alteration side. For one, the proposal shifts a LSR-M from a 120 hour course to an ACS standards course, i.e., the same standards used for an A&P. It would only cover a certain number of those standards applicable to the rating but its a big move which, in my understanding, was a main item that led to the extension request. Basically, the NPRM put a lot of unknowns on the table from a mx perspective especially with the inclusion of helicopters and powered-lift into the light sport arena.

In my opinion, this move is similar to what most wanted to see in the Primary Non-Commercial attempt. Which ironically was part of the foundation to MOSAIC. So for those that have pushed for a "A&P-Lite" type rating in the past, this move gets things pointed in the right direction. And if this is what the collective majority actually want, I'd be supporting the move to the ACS standards by entering as many comments as you can over the next 90 days.

The problem is that they have not provided any info on what the "ACS standards" would be. Maybe replacing the 120 hour course with 1.5 years instead of 2?

No idea, but it does seem very contrary with the idea of expanding the field of options.

Given that the current model works very well for current LSA, it's a huge leap to solve a problem that doesn't seem to exist.

 

[Bell206]

The problem is that they have not provided any info on what the "ACS standards" would be.

The Mechanic ACS came out last year when the A&P rules were rewritten. While it won't be a 120 hr class it will probably be more like a 3-6 month study program within distance learning and classroom. My bet is there's more to this shift to the ACS than LSA.

Given that the current model works very well for current LSA, it's a huge leap to solve a problem that doesn't seem to exist.

A problem didn't exist until helicopters and powered-lift were include into Light Sport. But while you might not see the logic in this, the NPRM gives clues to its reasons. May just end up being what private GA needs....

 

[RyanShort1]

I see the FAA extended the comment period until January at the request of AEA. What is the play here? Is AEA trying to get more (V speeds, passengers, etc) on behalf of sport pilots or trying to restrict it on behalf of LSA manufacturers that might feel threatened by legacy aircraft being allowed?

FAA Extends MOSAIC Comment Period

The FAA has announced a 90-day extension for the comment period on its Notice of Proposed Rulemaking titled Modernization of Special Airworthiness Certification (MOSAIC).

www.flyingmag.com

I for one am quite glad for the extension...

 

[X3 Skier]

I for one am quite glad for the extension...

Why?

 

[455 Bravo Uniform]

Any grandfathering for those who took the 120 hr class already? Any benefit to taking the class now to get grandfathered or was it too late as of the date of the proposed rule making?

 

[RyanShort1]

Why?

I'm working on a reply for an organization I'm a part of. This really has the potential to be a big deal, and getting the response right is important.

 

[X3 Skier]

I'm working on a reply for an organization I'm a part of. This really has the potential to be a big deal, and getting the response right is important.

Even more important is have the FAA respond correctly in the Final Rule

 

[Bell206]

Any grandfathering for those who took the 120 hr class already?

In its present form the NPRM states no further training will be required for existing LSR-M. But only the LSR-M is being changed. The LSR-I requirements will remain the same.

Any benefit to taking the class now to get grandfathered or was it too late as of the date of the proposed rule making?

That would depend on your definition of benefit. But it appears both training classes will be accepted up through a stated transition period once the rule is issued.