Need LightSport advice

Pa28-140 said:
I do have a lingering question though. Why is it that if the airplane is to be put on floats that they give you an extra 200 pounds of useful load?? I would think that, barring changes in the engine or wing, that useful load is an absolute. It's either safe and in the envelope or not? I would appreciate some comments so that I can understand that.

Another thing that I noticed at the Mount Vernon LSA show was how many exhibitors were blatant about disregarding the useful load restriction. Not one but several people were very upfront about telling me how they and their sons (240lbs +220lbs) would just load her up with fuel and go. No problem. Sorry, but I'm too big of a chicken to operate that way. I'd sure appreciate more comments about this and the float issue. Thanks!
Click to expand...

Keep in mind that you only get an extra 110 lbs MAX GROSS WEIGHT for seaplanes. NOT USEFUL LOAD!!! This was a compromise for the seaplane pilots when the standards were set. Since most float sets and hardware weigh more than 110 lbs, you will actually LOSE useful load by adding floats to any model. The aircraft still has to meet the max stall speed and structural requirements for LSA. You do get the "Repostional Gear" exemption for the amphibious seaplanes but even less useful load due to the heavier floats.

Your comments about the salesmen giving a wink and nudge about overweight operations is all too common and one of my pet peeves (it actually P$$$$$ me off). This is the kind of crap that makes it hard for LSA and Sport Pilot to gain legitamicy. I think I will have it addressed at the next LAMA meeting in Sebring. Maybe we can curtail it.
 
Pa28-140 said:
I do have a lingering question though. Why is it that if the airplane is to be put on floats that they give you an extra 200 pounds of useful load?? I would think that, barring changes in the engine or wing, that useful load is an absolute. It's either safe and in the envelope or not? I would appreciate some comments so that I can understand that.
Click to expand...

It's only 110# increase for floats, 1320 - 1430. And it probably to allows the addition of floats and still have enough useful for a pilot.:wink2:

Edit - what maddog said. And I also think the manufactorers and dealers need to be careful and honest about the LSA limits. You abuse anything and it can get taken away. Although I do wish it was a few pounds more so more existing 2 place aircraft would qualify like C140s and 150s.
 
Last edited:
ejensen said:
Not and stay an LSA, AFAIA. It can gain 220# to 1540 as an experimental or in some other countries if flown by a Private or beter pilot.
Click to expand...

True I did not specify.
 
Jeanie said:
~~~~ I thought there was a horsepower limit for LSA aircraft?
Click to expand...

There is no horsepower limit for LSA. There is, however an ASTM standard that uses a formula to calculate a minimum useful load per horsepower. The FAA chose NOT to adopt this standard. If they had, any aircraft with more than around 120 hp would have to have a very high useful load. A 180 hp Carbon Cub wouldn't even be close.
 
Last edited:
maddog52 said:
Your comments about the salesmen giving a wink and nudge about overweight operations is all too common and one of my pet peeves (it actually P$$$$$ me off). This is the kind of crap that makes it hard for LSA and Sport Pilot to gain legitamicy. I think I will have it addressed at the next LAMA meeting in Sebring. Maybe we can curtail it.
Click to expand...
As long as people continue to use LSAs as a replacement for traditional GA airplanes, the pressure to fly overgross will continue. 600kg airplane is simply not useful for cross-country flying. And I cannot imagine an LSA salesman saying with a straight face "this airplane is strictly for a Sunday afternoon pilot whose wife is very lean". Marketing of LSA airplanes as a cheaper alternative continues and will continue, unless something drastic happens, like removal of 3rd Class Medical Certificate.

-- Pete
 
zaitcev said:
As long as people continue to use LSAs as a replacement for traditional GA airplanes, the pressure to fly overgross will continue. 600kg airplane is simply not useful for cross-country flying. And I cannot imagine an LSA salesman saying with a straight face "this airplane is strictly for a Sunday afternoon pilot whose wife is very lean". Marketing of LSA airplanes as a cheaper alternative continues and will continue, unless something drastic happens, like removal of 3rd Class Medical Certificate.

-- Pete
Click to expand...

The thing is, there are a lot of LSAs that are great replacements for "traditional GA airplanes". Many have better useful loads and higher cruise speeds than a C150 and will cruise faster and farther than an older C172 or PA28. It's the guys that thumb their noses at the rules to try to make a sale that are the problem.

And lord knows all LSAs aren't useful for cross country.:rolleyes2: I mean, who would want an airplane that could take two adults (yes young adults) from Jacksonville, FL to Sandiego, CA in nineteen and a half hours.
http://www.worldrecordsacademy.org/...by_Matt_Hansen_and_Jessica_Scharle _90260.htm

LSAs can't replace all GA aircraft but they can be extremely capable and canl definitely replace some aircraft and definitely enhance the GA fleet.
 
I burn more fuel in a month in my turbo 182 than i would burn in a year in the jabiru I had. It was a great x-country plane.
 
Be nice now! :wink2: I flew my Cherokee 140 from Miami to VanNuys airport......but I didn't try to do it in one day. There were times that I saw an amazing ground speed of 45 knots on the GPS. Even at 110-115 knots I didn't think I'd ever get to peel that Cherokee off of my butt.

Seriously though, I do agree. LSA is not for someone who wants to get there fast. But, if you don't.......what a great way to kill time, huh? :cheerswine:

maddog52 said:
The thing is, there are a lot of LSAs that are great replacements for "traditional GA airplanes". Many have better useful loads and higher cruise speeds than a C150 and will cruise faster and farther than an older C172 or PA28. It's the guys that thumb their noses at the rules to try to make a sale that are the problem.

And lord knows all LSAs aren't useful for cross country.:rolleyes2: I mean, who would want an airplane that could take two adults (yes young adults) from Jacksonville, FL to Sandiego, CA in nineteen and a half hours.
http://www.worldrecordsacademy.org/...by_Matt_Hansen_and_Jessica_Scharle _90260.htm

LSAs can't replace all GA aircraft but they can be extremely capable and canl definitely replace some aircraft and definitely enhance the GA fleet.
Click to expand...
 
There are some very slick LSA's out there with performance that significantly exceeds traditional 2-seat 85-100 HP planes. However, this does come at a price. Start disassembling one, and you may be negatively surprised at what you find in the way of construction and design. The lack of conventional standards has allowed manufacturers to do things which make many A&P's and engineers blanch when the start looking inside.
 
Ron Levy said:
There are some very slick LSA's out there with performance that significantly exceeds traditional 2-seat 85-100 HP planes. However, this does come at a price. Start disassembling one, and you may be negatively surprised at what you find in the way of construction and design. The lack of conventional standards has allowed manufacturers to do things which make many A&P's and engineers blanch when the start looking inside.
Click to expand...

I agree with what Ron says.

It might also be said that modern materials and construction techniques may allow design and construction of airplanes that significantly improve on older methods, for examples see the Columbia/Cessna and Cirrus.

It would seem to me that any LSA buyer would need to pursue due diligence and conduct a good deal of research. That can be a challenge for all of us, and that is where reliance on opinions, old-wive's-tales and bias are our enemies. But, who of us is qualified to sort out all the conflicting information?
 
ejensen said:
You can do maintenance on either S-LSA or E-LSA with the right training and certificate. The builder might be able to do his own E-LSA without the 120 hour course, I'm not sure. The certificate lets you work on any aircraft if the manual (and owner) permit even for pay. An E-LSA can have the annual done with on the Inspection rating, a weekend course. Repairs have to be done by a LSA repairman or A&P.
Click to expand...

Here is what Rainbow Aviation says:

Repairman Inspection Rating (ELSA only- does not apply to SLSA)
This rating allows you to conduct the annual condition inspection on an E-LSA you own. It requires the successful completion of an FAA accepted, 16-hour course on the inspection of your particular class of LSA.
Repairman Maintenance Rating (for SLSA)
This rating allows you to perform maintenance and the annual condition inspection on S-LSA’s and E-LSA’s for compensation or hire. It requires the completion of a course on the maintenance requirements of various light-sport aircraft. It takes 120 hours for airplanes.

There are also specific engine training requirements established by the engine manufacturer, such as Rotax and Jabiru.
 
jnmeade said:
Here is what Rainbow Aviation says:

Repairman Inspection Rating (ELSA only- does not apply to SLSA)
This rating allows you to conduct the annual condition inspection on an E-LSA you own. It requires the successful completion of an FAA accepted, 16-hour course on the inspection of your particular class of LSA.
Repairman Maintenance Rating (for SLSA)
This rating allows you to perform maintenance and the annual condition inspection on S-LSA’s and E-LSA’s for compensation or hire. It requires the completion of a course on the maintenance requirements of various light-sport aircraft. It takes 120 hours for airplanes.

There are also specific engine training requirements established by the engine manufacturer, such as Rotax and Jabiru.
Click to expand...

Thanks, I thinks that's what I was trying to say. The regs are hard to follow but EAA, Rainbow and others help.

I'm still not sure whether an E-LSA builder (assembler) has any maintenance privileges or has to get the same training.
 
Ron Levy said:
There are some very slick LSA's out there with performance that significantly exceeds traditional 2-seat 85-100 HP planes. However, this does come at a price. Start disassembling one, and you may be negatively surprised at what you find in the way of construction and design. The lack of conventional standards has allowed manufacturers to do things which make many A&P's and engineers blanch when the start looking inside.
Click to expand...

Any specific examples you'd care to share. That's a broad brush, Ron. ASTM may not be FAA standards but they are standards.

I don't think these aircraft will last 50 years or more like some flying today. But they don't seem to be falling out of the sky either.
 
zaitcev said:
When I saw the verdict of these numbers, I started running every day. Then I gave up on LSAs (because they are impossible to rent in my area), but continued running. This is something to consider, your body will only thank you later.
Click to expand...

Well, except for your knees... but those are STC'ed replacement items, these days. ;)
 
ejensen said:
AI don't think these aircraft will last 50 years or more like some flying today. But they don't seem to be falling out of the sky either.
Click to expand...

Uuugh, that isn't entirely true in every case.

n601wd-clouds.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top