LSA requirements

stingray

stingray

Line Up and Wait
Joined
Jan 15, 2007
Messages
671
Location
Grantsburg WI
Display Name
Display name:
Daniel Michaels
Someone just told me today that they are changing the LSA rules to include the Cessna 150. Has anyone heard anything on this subject?

Dan
 
Where, or where do these rumors come from? As I keep saying, you can wish wish wish and some think that makes it so.....
 
LSA rules were designed to reign in the two-seat ultralights, not breathe life into GA. Heck, that's the last thing the FAA would want.
 
That's what I thought but you can not tell some people something.

Dan
 
steingar said:
LSA rules were designed to reign in the two-seat ultralights, not breathe life into GA. Heck, that's the last thing the FAA would want.
Click to expand...

That's the way it started for sure. But considering the number of people that can now fly that weren't able to before and the number of new aircraft available, it's hard to say the LSA movement hasn't stimulated GA.
 
I for one would like to see the weight limit raised to include the 150, Cub, and a few border line aircraft. The more old timers (pilots & planes) we can keep flhying the better it is.

The speed limit has always been rediculous. We are the only country (that I know of) to restrict the speed of LSA. It should be based on gross weight and full flap stall speed. This is why so many of the EU aircraft had to be dummy downed to fly here.
 
Regardless of the reality, the FAA's primary intent for LSA was to bring the illegal pseudo-ultralights inside the tent where they could be regulated effectively.
 
dmccormack said:
Yeah, those turbine powered Chiefs, most likely... :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

As far as the Champs go, there are differences that would seem unimportant, but can kick certain ones out of LSA qualification, like oleo v. bungee main gear, etc.


Trapper John
 
Trapper John said:
On some of them anyway, the oleo gear raises the gross to 1,350 lb if factory installed, or if field installed with the correct placards.

Trapper John
Click to expand...

I'll have to check with the Aeronca folks...may be the case. My Chief wieghs 880 lbs, so makes the limit by a long shot.
 
Last edited:
dmccormack said:
I'll have to check with the Aeronca folks...may be the case. My Chief wieghs 880 lbs, so makes the limit by a long shot.
Click to expand...

Chiefs may not even be an issue at all, but I do know it's an issue for some Champs.

If you're in doubt, get a CD of all your plane's documentation from OK City. That's really the official record of what your gross is. And it's gross, not empty that determines if it's LSA eligible.

One dumb part of the LSA rules are if an AC was ever configured for a gross over 1,320, you can't go back and reconfigure for less than or equal to 1,320.


Trapper John
 
Trapper John said:
Chiefs may not even be an issue at all, but I do know it's an issue for some Champs.

If you're in doubt, get a CD of all your plane's documentation from OK City. That's really the official record of what your gross is. And it's gross, not empty that determines if it's LSA eligible.

One dumb part of the LSA rules are if an AC was ever configured for a gross over 1,320, you can't go back and reconfigure for less than or equal to 1,320.


Trapper John
Click to expand...


I do have the CD -- requested it before I purchased. I also have logs back to 1940 -- pretty neat!
 
dmccormack said:
Yep -- gross in the Chief is 1250 (shoulda added that -- thanks for the correction!)
Click to expand...

880 empty and 1250 gross? That's slightly worse than my Porterfield (800 empty 1200 gross) and I can only carry 10 gallons with two 170 lb people in the plane. I hope you don't weigh much:D.
 
gismo said:
880 empty and 1250 gross? That's slightly worse than my Porterfield (800 empty 1200 gross) and I can only carry 10 gallons with two 170 lb people in the plane. I hope you don't weigh much:D.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I know.... it has a 12gal header tank, so there's not much carrying capacity for anvils, snowmobiles, tubas, and other stuff I need to tote around.

:frown2:
 
Trapper John said:
Yeah, for $100k and up you get about the same as a $15-17k C-150...


Trapper John
Click to expand...

For a 25+ year old airplane. Nothing wrong with that. I fly my brothers 1947 Luscombe 8A and it is a lot of fun. But a lot of the LSAs will outperform a C-150, 8A, J-3, or Champ in any category you can think of. Heck, some are faster and roomier than the older 172s. And 100k for a NEW SLSA is still 1/3 the cost of any NEW factory built type certificated aircraft.
 
maddog52 said:
For a 25+ year old airplane. Nothing wrong with that. I fly my brothers 1947 Luscombe 8A and it is a lot of fun. But a lot of the LSAs will outperform a C-150, 8A, J-3, or Champ in any category you can think of. Heck, some are faster and roomier than the older 172s. And 100k for a NEW SLSA is still 1/3 the cost of any NEW factory built type certificated aircraft.
Click to expand...

Don't know that I'd say 1/3 the cost, more like half. Both the DA-20 and XL-2 at roughly 200K, and have similar characteristics. In any case, the S-LSA's and older airplanes that are SP eligible are much more fun to fly.
 
Geico266 said:
I for one would like to see the weight limit raised to include the 150, Cub, and a few border line aircraft. The more old timers (pilots & planes) we can keep flhying the better it is.

The speed limit has always been rediculous. We are the only country (that I know of) to restrict the speed of LSA. It should be based on gross weight and full flap stall speed. This is why so many of the EU aircraft had to be dummy downed to fly here.
Click to expand...

The 1320lb is already an increase. It was originally proposed at 1232 lbs. It was increased for a number of reasons including having the ability to put onboard additional safety equipment like radios and BRS, as well as allowing more of the old classics to qualify. No matter what you set the limit at, there will always be somebody who thinks it should be raised just enough to qualify his favorite plane wheter it's a C-150 or a TBM.:rolleyes:

The clean stall speed was chosen because it is something that every airplane has demonstrated, not just those with lift enhancing devices.
The speed limit and weight were also chosen in order to limit the available kinetic energy. The ASTM committe and the FAA were actually trying to limit the damage an LSA can do to property on the ground. Keep in mind also that the original intent was to reign in ultralights that could never come close to a Vh of 120 KCAS.

Bottom line, don't expect any major changes to the basic parameters of LSA, just refinements and clarifications.
 
Trapper John said:
Yeah, for $100k and up you get about the same as a $15-17k C-150...Trapper John
Click to expand...

Why spend $100k? I just bought a Sonex a few months back. Blast to
fly. I see 130mph at suggested cruise rpm. Fits nicely into LSA. I probably
over paid .. but it's very nicely built and equipped. You could build one for
probably $25k + whatever added goodies you want to put in it.

RT
 
Comparing an experimental to a factory-produced design isn't exactly apples and oranges.

But I'd rather have something like a Sonex or an RV-12, than a lot of the flimsy factory-produced LSAs.


Trapper John
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top