Here's what I'd like to do, hopefully someone tell me if it's possible. I've yet to run this by a Sport CFI, as I can't find one in my area, yet. My question(s) are regarding "what's already been proposed" in MOSAIC, so pretend it passes as is for my situation. I want to buy a experimental JMB VL-3 w/retractable gear, then find an "capable" Sport CFI and have him/her train me in my own plane, use it for the checkride, cross country etc.... just never use the retractable gear while being trained, either by disabling it, locking it in place or maybe even removing the fuse. Whatever method would be deemed "legally" acceptable, if any. I've read somewhere the retracts can be mechanically locked into place, for sure remove the hydraulic cylinders and cover the holes, JMB offers a kit to do this. Then, after attaining Sport Pilot certification, get the SP CFI endorsement for the retractable gear, and everyone is good to go? Is this currently doable now, or have to wait until MOSAIC is "law", or just train in it until MOSAIC, or fly with someone else as PIC, fly with gear locked until MOSAIC? ... The bottom line is I only want to buy 1 plane and be trained as a Sport Pilot to fly this plane. Any comments or advice, suggestions? Thankx in advance
Sport Pilot training/plane question
- Thread starter rgb30b
- Start date
There are so many wonderfully weird Questions on this list! No idea.
It does bring to mind some company recently hawking an advanced training plane to big schools with a fixed gear but also with a gear handle in the cockpit so students start off pretending they’re flying complex airplanes.
It does bring to mind some company recently hawking an advanced training plane to big schools with a fixed gear but also with a gear handle in the cockpit so students start off pretending they’re flying complex airplanes.
Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe
Touchdown! Greaser!
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2008
- Messages
- 15,643
- Location
- DXO124009
- Display Name
Display name:
Light and Sporty Guy
"Continuously since certification"
So, if an aircraft ever had retractable gear, it is forever not an LSA (under the current rules).
So, if an aircraft ever had retractable gear, it is forever not an LSA (under the current rules).
Most retract gear airplanes have more drag with the gear down than a fixed gear airplane because the fixed gear has some streamline components to improve airflow around the gear. Retract gear is not streamlined creating more drag and poorer performance in climb and cruise. I would reconsider.
Your idea of being trained I your own airplane is good. I did the same thing, after getting my solo I finished my training in my own bird. I think you can train in your own RG airplane, I know early Mooney owners did just that back in the day.
One Miracle at a time.
Your idea of being trained I your own airplane is good. I did the same thing, after getting my solo I finished my training in my own bird. I think you can train in your own RG airplane, I know early Mooney owners did just that back in the day.
One Miracle at a time.
Last edited:
Well, I've got approx 150 hrs "experience" in a 172RG and a Cherokee 6, just never got the PPL, family and bills came first. I worked with a couple of guys in the oil fields in the late 70's, early 80's, I was barely 18 yrs old ... , one guy also traded the 6 for a Mooney before I left but I never actually flew it. I spent quite a bit of time in the 2 listed, including takeoffs and landing them. Ive been retired for 2 yrs now, retired at 59 1/2, and MOSAIC has got me going again. As one person has mentioned, "once retracts, never an LSA".. same thing for "adjustable prop, never an LSA".. well, not only is the definition of Light Sport going away ... one of it's "proposed " replacements, the VL3, has retracts and an adjustable prop ... and it can fly over 200 mph! The times, they are "a changin'"....
midlifeflyer
Touchdown! Greaser!
Agreed. while there are exceptions, you will typically lose performance with the gear down in a retract compared with the same airplane in a fixed gear variant.
Thats a valid question... actually there's "a lot" more time, and "a lot" more money between the two licenses. But neither is the reason. Simply no desire to fly at night, inclement weather or carry 4 people. Nor do I want to invest $1,000's in plane rentals. My mission is sort of like 600-800 miles a day @ 180-200 mph, using 8-10 GPH with a set of golf clubs and a 5' 6" brunette. Glass panels, A/P and a 750 GTNxi. There's a couple of MLSA's as Dan Johnson says... and 1, maybe 2 RV's that will fit this bill in the world of MOSAIC. Richard "Van" is pushing for 56 knot stall speed.. that would get most all his planes in MOSAIC.
I could never understand a car lease or renting when those same dollars could go to ownership! The only advantage to do that in a plane for me would "maybe" a couple of hard landings. As I mentioned, although it's been nearly 40 years, I have around 150 hrs in 2 different planes, and I'm a quick study... so I'd rather not "invest" in someone else's airplane.
tsts4
Pattern Altitude
You've never owned an airplane then. Ownership is by far more expensive than renting no matter how you compare the numbers--by a wide margin. However, there are non-monetary benefits than can make ownership desirable. For me it's access to my plane when I want it. But don't kid yourself into thinking ownership will somehow be cheaper.
Last edited:
That's true, I've never owned a plane. But I've gone thru and owned 23 motorcycles, 3 homes and 2 small business's. I sold my old muscle cars and I'm out of the motorcycle and "small" business as of last fall. Only thing(s) left is my house, a '17 Accord Coupe, a 2018 911 Carrera S, a '95 Silverado and 2 properties ... all paid for with cash. So yes I agree, there certainly are non-monetary benefits to ownership!
tsts4
Pattern Altitude
The economics of aircraft ownership and the assets you listed are quite different--more akin to boat ownership but that's not a perfect analogy either. I suggest you do some more research on the subject as your prior experience has little bearing on this. You seem to be focusing on the acquisition cost but that just the tip of the iceberg as far as ownership goes.
StraightnLevel
Line Up and Wait
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2023
- Messages
- 546
- Display Name
Display name:
StraightnLevel
Whoa....glad you mentioned that one. That seems like it could be a really nice solo or 2-person XC bird.
Definitely not doable under current LSA rules. Under MOSAIC, well, we really don't know what the final version of MOSAIC will look like, or when it will really happen, so buying an airplane now for what you think MOSAIC will look like is probably a bad idea.
A well designed airplane with fixed gear won't be all that much slower than a retract... and it will be simpler, more reliable, and cost less (not just direct cost but maintenance cost, insurance cost, etc.).
A well designed airplane with fixed gear won't be all that much slower than a retract... and it will be simpler, more reliable, and cost less (not just direct cost but maintenance cost, insurance cost, etc.).
Actually I've had a 26' Mariah some years ago, cost $200 just to hook it to ball hitch on my truck! I'm planning on approx $60-$80 an hour to actually fly. I'll build my own hanger and get the Rotax mechanics training certification. I'm acutely aware of insurance, annual maintenance and other costs. I don't have it all figured out, but starting out with an experimental plane and plan to get the Rotax training to do a lot of the routine maintenance is a big headstart and quite an advantage. Also, as I understand it, the MOSAIC "mechanic" details arent completey worked out yet. We'll see.
midlifeflyer
Touchdown! Greaser!
Yeah but there's a heck of a lot of difference between all of those and an airplane. As I learned on my first student solo cross country, in an airplane, you can't just pull over when you have a problem. Maybe you really do see you doing all the mechanical work on the experimental yourself, but as soon as you move to outside maintenance, you are basically tied to very expensive vertical market economics. If you've considered all that and your math still comes out ahead, great. Go for it.
Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe
Touchdown! Greaser!
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2008
- Messages
- 15,643
- Location
- DXO124009
- Display Name
Display name:
Light and Sporty Guy
There is a lot of a difference between the on paper minimum time requirements. But for many people, not so much of a difference in what it actually takes to get a ticket. Some instructors may chime in, but my understanding is that most pilots run over the required minimum hours before they are ready for the check ride.
Buying Experimental Armature Built or E-LSA does let you do a lot of maintenance / modification on your own. That saves on labor. But, I will mention that Rotax parts / special tools are not exactly inexpensive. And, for some tasks, say, replacing the seals in the water pump, or a gear box inspection, you are just better off shipping the accessory or gear case to someone with all the special tools (IMO). Personally, I pay an A&P to do the condition inspection each year, and I do nearly everything else.
tsts4
Pattern Altitude
Well that's a plan. I plan for a living, and I personally think you're being overly optimistic in your assessment and assumptions, but I hope you succeed and prove me wrong.
When I got my PPL I suggested going for a sport pilot instead. The arguments in favor of a PPL over a sport pilot are sound. If you can get a 3rd Class Medical, than you can go either way. One limits you to one passenger, limited airplanes, and limited navigation. Now some of these limits you can get logbook endorsements for, but others you must get a PPL to get around. That neans more training and a second check ride. The added training to be able to fly at night, and to fly in controlled airspace, and to navigate anywhere is not that much more and it is well worth it. You are going to want to do it anyway sooner or later, especially if you own your own plane.
I have not flown at night since buying Mooney, just because I've been busy. But there is something magical about flying on a moonlit night in good weather. Most of my night flying has been limited to training flights at my home airport and flights that originated in daylight and ended at night at my destination. (I don't like to preflight in the dark.) Having that ability might allow you to complete your trip after waiting for weather to move out, or allow you to stay a little longer with friends or family during a visit. This requires you to be able to maintain contolled flight on instruments, which may come in handy if you find yourself flying in a milk bottle with your only good reference being straight down! The first time I flew to Tangier Island I realized I was in a milk bottle over the bay. The bay and the sky were the same color! My training kicked in and and I maintained my course until I could see the island ahead. After you have your PPL, you don't have to fly at night if you don't want to, but being trained to do so might save your life. You should embrace it.
These extra things involve more training, but not a whole lot more, and it pays you back by allowing you to have more choices when you fly, where you fly, and what you fly. In 2004 I started flying lessons again after 22 years away from flying. It took 75 hours for me to get my PPL. I did it in 11 months what with me working and rain delays. I'll bet you could do it in 4 or 5 months if you scheduled 3 days or 4 hours a week. If you buy your own airplane you are going to do a lot of flying anyway. Why not train for that?
Now for the last part: The best value in aviation today is good well maintained older aircraft with about 600 hours SMOH. In 2004 I bought a 1968 Piper Cherokee 140 with 160HP 4400 hrs TTAF and 0 hrs SMOH, new interior and 5 year old paint for $42K. It almost looked new. After 500 hrs of flying and 14 years later I sold it for $32K, and my broker told me it was the best example of the type on the market at that time. The following year I bought a 1964 Mooney M20E 200HP with 2800 TTAF and 800 SMOH for $40K. It is better in nearly every way from the Cherokee. It takes off shorter, climbs better, flies faster, burns less fuel, carries more stuff, and can still handle the grass runway I fly to regularly. I am not limited in what to buy by my PPL, but you will be if you get a SPL. When you have grand kids or grand nieces and nefews, you might want a Skywagon or a Navion to ferry them around in. These airplanes are available in good shape for reasonable money, and will do well for you if you find good people to help you maintain them.
If you haven't started your training yet, I'd start training now in their airplane. Then buy a good used bird to use after your first solo, or buy your own RG bird and transition to it when it comes in. Complete your training in your own bird, get your PPL, and never look back.
Last edited:
dbahn
Pattern Altitude
Just to be clear, none of those items require annual inspections under the authorization of a federal agency. If you own a $100,000 airplane and a mechanic can't certifiy that the engine meets inspection criteria, your airplane is grounded until you overhaul the engine for something around $70,000 when done. You can sell the airplane, but you still are down by the $70k.
I appreciate your concern. It'll "likely" be a $300,000 plane that I will maintain myself to the full extent as I legally can. Im well aware of the annual inspection.
Hmm, quite the contrary here, I plan to live. To be honest, I used to get that a lot in my 20's and 30's... since I retired, not so much anymore. Oh sure there's a few people still in the salt mines that disagree, but they always did, and always will! Let's just say my expectations can be met by my capabilities.
Last edited:
Maybe you missed the part where I've flown 150 hrs in 2 different planes, "illegally of course but thats between me and you", nonetheless, landings and takeoffs, ILS ... albeit 40 years ago.
I appreciate you comments, very interesting story. No doubt you've been around the block a few times. As I mentioned however, I have no desire to fly at night, in inclement weather or haul 4 passengers ...
My intention is to do everything a SP Repairman can legally do when MOSAIC becomes law. I've turned a lot of wrenches in my life.
Yes, it's one of a few options I'm interested in, the Sparker is another, as it has similar capabilities. It's another 200 MPH, modern glass instrument panel, parachute, 7.5 GAL, 1,000 range airplane. Have a look, its a TL Sport Aircraft.
midlifeflyer
Touchdown! Greaser!
Nope. Just responded to what you wrote in that post.
tsts4
Pattern Altitude
Ok. Go get your pilots certificate (whichever version you settle on), get your plane, fly for a year and report back with all your numbers open kimono and I’ll publicly sing your praises if you’re correct. Until then you can say what you want but it’s merely speculation on the part of a non-pilot, non-owner. That said I sincerely wish you luck and hope you succeed.
It's been awhile since I read through the actual proposed rule, but as I recall there were no significant changes in the maintenance rules. The big thing MOSAIC does is to expand the types of aircraft a Sport Pilot can fly, but it doesn't make those other (larger, faster) aircraft LSA for the purpose of maintenance.
Anybody can work on any experimental. Only the annual (condition) inspection has to be done by an A&P, or the holder of a repairman certificate. This applies to E-AB or E-LSA. For E-AB, only the builder can get the repairman certificate; for ELSA, any owner can take the 16 hour course and get the certificate.
A LSA-compliant aircraft with a standard airworthiness certificate (e.g. Piper Cub today, maybe C-172 or Cherokee after MOSAIC) will still be standard airworthiness, requiring an A&P for all maintenance other than limited "preventative maintenance" which requires at least a PP. A holder of a LSA repairman certificate can't work on these aircraft, even though they meet the LSA limits.
A LSA repairman (or A&P) can work on new SLSA certificated aircraft.
A new SLSA can be converted (a paperwork exercise) to ELSA, then anybody can work on it, but it may reduce the aircraft's resale value.
For somebody wanting to work on their own plane, the most practical thing is probably a used E-AB with a legacy (Lycoming, Continental) engine. You will need an A&P for the annual, but a second set of eyes once a year isn't a bad thing anyway. You can do all your own work, and you can get help from your A&P for anything you don't want or don't know how to tackle yourself. Not all A&Ps have the specialized tools and knowledge (or desire!) to work on Rotax engines. The A&P on my field won't work on (or even do an annual) on anything other than Lycoming or Continental engines.
StraightnLevel
Line Up and Wait
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2023
- Messages
- 546
- Display Name
Display name:
StraightnLevel
How so? Flight hours are only part of the cost equation, and even that portion is not linear. You still have to pass a written, you still have to pass a checkride, you still have to get all of the normal kit (headset, assorted study guides, flight kit, etc.). If the cost delta between SP and PPL is something you see as significant, you're going to hit a wall very rapidly in the rest of aviation costs. Now, if you don't ever see yourself wanting to use PPL privileges, there's no reason to go beyond SP - but your stated desire to do your own maintenance would seem to push you to PPL at some point anyway.
There is one BIG difference between other mechanical toys and planes that I think you are leaving out of your model - time-based costs.
Cars, boats, and motorcycles don't cost very much when they sit idle. Aside from the annual license fee and insurance, they're relatively inert financially when sitting still. Planes are not. You will pay the annual inspection costs, ADs, hangar rental, insurance, etc. regardless of how much you fly it. These expenses are not trivial, particularly in the lower end of the capital cost range (like the VL3 you mentioned). This is where renting comes out ahead, and it all comes down to utilization.
Think of it this way: Assume your annual runs $10K, insurance is $6K, and your hangar rental is $9K ($750/month). If you fly 50 hours/year, that's $500/hour before you even talk about capital cost and fuel. At 100 hrs, it drops to $250. To get down to break even with a rental, you generally need to be flying ~300 hours/year (this is my math - you should do your own).
In manufacturing, we call this capital utilization and/or overhead cost absorption. A capital asset with associated time-based costs can't sit idle without becoming a financial boat anchor - and that's the way it works with airplanes.
Last edited:
BMan
Pre-Flight
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2023
- Messages
- 82
- Display Name
Display name:
BMan
As a number cruncher myself, well said. However, another cost factor to consider when comparing owning vs rental: long-term long-distance trips; a rental will come with a LOT of additional cost as the renter must pay the opportunity cost for the potential lost rental revenue when taking that rental on a 1-2wk trip (if it's even allowed where one rents). Looking into this myself, a club might be an option (or not, depending on club rules).
For my retirement, my plans are to fly wherever, whenever to visit people and tour vacation spots across the country at my leisure and at the mercy of mother nature. Rental would not work very well for that spontaneity in my case and I have no guarantee there's a club in my eventual retirement location amenable to that usage. So, buying may be the best capital utilization choice to meet the needs for someone in my mission scenario.
Albany Tom
En-Route
- Joined
- Jul 23, 2021
- Messages
- 3,492
- Display Name
Display name:
Albany Tom
I did sport and then private pilot, so I'm a little familiar with the process. I won't comment on the money part, because there's no way to slice flying for fun except that it's a cost. I will suggest that you just get the sport now, while you can, with whatever aircraft is simplest and affordable. Keep in mind that you don't have to train in a sport aircraft, except to solo and enough time in one to be signed off on the solo. I'm suggesting to split primarily because the fewer "ifs" or dependencies you have on getting your ticket, the less likely and probably slower it'll be.
The other reason I'm suggesting decoupling is because I believe that at least in the beginning, being exposed to flying more than 1 or 2 different aircraft makes you a better pilot. An opinion I picked up from the first guy I learned to fly from, and that makes sense to me. No proof for that, just that it feels like it expands the way you think about flying a bit.
The other reason I'm suggesting decoupling is because I believe that at least in the beginning, being exposed to flying more than 1 or 2 different aircraft makes you a better pilot. An opinion I picked up from the first guy I learned to fly from, and that makes sense to me. No proof for that, just that it feels like it expands the way you think about flying a bit.
As I mentioned, I have no particular desire to attain PPL. I'm basing a lot on what shakes out in MOSAIC. Having said that, I can't imagine FAA will renege on what it put out there. In fact, I expect the proposed VS1 to increase a bit, maybe 56-58 knots to include several Vans aircraft, he's pushing it hard! I'll get CFI endorsement for retracts. I expect night flying will be allowed without 3rd Class medical as well. Anyway, I plan to get iRMT - independent Rotax Maintenance Training. The "service" course includes 100 hr and annuals, and maybe the "maintenance" course which consists of component replacement. Not sure of the details of the maintenance course, but I'll do the service course for sure. Also, not sure where you get a $10,000 annual for a Rotax engine? A complete overhaul to Rotax specs is $12K. Engine has 2000 hr. TBO. There's quite a few 100 hr inspections in a 2,000 TBO! Anyway, no hanger costs, I'll build a hanger on my own strip. Yes, Im very familiar with "Capital Utilization & Overhead Cost absorption"! These are buzz phrases for the term "sunk costs". I plan 175-225 flying hrs a year, you're probably pretty close for insurance. Fuel ($10.5K), insurance ($7K), 100 hr ($750?), annual ($1.5K?), oil change(s), etc ... approx $18-22K per year. This is a pretty good estimate, good enough for now. Appreciate your input.
StraightnLevel
Line Up and Wait
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2023
- Messages
- 546
- Display Name
Display name:
StraightnLevel
You're making a LOT of assumptions about a rule change that has been delayed multiple times (and is likely to be delayed again).
As I understand the current proposal, it would only allow night flying with an endorsement AND BasicMed. Have you talked with an instructor about the process for getting that endorsement, and how it would compare to finishing the PPL? Combine this with the complex aircraft endorsement for RG, and I'm not sure why you're avoiding the PPL. It would seem to be the faster, easier approach to getting all of the credentials you want to use.
As for pushing the stall speed up, well....it might happen. If it does, it almost certainly will be accompanied by further delays as the FAA studies it, re-writes the proposed rules, re-writes and publishes all of the associated materials, studies it some more, then makes up their minds. Be careful what you wish for.
OK, that's great, but if I understand the CFR definition of preventive maintenance correctly, you can still can't do much more than change the oil, filter, and spark plugs without having an IA and/or A&P involved, even with a LSA airplane. To do your own maintenance fully, you have to go home-built experimental.
The annual cost involves a lot more than just the engine. Ask a few owners how much they average per year. One AD can add a bunch to it, as would any prop damage. Stuff happens.
The last annual on my Mooney came in at $1850. The flat rate is $1350 plus parts. They had to add a front tire this time for almost $400. The last couple of annuals were more but only because I added upgrade work to the annual. I closed up the "guppy mouth" two annuals back, and I needed new engine mounts to get it done. Three annuals back I replace the engine instruments with a CGR30P. All these are long life upgrades that are not likely to be repeated anytime soon. I have owned 35Y for 5 years now, and purchse price plus 4 annuals is just over $70k. Not bad considering I added ADS-B and all the little things I did to improve my bird. 1964 M20E 2950 TTAF
A 10K annual and 6K insurance is my Seneca.
A 2K annual and 1K insurance is my Grumman.
It would have to be a really bad day to get an annual to 10K on an LSA.
A 2K annual and 1K insurance is my Grumman.
It would have to be a really bad day to get an annual to 10K on an LSA.
StraightnLevel
Line Up and Wait
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2023
- Messages
- 546
- Display Name
Display name:
StraightnLevel
What's $40k new? The VL3 is 10x that.