 |
Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
MichaelGibbs(at)cox.net
Guest
|
 Posted: Sat Nov 04, 2006 12:31 am Post subject: "maximum takeoff weight" Page by page |
 |
|
Steve sez:
| Quote: | So, on page 44793...The maximum weight of a light-sport aircraft is
the sum of:
(1) Aircraft empty weight;
(2) Weight of the passenger for each seat installed;
(3) Baggage allowance for each passenger; and
(4) Full fuel, including a minimum of the half-hour fuel reserve
required for day visual flight rules in 91.151 (a)(1).
|
This is not the definition of "maximum takeoff weight." You have
taken this section completely out of context. The paragraphs
preceding it describe concerns that some commentors had that people
would try to operate much heavier airplanes as light sports by
playing the very game you are attempting. The FAA agreed that some
people would try to do that and added this poorly-worded text to
their narrative. This is not regulatory, it's a comment.
Maximum takeoff weight is a fixed value applied by the manufacturer
(the "amateur" in the case of amateur-built aircraft) and does not
change from one flight to another, regardless of the aircraft's
loading. Adding the 4 values listed above produces a "takeoff
weight" not a "maximum takeoff weight" and is meaningless with regard
to LSA limitations.
Mike G.
N728KF
| | - The Matronics Kitfox-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
84KF
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 04, 2006 6:51 am Post subject: Re: |
|
|
This is not the definition of "maximum takeoff weight." You have
taken this section completely out of context.
In what way? PLEASE explain.
Maximum takeoff weight is a fixed value applied by the manufacturer
(the "amateur" in the case of amateur-built aircraft) and does not
change from one flight to another, regardless of the aircraft's
loading.
VERY VERY WRONG, Show you reference to that profound declaration! You just now, made up your own difinition based on personal opinion. Can't do that.
"The FAA agreed that some people would try to do that and added this poorly-worded text to their narrative. "
Why is it poorly-worded? I'ts beautiful.
Federal Register
Certification of Aircraft and Airman for the Operation of Light-Sport aircraft; Final Rule. Dated July 27, 2004
"The FAA realized it needed to and did, include the definition of “maximum takeoff weight” as it applies to the LSA definition in 1.1 and it is found on page 44793 of
Federal Register
Certification of Aircraft and Airman for the Operation of Light-Sport aircraft; Final Rule. Dated July 27, 2004
It says, verbatim,
Some commentators stated that lacking a definition of maximum take off weight, aircraft with fairly high performance characteristics could meet the definition of light-sport aircraft by limiting the approved weight and payload of the airplane. The FAA considers this a valid concern and has provided some additional constraints on the weight as detailed below. The maximum weight of a light-sport aircraft is the sum of :
(1) Aircraft empty weight;
(2) Weight of the passenger for each seat installed;
(3) Baggage allowance for each passenger; and
(4) Full fuel, including a minimum of the half hour fuel reserve required for day visual flight rules in FAR 91.151(a)(1)
It is regulatory, and has now defined the conditions ONLY FOR LIGHT-SPORT weight issues. This is not a BLANKET statement, applicableto ANY casualy tossed out use or intended use of the term gross weight.
also
Please don't break a progressive thread by using my "subject title" to start a reply in a new post. Reply to the original post using the "reply button at the bottom of the original post. It will maintain the continuity of the discussion.
steve
| | - The Matronics Kitfox-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Flybradair(at)cs.com
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 04, 2006 7:32 am Post subject: "maximum takeoff weight" Page by page |
|
|
Any aircraft with the original certification filed with the FAA with a gross weight of 1320 or under can be flown LSA.
Any aircraft with the original certification filed with the FAA with a gross weight of over 1320 cannot be changed to meet LSA.
If you are still building you can set the gross weight at 1320 when you register the aircraft and fly LSA.
If you are done building and the aircraft is registered at 1550 then you cannot fly LSA.
Sorry Steve, your beating a dead horse.
Brad
Wichita
5- 1550 gross
In a message dated 11/4/06 8:56:53 AM Central Standard Time, stevebenesh(at)comcast.net writes:
| Quote: |
"The FAA realized it needed to and did, include the definition of “maximum takeoff weight†as it applies to the LSA definition in 1.1 and it is found on page 44793 of
Federal Register
Certification of Aircraft and Airman for the Operation of Light-Sport aircraft; Final Rule. Dated July 27, 2004
It says, verbatim,
Some commentators stated that lacking a definition of maximum take off weight, aircraft with fairly high performance characteristics could meet the definition of light-sport aircraft by limiting the approved weight and payload of the airplane. The FAA considers this a valid concern and has provided some additional constraints on the weight as detailed below. The maximum weight of a light-sport aircraft is the sum of :
(1) Aircraft empty weight;
(2) Weight of the passenger for each seat installed;
(3) Baggage allowance for each passenger; and
(4) Full fuel, including a minimum of the half hour fuel reserve required for day visual flight rules in FAR 91.151(a)(1) |
[quote][b]
| | - The Matronics Kitfox-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dave
Joined: 22 Sep 2006
Posts: 1382
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 04, 2006 7:35 am Post subject: "maximum takeoff weight" Page by page |
|
|
Kind of sick of this of this topic.
Bottom line----
If you not happy with LSA then go for it .
If not --well stay N numbered
All I see is LSA is a way to guys who lost aviation medical to fly with a
limit of 1320 lbs on wheels. But i stand to be corrected.
Dave
---
| | - The Matronics Kitfox-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-List |
|
_________________
Realtime Kitfox movies to separate the internet chatter from the truth
http://www.youtube.com/user/kitfoxflyer
Hundreds of Kitfox Movies
Most viewed Kitfox on youtube
Most popular on youtube
Highest rated on youtube |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
84KF
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 04, 2006 9:16 am Post subject: Re: |
|
|
“Adding the 4 values listed above produces a "takeoff weight"
This is correct, and you don’t realize it but you just determined the weight of the aircraft, at the time of takeoff…. and if it does not exceed 1320lbs (land) you have not exceeded the limit (for the aircraft) to be light-sport eligible. (if it meets the rest of the parameters).
“Any aircraft with the original certification filed with the FAA with a gross weight of 1320 or under can be flown LSA.”
Correct, if the rest of the parameters are meet also.
“Any aircraft with the original certification filed with the FAA with a gross weight of over 1320 cannot be changed to meet LSA.” You may not modify the aircraft in order to meet the definition, correct, but it is not Gross weight, or design weight that is the limiting factor.
It is true, you will not find any aircraft with a TCDS that is light-sport eligible to have a “maximum weight” (as written on a TCDS.) greater then 1320 lbs (land). That is an operation limitation and written in stone when certificated. But in some TCDS aircraft, if you do fill both seats with two big guys\gals, fill the tanks and add some baggage, “maximum weight” will easily bee exceeded, so you need to control loading in order to comply with “maximum takeoff weight”. to remain legal.
The “since original certification” is included to prohibit certificated (TCDS) aircraft from being modified to meet the definition in 1.1 eg. Change to small fuel tanks to reduce the weight of “full fuel”
“If you not happy with LSA then go for it .
If not --well stay N numbered”
??????????
What does this mean??? What does N numbers have to do with anything?? SLSA, ELSA, and amatuer-built that meet the definition, are all referred to by tha FAA as light-sport aircraft, and the ALL require N numbers.
Well, we can agree to disagree, but I have provided all regulatory information, not “opinions” or “personal interpretation” of the subject matter. If one insists on denying the facts, to justify a misconception of the regs, like one might have read on , say, JimBob’s Official Aeroplane and Tractor Website, then it is that person who has to deviate from the FAA’s definitions and guidelines.
steve
| | - The Matronics Kitfox-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Lynn Matteson
Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 2778
Location: Grass Lake, Michigan
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 04, 2006 9:50 am Post subject: "maximum takeoff weight" Page by page |
|
|
Or guys like me, Dave, who have never had a pilots license before, but
for one reason or another don't want to try for the medical, and are
willing to restrict themselves to the Sport Pilot rules, and have an
LSA plane to fly.
Lynn
On Saturday, November 4, 2006, at 10:35 AM, dave wrote:
| Quote: |
All I see is LSA is a way to guys who lost aviation medical to fly
with a limit of 1320 lbs on wheels. But i stand to be corrected.
Dave
|
| | - The Matronics Kitfox-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-List |
|
_________________
Lynn
Kitfox IV-Jabiru 2200
N369LM |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
84KF
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 04, 2006 10:53 am Post subject: Re: |
|
|
Mike, Sir,
In regards to:
(page 44793 of :Federal Register Certification of Aircraft and Airman for the Operation of Light-Sport aircraft; Final Rule. Dated July 27, 2004) “Some commentators stated that lacking a definition of maximum take off weight, aircraft with fairly high performance characteristics could meet the definition of light-sport aircraft by limiting the approved weight and payload of the airplane. The FAA considers this a valid concern and has provided some additional constraints on the weight as detailed below. The maximum weight of a light-sport aircraft is the sum of :
(1) Aircraft empty weight;
(2) Weight of the passenger for each seat installed;
(3) Baggage allowance for each passenger; and
(4) Full fuel, including a minimum of the half hour fuel reserve required for day visual flight rules in FAR 91.151(a)(1)”
If you are of the “opinion” that this statement was just “talk”, then apply this logic.
If you do not consider this definition as pertinent then why is there all the confusion with the way the rule is being “interpreted “ and why are we, and the aviation light-sport \sport pilot community discussing the issue in the first place???
If, and when, you do consider it pertinent, then it eliminates ANY and ALL confusion in EVERY case and has absolutely no negative effect to any rule or reg, and does not contradicts any intention and\or stated purpose of the new regulations. It does not change one single thing …not one, because the regulations are centered around this paragraph.
One is not defying the FAA, or challenging it, just the opposite, You are using the information they provided, as intended, to eliminate confusion, and comply with the Reg. The fact that it is not on the only page one wants to read does not make it disappear.
This is the “cipher”, or key , to proper understanding. If I ask 5 people to tell me the circumference of a circle 6.5 inches in diameter only using a tape measure, I MIGHT get 5 different readings, some more accurate than others, but if you apply Pi (the “key”) you get the same answer every time. No “almost’s”
That’s why it’s pertinent, and applicable That’s WHY it is there.
Steve
| | - The Matronics Kitfox-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MichaelGibbs(at)cox.net
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 05, 2006 10:58 am Post subject: "maximum takeoff weight" Page by page |
|
|
I had sed:
| Quote: | This is not the definition of "maximum takeoff
weight." You have taken this section completely
out of context.
|
To which Steve replied:
| Quote: | In what way? PLEASE explain.
|
I already did in my original reply. I'm not
going to play 20 question with you--try Noel for
that, he loves it.
I had sed:
| Quote: | Maximum takeoff weight is a fixed value applied
by the manufacturer (the "amateur" in the case
of amateur-built aircraft) and does not change
from one flight to another, regardless of the
aircraft's loading.
|
To which Steve replied:
| Quote: | VERY VERY WRONG, Show you reference to that
profound declaration! You just now, made up your
own difinition based on personal opinion. Can't
do that.
|
OK, let's start with the word "maximum." I think
#2 is particularly appropriate to this
discussion. From Merriam-Webster Dictionary
<http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/maximum>:
| Quote: | Main Entry: maximum
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural maxima /-s&-m& /; or maximums /-s(&-)m&mz/
Etymology: Latin, neuter of maximus biggest -- more at MAXIM
1 a : the greatest quantity or value attainable
or attained b : the period of highest, greatest,
or utmost development
2 : an upper limit allowed (as by a legal
authority) or allowable (as by the circumstances
of a particular case)
3 : the largest of a set of numbers;
specifically : the largest value assumed by a
real-valued continuous function defined on a
closed interval
- maximum adjective
|
By definition, a "maximum" is not TODAYs weight,
it is the MOST EVER. There is "takeoff weight",
the actual value for today's flight and a
"maximum takeoff weight", the most it can ever
be. The LSA rules refer to the "maximum takeoff
weight" not the actual takeoff weight.
I had sed:
| Quote: | "The FAA agreed that some people would try to do
that and added this poorly-worded text to their
narrative. "
|
To which Steve replied:
| Quote: | Why is it poorly-worded? I'ts beautiful.
|
It's poorly worded because it is ambiguous. You
have taken it's meaning as a definition of the
term "maximum takeoff weight" and I have taken it
as narrative. Clearly it is not clear enough.
Steve followed with:
| Quote: | Please don't break a progressive thread by using
my "subject title" to start a reply in a new
post. Reply to the original post using the
"reply button at the bottom of the original
post. It will maintain the continuity of the
discussion.
|
I'm sorry you are not happy with the message
header handling of my e-mail client, but I do not
use the web interface to read the list and don't
plan to start. You needn't worry though, I have
made my point on this subject and you are free to
disagree. I'm sure I'm not the only one getting
tired of this pointless discussion.
Besides, there is nothing "progressive" about
this on-going attempt to convince people who know
better that you can fly any airplane ever built
as an LSA simply by playing games with your
takeoff weight. If you are confident of that,
just go do it! Try not to get caught, though.
Mike G.
N728KF
| | - The Matronics Kitfox-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
Get Email Distribution Too!
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
