 |
Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
RRTRACK(at)AOL.COM
Guest
|
 Posted: Fri Apr 25, 2008 6:33 pm Post subject: Light Sport Rules? |
 |
|
Can any one explain "WHY" if an LSA qualified plane is flown with an IFA prop or over 1320# take off weight even once it should be disqualified forever as an LSA?
All that should matter is "Does it fit the qualifications now". I just would like to know why they made the rule the way they did.
Mark
Kitfox 5 Vixen
912UL IVO
Hartford, Wisconsin
Need a new ride? Check out the largest site for U.S. used car listings at AOL Autos.
[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 |
|
 |
helili(at)chahtatushka.ne
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 26, 2008 4:46 am Post subject: Light Sport Rules? |
|
|
Can’t say why the FAA makes any rule( and I used to work for them). The only explanation I ever heard, and it wasn’t in a rule or even written, is that it is an in-flight adjustable prop was a “complicated” device and the rules were being written for “uncomplicated” aircraft so pilots with a minimum amount of experience could operate them. As far as the weight, I ain’t got a clue!
John Hart
KF IV
Wilburton, OK
From: owner-kitfox-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of RRTRACK(at)AOL.COM
Sent: Friday, April 25, 2008 9:29 PM
To: kitfox-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: Light Sport Rules?
Can any one explain "WHY" if an LSA qualified plane is flown with an IFA prop or over 1320# take off weight even once it should be disqualified forever as an LSA?
All that should matter is "Does it fit the qualifications now". I just would like to know why they made the rule the way they did.
Mark
Kitfox 5 Vixen
912UL IVO
Hartford, Wisconsin
Need a new ride? Check out the largest site for U.S. used car listings at AOL Autos.
| Quote: | | http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-List |
0123456789
[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 |
|
|
RRTRACK(at)aol.com
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 26, 2008 6:05 am Post subject: Light Sport Rules? |
|
|
I fully agree with the limits put on LSA planes. An IFA prop does add complication and should not be allowed for LSA use. But if it was removed and a ground adjustable prop installed for LSA use, why should it be disqualified forever? Just makes no sense to me.
If this was written to keep more complicated planes from being modified to meet the LSA requirements, I still ask why, all that should matter is does it meet the LSA requirements now. This part of the rule sounds more like politics than common sense. What am I missing?
Mark
Kitfox 5 Vixen
912UL IVO
Hartford, Wisconsin
Need a new ride? Check out the largest site for U.S. used car listings at AOL Autos.
[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 |
|
|
helili(at)chahtatushka.ne
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 26, 2008 6:35 am Post subject: Light Sport Rules? |
|
|
The only answer that I can think of in that light is, “The FAA has spoken!”. They write the rules under a mandate of Congress through Public Law. Public Law is changeable, BUT, it takes a lot of time, not to mention money, to do it from an individual level. The legislative branch of the Federal government can force a change , BUT, they have to be convinced to do it. Me, I ain’t got the time or money to fight it, not to mention the inclination. I’d rather go fly for the few years I got left.
John Hart
KF IV
Wilburton, OK
From: owner-kitfox-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of RRTRACK(at)aol.com
Sent: Saturday, April 26, 2008 9:02 AM
To: kitfox-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: Re: Light Sport Rules?
I fully agree with the limits put on LSA planes. An IFA prop does add complication and should not be allowed for LSA use. But if it was removed and a ground adjustable prop installed for LSA use, why should it be disqualified forever? Just makes no sense to me.
If this was written to keep more complicated planes from being modified to meet the LSA requirements, I still ask why, all that should matter is does it meet the LSA requirements now. This part of the rule sounds more like politics than common sense. What am I missing?
Mark
Kitfox 5 Vixen
912UL IVO
Hartford, Wisconsin
Need a new ride? Check out the largest site for U.S. used car listings at AOL Autos.
| Quote: | | http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-List |
0123456789
[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 |
|
|
vetdrem
Joined: 20 Nov 2007
Posts: 62
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 26, 2008 3:02 pm Post subject: Re: Light Sport Rules? |
|
|
The "fact" that the aircraft must have meet the LSA criteria continuously since new has a lot of effect on everyone. I converted an Ercoupe 415 C to a 415 D changing the gross weight from 1250 to 1400. I did it after the initial talk about LSA, but before the final rule was out. At that time, the max gross weight was going to be 1232. The 'coupe was over that anyway, so I thought that I might as well do the conversion. A month or two latter, the final rule came out saying the max weight was 1320. I was going to just convert it back, but OH NO.
I think that what caused the rule to not allow it was the fact that the Cesna 120/140 group tried to get around the rule by getting a 337 approved by a local FSDO to reduce the max gross weight of the 120 to 1320. The Cesna met all the criteria except the max weight. Now, armed with a precident, they moved toward making most of the little Cesnas fit the catagory. Of course the FAA could see that this tactic could and would be used to include many planes into the catagory that really shouldn't be, and since the cesna guys already had an approved 337, they added the requirement that the plane has to have ALWAYS met the rule.
I was not able to convert my 'coupe back, and took a pretty large financial hit when I sold it because it was not "light sport".
I am not saying it's right, but at least I understand why it is.
Louie
| | - 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 |
|
|
akflyer
Joined: 07 May 2007
Posts: 574
Location: Soldotna AK
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 26, 2008 4:05 pm Post subject: Re: Light Sport Rules? |
|
|
Modifications of Aircraft To Meet the Light-Sport Aircraft Definition
As stated above in the
section titled ‘‘Modifications of Aircraft
To Meet the Light-Sport Aircraft
Definition,’’ a sport pilot may not fly an
aircraft with a standard airworthiness
certificate that has been modified to
meet the light-sport aircraft definition.
Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 143 / Tuesday, July 27, 2004 / Rules and Regulations 44793
It doesnt say ANY aircraft, it states aircraft with a standard airworthiness
certificate. Period.
The way it reads, it simply does not apply to experimental aircraft. As stated in the post above, it was to keep "normal" ie. cessna / piper etc. from changing over to LSA.
As anyone who reads, or deals with the laws knows, the booger is in the details. That is how murders get off on a technicality. If you apply the ruling as it is written in black and white it seems obvious. The issue is with people who do not take the time to actually read the rules and just rely on what joe blow says and take it for the gospel. You need to take the time to look it up and read it for yourselves, then come back and have an informed discussion.
Just my .02. Put that with 5.00 and you can get a cup of coffee at Starbucks
| | - 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 |
|
_________________
DO NOT ARCHIVE
Leonard Perry aka SNAKE
Soldotna AK
Avid "C" / Mk IV
582 (147 hrs and counting on the rebuild)
IVO IFA
Full Lotus 1450
#1 snake oil salesman since 1-22-2009
I would rather die trying to live, than to live trying not to die.... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Float Flyr
Joined: 19 Jul 2006
Posts: 2704
Location: Campbellton, Newfoundland
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 26, 2008 4:20 pm Post subject: Light Sport Rules? |
|
|
Exercise in the power of FAA?
Lack of knowledge on the behalf of legislators?
Just a couple of ideas from north of the 49th.
[img]cid:image001.jpg(at)01C8A7E7.388148E0[/img]
Noel Loveys
Campbellton, NL, Canada
CDN AME intern, PP-Rec
C-FINB, Kitfox III-A
582 B box, Ivo IFA, Aerocet 1100 floats
[url=noelloveys(at)yahoo.ca]noelloveys(at)yahoo.ca[/url]
From: owner-kitfox-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of RRTRACK(at)AOL.COM
Sent: Friday, April 25, 2008 11:59 PM
To: kitfox-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: Light Sport Rules?
Can any one explain "WHY" if an LSA qualified plane is flown with an IFA prop or over 1320# take off weight even once it should be disqualified forever as an LSA?
All that should matter is "Does it fit the qualifications now". I just would like to know why they made the rule the way they did.
Mark
Kitfox 5 Vixen
912UL IVO
Hartford, Wisconsin
Need a new ride? Check out the largest site for U.S. used car listings at AOL Autos.
| Quote: | | http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-List |
0123456789
| | - 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 |
|
| Description: |
|
| Filesize: |
7.29 KB |
| Viewed: |
3212 Time(s) |
|
_________________
Noel Loveys
Kitfox III-A
Aerocet 1100 Floats |
|
| 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
