At the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association Regional Fly-In in Carbondale, Illinois, Oct. 6, it was revealed that the FAA will start the rulemaking process in January 2019 to increase the weight of light-sport aircraft from 1,320 pounds to 3,600 pounds.
According to Jack Pelton, chairman and CEO of the Experimental Aircraft Association, the FAA will publish a notice of proposed rulemaking on Jan. 19, 2019, for the weight increase.
“That will allow you to fly in a 172, have four seats in the airplane, and fly 150 mph,” said Pelton, who also anticipates a rule change that would allow professional builders to build experimental amateur-built aircraft.
“Over the past two years, AOPA has been working with the FAA, ASTM International Light-Sport committee, and other general aviation organizations to improve and advance light-sport aircraft, including increasing the weight limit and incorporate new technologies like electric propulsion,” said AOPA President Mark Baker. “The FAA has indicated it is on track to publish a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in early 2019 which will include many of the suggestions for improvement. The rule will be a major step in making new, innovative aircraft accessible to pilots, by removing prescriptive barriers that are limiting aircraft designers, the flight training industry, and the strength of the pilot population.”
Another ADS-B Rebate
Baker also revealed that another ADS-B rebate is in the works.
“I talked with the FAA administrator yesterday,” he told the fly-in crowd. “He was comfortable with me telling you there’s going to be another $500 rebate.”
In the previous rebate program, which ran for one year, the FAA disbursed $5.1 million in rebates to owners of eligible U.S.-registered, fixed-wing single-engine piston aircraft who installed ADS-B Out.
An FAA mandate will require all planes flying in airspace where a Mode C transponder is required today to have ADS-B Out installed by Jan. 1, 2020.
“Now is the time to get it done,” Baker told the fly-in crowd, adding more information will become available on the program this week.
The potential LSA changes sound good even if pushing the weight limits a bit given that accommodates the C206 and PA-32 Cherokee Six aircraft both with six seats. So are they going to change the stall speed requirement so that even a C172 or PA-28 can fit in? None of those can meet 45 kts flaps up as in the current LSA requirements so I wish they would say something in that regard.
Don’t start ‘high fiving’ and buying up all the <3,600 pound airplanes just yet, boys. There are still issues. Admittedly, this is a good start IF true and IF it comes to pass, however, if you read the EAA Press Release and EAA's Dick Knapinski's quoted comments, it's far from sealed and delivered AND … I see another problem.
See:
eaa.org/en/eaa/eaa-news-and-aviation-news/news/10-08-2018-eaa-led-reform-ideas-include-lsa-weight-and-homebuilt-regulations
There's a big difference between discussing an NPRM and having a FAR codified. Look no further than the no medical idea promised to us by the former Administrator for several years. A form of it called BasicMed came to be but ONLY after Sen. Inhofe (R-OK) used a perfect storm opportunity to stop FAA funding unless his idea was put into the Bill. And, Sen Nelson (D-FL) said he'd take enough Senators with him unless some form of doctor's visit was included in the final language. THAT is how BasicMed replaced the idea of no medical for pilots of certain low end GA airplanes.
This is great news and a good start but I predict the final version will be far different.
Beyond the issue of revising the definition of a "light sport" and the conditions under which a conforming airplane can be flown by various types of licensed pilots is maintenance. Any conforming heavier airplane which was originally certified under CAR 3 / FAR 23 will still have to be maintained by today's standards. That is, an IA will have to perform an annual inspection vs the condition inspection for a "real" LSA. I see this as a major problem. With a mechanic shortage looming, we'll have airplanes we can fly under light sport rules and for which finding maintainers will be an issue.
Had the tenets of the FAR Part 23 rewrite report been adopted, these airplanes could have been relicensed in the Primary – non commercial (P-NC) category. That never happened. Instead, the FAA retained control and gave us tidbits of relief in the form of individual non-TSO STC's under "performance based" standards or NORSEE rules. That ain't enough.
Unless and until we can maintain our low end airplanes under rules similar to existing LSA, only part of the problem has been addressed. If I buy or build an RV-12, only a condition inspection is required annually. If I fly a 1940 Piper Cub as a light sport pilot, it has to have a formal annual by an IA. THIS is the problem.
I am ashamed to say that I am “represented” by Bill Nelson but as the saying goes “We Will Remember in November” and he is up for reelection. That is one voting selection that will be easy to make. I am not sure who forced the requirement on top of that to have had a medical within 10 years but that was what locked me out of Basic Med and the doctors sign off was a question mark as well.
It was Sen. Nelson, Sarah. I, too, will “remember” … I vote there, too.
I spoke with Sen. Inhofe in person at Airventure 2017; he outlined for me what he had to do to capitalize on the once in a lifetime opportunity to get ‘something’ passed on the medical. HE did good save for Nelson who sits on the aviation subcommittee. If you remember, the Administrator kept telling us over several years that “something” was happening but it was at the DOT for review and he couldn’t reveal the contents because it was an ex parte communication. Yeah … right, Michael.
ALL of us now using BasicMed owe Sen. Inhofe a pat on the back and a raucus “Thanks!” I have a picture of me doing just that 🙂
Isn’t it a shame that most of the positive things that impact GA come not from the FAA but from the Congress who has to direct it to DO SOMETHING. And, even there, it’s only when we have a proactive ombudsman that good things happen. The recent Reauthorization is ~475 pages for that specific reason. That you gotta tell the FAA how to do everything with legislation is not only sad, it’s pathetic. That’s why I’m a skeptic over this recent announcement. We shall see what we’ll see … won’t we. EAA did good, however. They, too, deserve a pat on the back. Thanks Jack and Dick, et al.
I call everyone’s attention to the fact that this new change falls under something they’re calling MOSAIC — Modernization of Special Airworthiness Certificates. That’s any airplane which flies with a pink airworthiness certificate vs a white one used on certified airplanes. This gets complicated fast and convolutes overlapping Regs. I see this as helping manufacturers more than users but … we shall see how it all rings out.
Meanwhile … 28 days to voting day …
Yes I agree that Sen. Inhofe did a great thing for aviation by getting that bill through the Senate and approved into law, the FAA was never going to do anything. As for Bill Nelson I just wonder if he will put that strong armed change down as his accomplishments from his current (and hopefully last) term. And NO I do not use such honorary titles for people not deserving of my respect. I doubt he did anything honorable to have that title granted to him by the citizens of our fine state. Well that is enough for politics, this is about aviation and not what some bottom feeder did to us.
Sen. Nelson D is a dinosaur 76, and should be replaced. Scott is a thief and won’t be getting my vote. Poor choices both, unfortunately. Sen. Inhofe R 83, has been fighting a personal war against the FAA due to the discipline (without due process) he received at the hand of the fed for landing on a runway with an allegedly missing notam. Many of us have benefited greatly from Sen. Inhofe’s self serving work. Nelson’s requirements relating to basic med were reasonable in my opinion, giving Inhofe what he wanted, but attempting to insert some protection from aircraft being flown by those seniors who get their Florida driver license renewed in the mail. A Florida license may be renewed ONLINE every eight years for customers 79 years old and younger. At age 80, driver licenses must be renewed (not online) every six years. After age 80 a vision test is required. 20/40 distance vision is all that is required. Everyone is different, I have flown with an 86 year old who could still shoot an ILS to minimums, while his brother could barely keep a car in its lane at 80.
All excellent points, Larry.
If the LSA weight limitation increase to 3,600 pounds for standard production airplanes is to be considered a wonderful thing, then the rest of the LSA rules should apply–i.e.
1) No medical requirement including no need for basic med,
2) Allow owners to perform condition inspections.
Without these 2 conditions, the weight increase change does nothing, means nothing, and motivates me to say, “Thanks for nothing, FAA”.
We can only hope.
Look at that! Somebody at the FAA actually read the memo and figured out that this President wants LESS bureaucracy and LESS regulation.
When you’re a star, they let you do it.