In about one year, the FAA may announce its new regulations for Light-Sport Aircraft.
This rule, sometimes called MOSAIC (Modernization of Special Airworthiness Certification), proposes wide changes for the light aircraft segment, including an entirely new term: Light Personal Aircraft (LPA).
I am privileged to have new information in which I have very high confidence.
While we do not know everything yet — and neither does the FAA itself — we are getting a clearer picture. Nonetheless, you should remember this is a proposal still in deliberation. It is not a completed regulation. We will know definitely what the FAA recommends only when the Notice of Proposed Rule Making (NPRM) is released. My best guess for that is EAA AirVenture Oshkosh 2022…about one year in the future. The final rule, after assessing all comments, is not expected until the end of 2023.
Light Personal Aircraft
The first time anyone outside the FAA heard about Light Personal Aircraft was one year ago, in May 2020. In this time of great society-wide distraction many became aware of new term later in the year.
LPA represent the full range of aircraft the FAA will likely propose as suitable for issuance of a Special Airworthiness Certificate using a manufacturer’s statement of compliance to FAA-accepted, industry consensus standards.
LSA would be those LPA that meet an expanded definition of LSA in the new regulations. LSA would become a subset of LPA. LSA may continue to be operated by Sport Pilots and maintained by Light-Sport Repairmen. LPA that exceed the LSA definition would require higher certificates for pilots and repairmen.
Another way to say this is: All LSA will be LPA, but not all LPA will be eligible for LSA.
This point needs to be stressed: Even as LPA arrives, LSA will see “expansions.”
Setting the Record Straight
Agency personnel are still very actively discussing this internally and many points are still being deliberated and refined. However, one person said, “The original ideas we shared with you [in previous discussions] remain as we informed you then. The plan is to expand LSA significantly.”
With the following, I will seek to address reader comments I received. These issues appeared to be of greatest importance.
I start with one that garnered the most response and I’m pleased to restate this.
Weight
Light-Sport Aircraft will be allowed more weight, although this evolved somewhat differently than once expected. LPA entered the picture and will be the larger aircraft, but LSA will also benefit.
How much weight an LSA can increase will be determined with Power Index — essentially wing loading and horsepower considerations. Few readers might fully understand Power Index (details here) yet use of this formula allows weight flexibility well beyond currently-prescribed values.
Those of you who lamented the likelihood of no weight increase for LSA can breathe a sigh of relief.
Sport Pilot Privileges
Sport Pilots will be allowed to use their certificates to fly LPA that meet the parameters of the new definition of LSA, which will include (somewhat) heavier airplanes and all LSA meeting the present day definition of LSA. When a Light Personal Aircraft exceeds the final definition of LSA, you will need a private pilot certificate or higher.
How heavy an airplane can a sport pilot fly? That is still in discussion. Sport pilots will not be able to fly an LPA that exceeds LSA parameters as described in the new regulation, but sport pilots will be able to fly a heavier airplane than a present-day 1,320-pound LSA landplane.
Where precisely is the separating line? We’ll learn more about that later.
Maintenance
Since heavier airplanes than today’s LSA could be flown by a sport pilot, it seems reasonable that a Light Sport Repairman-Maintenance (LSRM) could work on an airplane that a sport pilot is permitted to fly. For those already using or contemplating earning that credential, an LSRM will be able to maintain LSA as described later. LSRMs will not be able to work on LPA that are beyond the eventual LSA description.
Legacy GA Airplanes
A good number of you yearn to operate a Cessna 150 or 172, a Cherokee, or some similar aircraft using a sport pilot certificate. If an airplane meets the description of a LSA under the new regulation, yes, it may be possible to fly one as a Sport Pilot.
A Cessna 150 or a Cherokee 140 may qualify, but a Cessna 210 or a Bonanza will not. The boundary line relates to the Power Index, but some of you who wish to fly a legacy GA aircraft may be satisfied.
Single Lever Control
While this automated prop control is something that can be installed on LSA in 2024, it will not be limited to LSA. LPA may also use single lever control and could have additional prop control options.
Fully-Built Gyroplanes
This request remains on track. After more than 15 years, Special LSA gyroplanes should become a reality.
Electric Propulsion
This remains in the proposal for LSA (as well as LPA). Hybrid systems will also be permitted.
Aerial Work
Not the same as “commercial operations,” aerial work remains under consideration, although what pilot certificate may be needed is to be decided by the flight standards people. LSA will be able to do such work, as eventually described, but a higher pilot certificate may be needed for certain activities or certain airplanes.
According to one FAA official, “Aerial Work is actually defined as a pilot privilege and not an aircraft limitation.”
Light Personal Aircraft
These will take the lead position in the new regulation and LSA will become a part of LPA. Both will be allowed to get heavier than today’s LSA.
However, I add that not all LSA need to get heavier. Weight shift and powered parachutes are two obvious examples that are well optimized under today’s weight limits.
ASTM Standards Work
LPA will be built to FAA-accepted, industry consensus standards like present-day LSA, but updated standards are needed to address all the changes that will be part of the final MOSAIC rule.
Revision of all LSA standards is taking place now based on information the FAA has shared, but newly-approved aircraft like gyroplanes or technologies like electric propulsion may not have completed standards when the rule becomes final. So, these newly-approved aircraft are coming, but there will probably be some time lapse from when the rule becomes final and when compliant designs are available for purchase.
Working Together
The Light Aircraft Manufacturers Association (LAMA), represented by myself and Roy Beisswenger, had numerous fruitful discussions with FAA officials. We went to many meetings and made several trips to FAA headquarters in Washington, DC. In most of these meetings we found FAA people interested to advance LSA in the aviation world and interested to hear what changes we wanted.
LAMA was satisfied with those discussions and, indeed, the FAA incorporated into its proposal every LAMA request:
- SLSA (fully built, not kit) Gyroplanes
- Aerial Work/Commercial Use
- Electric Propulsion
- Single Lever Control (in-flight adjustable prop).
In the end, we got more than we asked for.
I am pleased discussions continue so we can all learn more about what lies ahead.
No one at the FAA is elected. Light Sport pilots are thinly scattered over the entire nation. No state has enough LS Pilots to form a voting bloc large enough to bully or buy a sufficient number of representatives and senators to affect the FAA. Unless the appointed leaders of the FAA feel their positions are threatened by cuts in funding from congress or that they will be booted out by a change in administration have little incentive to change anything.
I want 150s and Tomahawks and Cherokees as much as anyone but until we wield enough political power change may always be slow at best.
There is no logical reason at all for limiting LSA aircraft to 1320 pounds. The third class medical requirement is nonsense. If you can fly a LSA with a Driver’s License there is no logical reason why you could not fly a Piper Archer or Cessna 172. Let’s face it. The Primary Directive of the FAA is to eliminate Private Pilots from the skies. The only reason they came up with the LSA arrangement was that nonlicensed pilots who couldn’t afford to get a PPL or rent an airplane after that were building Kit planes and telling the FAA to go shove it. The FAA could not allow these grassroots yahoos to go unregulated and knew they could not prevent them from flying hence the “creation” of the LSA. But, the bottom line is that there is no logical reason to limit LSA to 1320 pounds, impose a speed limitation of 120 knots, or use of retractable gear and constant speed prop. It does not take a pilot with a Class 1 Medical to be able to hit a gear switch or move a prop RPM handle.
Dan in his discussion of MOSIAC and the FAA timeline for completing the changes for LSA’s by 12/31/23 or congress will. He had stated that the FAA needs 18 mos to review all the comments and based on this time line the changes will hopefully be released at AIRVENTURE. That will be one crowded meeting. Let’s hope he’s right. He went on to say in his talk we can join the ASTM and have an equal say in the final rules for a mere pittance. Wouldn’t that be nice. I have 2 LSA and 2 flyable Vintage, ‘46Cub, ‘46Chief and they are all great. Granted the LSA Tecnam P2008 And Astore are state of the art airplanes;but as we all know you are limited on weight and if you are taking a passenger you obviously cut the fuel almost in half and choose your clothes wisely although the 2008 with the Rotax 914 is approved for 700kg in Europe. Just don’t have a problem where the FAA has to investigate, so realistically your back to 600kg.
As was mentioned, the LSA category of aircraft appear to be more expensive to purchase if you want to fly something higher than you want to fall from. Meaning the potential of a training GA aircraft like a Cherokee or Cessna-ish aircraft would be a welcome addition to the stable of approved aircraft. I would take no pleasure in being blown around the sky like a beachball on final in an “affordable” LSA plane-ish. But would readily re-enter GA in a older Cherokee. I read a comment where one gentleman was bashing the FAA for it’s vagueness and the following comment questioned whether that dood should be a pilot. C’mon! I’ll always be a pilot whether I get the chance to fly again or not. Give us guys a break.
One thing I noticed when I went to insure my LSA with a hull value of 230k was that it was impossible to find a company that would insure a LSA for that amount. Since I’m an old low time pilot rates ranged from 3750. to almost 9000. I settled for the lower at 200k with a 20k deductible. It seems a lot of the industry are shying away from LSA’s add in hull value that high, age, low time, no advanced ratings, I.e, Instrument, not that I would want one; but you are getting priced out of the market. I have. ‘46 J3 with a hull of 40k was almost half that. Conventional gear really runs up the rates. So where does that leave us, at the hold short line I’m afraid.
Dan, once again we ALL appreciate what you are doing in our behalf. I’m so thankful to be able to fly an LSA. Yes, it would be nice to fly a Skyhawks as the added weight does make it much easier to fly. Ask anyone who’s flown both which is easier. An LSA is much like a sports car more responsive and more susceptible to gusts. One day as I was landing and bouncing all over the place on short final. As I passed a Bonanza, I said a little bumpy for us light sports, he replied, “Man, I’m glad I’m in a big plane! It always smooths out near the runway, but it was funny. But it does well to illustrate the point, that sport pilots are no less of a pilot than a GA pilot.
Unfortunately if the weight limit is 1800 lbs the only addition to the LSA ROSTER will be a 152, 150. Cherokee’s and 172’s are too heavy. There has NEVER been any data to suggest that completing a class 3 medical will prevent an accident, whether it be in a plane or a car. LSA’s do need to be “beefed” up to make them even safer and maybe this is as good as it will ever get. Unfortunately, LSA’s are priced disproportionately high because of the captive usually old pilot who is trying to find something to continue his dream. If you increase the eligibility of the GA planes we’ve talked bout that will bring down LSA prices and give aviation a well needed shot in the are. Thanks, Dan
I guess I don’t understand the rules for LSA’s. Let’s approve a Supercub with 180hp And only limit it for 5 minutes a max settings. Let’s make exceptions for planes with floats because, oh yea the floats give you added lift so of course they can weigh heavier. Whether you have a class 3 or not we all look ourselves in the mirror and say am I good enough to fly today. You would think that would suffice. I hope the FAA realizes that we all age, most at different rates and the problems we face today, they will encounter in the not too distant future. Since the national average of the number of personsons in a LSA or GA plane is 1.3 I doubt that increasing the weight of the aircraft or number of seats will make any statistical difference as
We who have at least a private pilot license should be able to fly any GA two seater with out a current medical. The safest aircraft flying.
In a perfect world, an LSA certificated pilot should be able to fly a Skyhawk or Cherokee. Also should be able to put people in the seats. These birds are much easier to fly than say a J3, Taylorcraft, or Luscombe 8A. The question for the FAA is this: ” if LSA pilots can’t fly a Skyhawk or Cherokee with 3 passengers, why not?”
It would be a great benefit for all sport pilots to be legal to fly Cessna 172 and Cherokee 140 aircraft as they are many of these aircraft available in the United States that most pilots are familiar with.
Thank you for your faithful coverage
Any mention on medical status for the LPA category. Any speculation if any of the Vans series other than the RV12 will be accepted under the LPA category. Thank you for all you do.
Any idea if there will also be a revision to the number of passengers allowed? If 172s and Cherokees are LPAs seems like they should allow 3 passengers.
My guess is they’ll do some mash up of a recreational license and drop that. More specifically, allow the bigger plane but still restrict number of passengers to 1. Really this is already a recreational license minus the need for a medical and the allowance to fly at night under supervision of CFI.
A good justification for this passenger limit is the lack of need for a medical cert. Even with basic med you need a cert first.
Dan & Roy: Thank you for everything you are doing. I know I speak for 10″s of thousands for the advances you and hopefully the FAA men and women working on the forthcoming changes. Please hang in there.
I fail to connect the “click bate” of problems with this “”Chaos… Typical of a government agency but especially the FAA,” exclaims gbigs. “The only thing people want is LSA (not a new class of aircraft) with a weight and speed increase to around 1800lbs and 140kts. If that does not happen its all nonsense anyway.”” – and your article where, in the first paragraph you say “While we do not know everything yet — and neither does the FAA itself — we are getting a clearer picture.” – I want fact – not sneaky journalism. I have been following MOSAIC for a while – 2 years ago they told us the same “The final rule, after assessing all comments, is not expected until the end of 2023.” – your “click bate” implies “BIG PROBLEMS”, and frankly, I did not see anything in the article that was much different than what I heard 2 years ago…. “here is what we are working on – and NOTHING is solid yet”.
Maybe you shouldn’t be a pilot.
Outrageous, looks like another sellout. 4 seat simple planes 172 Cherokee and the like LSA End of story.
That would satisfy 90% of the GA pilots .
Thank you for all your efforts to bring this rule change to life. Being a retired FAA Inspector, I understand what you have faced. Much like pushing a rope up hill !
A weight increase will be appreciated. Hopefully the final rule will include your inputs.
Not all will be happy with the new rule. Many think of their personal desires. The FAA has to look at the overall picture to safety benefit the majority which includes the public not just the pilots.
Keep up the good fight.
If you can fly an LSA you can safely fly a Cherokee. If you don’t need a medical for an LSA then requiring a medical to fly a Cherokee or C172 makes zero sense. Those of us that want to be able to fly the family somewhere but are disqualified because of some medication or diagnosis that the FAA doesn’t like finding the arbitrary nature of the FAA’s rules very frustrating and stupid, quite frankly.
Everyone that has taken the”jab” Ian’s is flying with a medical technically needs to ground themselves as per the FAA’s own rules
Just another complicated, confusing, and poorly conceived mass of regulations from people that are basically clueless about the silent majority of GA pilots and prospective pilots. They’re from the government, and they’re here to help themselves.
Dan,
What are your thoughts on how this could affect experimental aircraft ?
A number of kit manufacturers offer 2 versions; one that meets the LSA specs, and another with a higher gross weight and engine options.
Experimental Amateur Built aircraft will be impacted in similar ways. In addition, greater professional build help center opportunities should be coming.
What I call “Sport Pilot kits” (those kit-built designs that may be flown with a Sport Pilot certificate or using those privileges with a higher certificate, i.e., no aviation medical required) will also be allowed more weight but limitations regarding the size of aircraft a pilot may fly are focused on the pilot certificate not the airplane.
Companies who achieved at least one Special (fully-built) LSA may still offer an Experimental LSA (ELSA) and it, too, can have higher weight among other expansions.
Dan,
Thanks for the added info. It looks like an important set of changes, for the better for us pilots, and possibly a broader selection of experimental kits.
Dan since the FAA contributed to the MAX crashes that killed 346 people, I do not see any decisions coming from this agency.
Actually it was Boeing that failed to disclose the mcas system addition to the pitch control system.
A number of US pilots experienced an mcas failure, but reacted correctly, since it was a pitch runaway event, and they knew to immediately disconnect it and use the manual pitch control to correct the pitch problem.
There are many reasons to nudge the max gross weigh of LSA’s up, not the least of which is to accommodate the addition of floats, which currently allows only 110 pounds. However, we need to be careful not to exceed the aircraft DESIGN max gross take off weight for each example!
Hello Dan,
If Sport Pilots are able to fly legacy aircraft (172) that are 4 seat capable, do you believe there is a chance an additional 2 passengers will be allowed (4 total)?
I do not know that aviators with a Sport Pilot certificate will be allowed to fly legacy GA aircraft under the coming regulation. This will depend on the definition of LSA and LPA and whether a given legacy airplane qualifies.
I suspect (only a best guess) that Sport Pilots will not be permitted to fly with four on board. I suspect something like a Cessna 172, if it fits the parameters, will be considered an LPA, which will require a Private or better, probably with an aviation medical or BasicMed.
If a Skyhawk or Cherokee type airplane would require a private license and a medical or basic med, then why are we even discussing them as part of the changes? That is the current status! Such airplanes already fall into the 1.2 Ip, so either they fall into the new definition of LSA or the new designation of LPA is bogus, as no change will be effected to fly them.
I am an ATP/CFI/CFII who no longer qualifies for a medical certificate or basic med, but does qualify for light sport, and I have been waiting patiently for an opportunity to get back into instructing, especially primary and instrument, as that is where the opportunities lie. If I cannot act as PIC of a C172 or a PA28 size airplane without a medical or basic med, the whole thing falls apart. It looks to me like a distinction without a difference. I’m very disappointed.
Chaos… Typical of a government agency but especially the FAA. The only thing people want is LSA (not a new class of aircraft) with a weight and speed increase to around 1800lbs and 140kts. If that does not happen its all nonsense anyway.