In article ,
says...

On Mon, 03 Jan 2005 22:30:18 GMT, (sleepy6) wrote:

In article ,
says...

Is it correct to say that the consensus standards do not apply, when
it is a plans built? How about kit meeting 51% self built rule?

I'm still not exactly sure I understand what an experimental LSA is,
a
and what hoops must be jumped through.

An ELSA is simply an SLSA that has been pulled off the production lin
e
at whatever point the customer wants. The customer then finishes the

planes following the EXACT factory instructions but it must be
identical to the SLSA. All factory parts and no modifications at all
.

It is subject to the same maintaince etc requirements as SLSA but can

not be used for instruction or rental.

Sleepy is correct. The LSA regs do not affect the classic 51% homebui
lts *at
all*. The same old process is in effect. If your 51% homebuilt meets
the
definition of a Light Sport Aircraft (gross weight, stall speed, etc.)
it can be
flown by a person with Sport Pilot privileges (either someone with an
actual
Sport Pilot license, or someone with a higher license and an lapsed me
dical) but
the licensing and maintenance regulations are the same as they've alwa
ys been.

One small point that I'll correct Sleepy on: The Experimental LSA is
not quite
subject to the same maintenance requirements of a Special Light Sport
Aircraft.

On the SLSA:

1. Preventative maintenance can be performed by the owner (just like
FAR 23
aircraft).
2. Normal/major maintenance must be performed by an A&P or a person w
ith a
Light Sport-Maintenance (LS-M) Repairman Certificate
3. Annual inspections must be performed by either an A&P or a person
with a
LS-M Repairman Certificate.

For the ELSA:

1&2. Preventative AND Normal/major maintenance can be performed by th
e owner
3. Annual inspections must be performed by an A&P, a person with a LS
-M
Repairman Certificate, or someone with the other new Repairman Certifi
cate,
Light Sport- Inspection (LS-I).

The LS-I Repairman Certificate is similar to the Amateur-Built aircraf
t
repairman certificate, with two significant exceptions:

First, the applicant must complete a 16-hour training course. You can
NOT
receive an LS-I just by assembling an ELSA. You MUST take the course.

Second, a person with an LS-I may perform the annual inspection on *an
y* ELSA
they own. Unlike the Amateur-Built Repairman Certificate, it is not a
pplicable
to only one aircraft. Once you earn the LS-I, you can buy another ELS
A kit or a
completed ELSA aircraft and perform the annual inspections on it.

Sleepy touches on one sporty item about the ELSA category. Like he sa
ys, the
ELSA kit *must* be built exactly to the LSA kit manufacturer's instruc
tions.
You cannot install an alternate engine, use a different covering syste
m, etc.
It must be built precisely to the manufacturer's callout.

However... as far as I can tell, the owner can then modify the aircraf
t however
they chose, once the plane receives its formal ELSA airworthiness cert
ificate.

Owners of SLSAs (the production LSAs) must maintain their aircraft in
precise
accordance to the manufacturer's maintenance plan and continued safety
directives to continue to conform to the consensus standard. But the
FAA also
says that owners of SLSAs can avoid having to follow the SLSA's manufa
cturer's
safety directives by changing their plane's airworthiness to ELSA.

It follows, then, that ELSAs are NOT required to continue to comply to
the
consensus standard, and owners can modify them once they've received t
heir
original ELSA certification.

Ron Wanttaja


Ron is correct about the maintaince and other details. To me the
differences between SLSA and ELSA are minor compared to the differences
between ELSA and amature built experimental.

Personally, my only reason to consider ELSA would be to avoid building
at least 51%. The restrictions and requirements associaed with ELSA
would easily outweigh that benefit in my opinion.