LSA Class?

Larry wrote:
Why is the FAA so supportive of this class of flying? Older pilots?
passenger allowed? more skill required in bad weather? less reliable
powerplants? no FAA medical exam? Less stringent certification of LSA?
I can only surmise that the FAA, EAA and MAYBE a need for grooming
future military pilots (where ever they go) endorse this effort. I am
only concerned about safety and why we even consider this class of
flying. Freedom yes but the FAA/EAA says "become a pilot faster,
easier, and cheaper than ever before". This scares me and I worry about
safety. Maybe I am wrong in my thinking.

These are valid concerns, but I think they are misplaced. You are
quite correct that the just-certified Sport Pilot (SP) will have had
less total training than the just-certified Private Pilot (PP).
However, much of that training will cover operations that are
prohibited to the SP. In fact, although having had somewhat fewer
hours of training, the SP may have in fact had *more* training in those
areas directly affecting his flights (Day, VFR).

As for the (LSA) aircraft, there is no reason to assume that they are
any less safe. It is certainly true that they are not required to be
equipped for night flight or for flight in instrument conditions
(flying inside the clouds) - but those operations are prohibited to the
LSA SP anyway.

My normally certificated aircraft is not certified for flight in known
icing; whereas the MD-80 that I am about to board is so certified. Is
my plane inherently less safe? Not if I stay out of the ice!

In fact, the truth of the matter is that the FAA supported the LSA
rules precisely to *improve* safety. The reality of ultra-lights in
the US is that probably 80% of them are technically illegal
(overweight, above max fuel, more than one seat, etc.). They fly with
a reasonable level of safety, but they were pretty much without FAA
oversight. One of the goals of LSA was to bring more of these "into
the system" and give the FAA back some control.

Will some SP in an LSA eventually do something really stupid and kill
himself and maybe a passenger? Of course. And, unfortunate though it
is, tonight some guy will down a couple of six packs and manage to kill
himself and maybe a bunch of others on the highway. In both cases it
was the stupidity that was unsafe, not the level of training or the
mechanical condition of the vehicle.

As for the (LSA) aircraft, there is no reason to assume that they are
any less safe. It is certainly true that they are not required to be
equipped for night flight or for flight in instrument conditions
(flying inside the clouds) - but those operations are prohibited to the
LSA SP anyway.

The CT -- the only LSA I've flown -- had equipment comparable to my
IFR-certified Pathfinder. And if flew wonderfully. LSAs need not be
anything but excellent light aircraft.

Will some SP in an LSA eventually do something really stupid and kill
himself and maybe a passenger? Of course. And, unfortunate though it
is, tonight some guy will down a couple of six packs and manage to kill
himself and maybe a bunch of others on the highway. In both cases it
was the stupidity that was unsafe, not the level of training or the
mechanical condition of the vehicle.

'Twas ever thus, I'm afraid.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Jay Honeck wrote:
As for the (LSA) aircraft, there is no reason to assume that they are
any less safe. It is certainly true that they are not required to be
equipped for night flight or for flight in instrument conditions
(flying inside the clouds) - but those operations are prohibited to the
LSA SP anyway.

The CT -- the only LSA I've flown -- had equipment comparable to my
IFR-certified Pathfinder. And if flew wonderfully. LSAs need not be
anything but excellent light aircraft.

I haven't tried one yet, but hope to @ AOPA Expo '07. They seem like
they would be a lot of fun, along the lines of many of the old
taildraggers some of my fellow pilots own for hopping around the 'patch
for the fun of it.

A few of us who already own other aircraft have tossed the idea of
buying an LSA as a group for a second local "fun" plane.

B A R R Y wrote:
Jay Honeck wrote:

As for the (LSA) aircraft, there is no reason to assume that they are
any less safe. It is certainly true that they are not required to be
equipped for night flight or for flight in instrument conditions
(flying inside the clouds) - but those operations are prohibited to the
LSA SP anyway.


The CT -- the only LSA I've flown -- had equipment comparable to my
IFR-certified Pathfinder. And if flew wonderfully. LSAs need not be
anything but excellent light aircraft.


I haven't tried one yet, but hope to @ AOPA Expo '07. They seem like
they would be a lot of fun, along the lines of many of the old
taildraggers some of my fellow pilots own for hopping around the 'patch
for the fun of it.

A few of us who already own other aircraft have tossed the idea of
buying an LSA as a group for a second local "fun" plane.

That's what I'm thinking, but I want mine really light, open and
probably amphib!

Margy

passenger allowed? more skill required in bad weather? less reliable
powerplants?

My father just got a brand new Legend Cub. It is LSA compliant and it came
with a brand new shiny factory O-200. Tell me please how that powerplant is
less reliable than in a certified aircraft.