Major expansion of light sport aircraft coming! MOSAIC explained
Вставка
- Опубліковано 27 сер 2024
- If you’re not already an AOPA pilot, we’d love for you to join us. Learn more about our FREE* trial membership! www.aopa.org/t...
The FAA released a long-awaited rulemaking proposal to do away with light sport aircraft weight limits and other restrictions on pilots who fly them, though sport pilots will still be limited to only one passenger at a time.
NPRM: public-inspect...
Connect with us on social media!
Instagram: / flywithaopa
Facebook: / flywithaopa
Twitter: / flywithaopa
TikTok: / flywithaopa
LinkedIn: / verification
Check out our merch: pilotgear.aopa...
The Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA) is the largest community of pilots in the world, providing aviation advocacy, education & inspiration. AOPA has represented the freedom to fly for all pilots since 1939. To learn more about becoming a member visit www.aopa.org/m...
*This offer is only valid for first-time members and is limited to one AOPA Trial Membership. You must reside in the U.S. AOPA Trial Membership is available free for 3-months, a credit card and enrollment in automatic annual renewal is required at sign up and you will be charged for a full year of membership at $89 once your trial expires. 100% no risk trial - cancel at any time before the end of your trial to prevent charges.
Big thanks to the AOPA for their efforts on our behalf.
Definitely! Thank you AOPA!!🙌🏼🙌🏼🙌🏼
I’ve been a Sport pilot for 8 years and over 500 hours and owner of various Light Sport planes. These changes look great. Better safety and better for manufacturers. This should entice even more people to fly under the sport pilot privileges.
Its almost unbelievable how great this news is.
I'm close to my final checkride for my PPL but man....I've always been a fan of aerobatics, unfortunately there are no schools here that teach it. I can't die without doing a barrel roll first dang it!
Why do u say better for manufacturers? Hopefully the old 1320# lsa prices will come down.
go to red Stewart airfield for acrobatics training. 2:42 2:44
@@whiffy506 where are you at? We can do an aerobatics lesson at KPSM
This is so great. I can't get a PPL due to med but the current LSA/LSP restrictions weren't really worth the cost. This might change that equation to something I can work with. Thanks for putting this together for us.
YES YES YES this is exactly what I was hoping for, thank you all so much for your hard work I am SO EXCITED to get my sport pilot now
About time. I am 89 and flying under BasicMed which has to be renewed in 4/25. If this passes and effective end of 2024 I will slide right into it. Flew Sport Pilot in Ercoupe and Skycatcher for years before Basic Med.
This is awesome. I have been waiting over 3 years for this. The closest LSA school to rent LSA around me is almost 4 hours away. With this new rule, my closest flying school (with 172) is 25 minutes away. I am glad I didn't pursue my Class 3 medical. I missed that boat in 2005 when I left the Army.
Let's fly!!!
(responsibly)
I’m a private pilot. But not current. This sounds great. It would be much easier to get back current as a light sport than a PPL I think. I wish they’d up it to 2 passengers though.
It is you can your one of the passengers in their eyes
I have my PPL, and I’m building an experimental, so the sport pilot stuff doesn’t apply to me now, but looking forward to seeing how manufacturers respond to this. I could see a huge expansion in modern GA aircraft now that they’re not so limited. Wonderful news!
soo.. but is that rly good for Safety everybody's safety ?
don't think so
I'm looking forward to my flight lessons as a sport pilot and the Privileges I will inherit thank you so much
If you can fly a Cessna 172 and maybe a 182 under the new LSA rules you should be able to carry more than one passenger. May be tie that your total hours e.g. first 200 hours only one passenger, two passengers after 300 hrs and fill all four seats after 400 hrs TT ….
Makes sense!
I would support flying with addition passengers based on 100 of hours flown , for example after your first 100 hours you should be able to fly with yourself, of course plus one, after achieving 200 hours of flight time yourself pluses two, for a maximum of 3 passengers. If
Been waiting for this. Great news.
i didn't see any change for ceiling limitations, currently set to 10,000 MSL or 2,000 AGL.
I have been wondering this exact same question. I have "skimmed" over the n.p.r.m. and did not see it. I am not entirely sure that it is covered. In my opinion, why not? As long you understand oxygen , more altitude is safer, and as a bonus faster.
Thanks. Been waiting for this for ten years!
We need the CAA to implement this. It’s a brilliant change to the regulations.
Wow, that 54 knts stall speed opens up a lot of GA aircraft to sports pilots, I wonder if there are any other limiting factors?
If you haven’t read the proposal you should. Retractable gear, constant speed propellers, 4 seats, 250 kt speed limits, self certification by kit manufacturers-its unbelievable how great this news is!
As cirrus instrument pilot and the increasing costs and parts back up, I will be interested in models of LSA with the increased weight and speed that bring newer technologies (auto pitch, electronic ignition, upgraded panels) and allow more owners to service their own airplanes. Big win for pilots. Thanks AOPA!
It’s been a long time coming, and it looks like you guys were the first to get the news out there.
Actually Dan Johnson site was the first to report
@@mauriceevans6546 can you provide a link, I have looked for it but only see the ones from 2022
@@mauriceevans6546 Dan Johnson has not yet put out a video on the NPRM . Fake News.
Government needs to get out of way. They make aviation more dangerous. Huge overreach as always ...no benefit whatsever.
my uneducated guess but increasingly cynical view of any bureacracy, is that their purpose is not about the overt descriptors in the name or mission statement....it's about regulating for the purpose of preferential treatment for companies and persons who grease the wheels. Look how few regular people actually benefited from the original lsa rules. Rather...all the caveats, exceptions, limitations to every single clause , is daunting to read, let alone put into practice...and I suspect each limit benefits one of the manufacturers above the lsa category..
@@sirlancair precisely. Motivated by $$$
@@sirlancairprimary purpose of a bureaucracy is to maintain the need for it’s existence and to expand its power. Dr. Thomas Sowell who was a Marxist coming out of college discovered this when he went to work for government. He pointed out all sorts of ways they could permanently solve the problems his agency was tasked with and the higher ups explained why they would not consider his ideas. If they solved the problem they would all be out of a job.
FAA has to do something because GA is dying a rapid death. As a Canadian recreational pilot (diabetic) we can fly any 4 place ,non high performance plane. Maybe as a result of this we will be able to fly over 200hp and at night. It would be nice to get up to 200knots.
What about the provisions to eliminate the 50% rule for Kit Aircraft????
great video!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Great Job AOPA! I am so excited to see some of these regulations reduced.
This is exciting!
Night: Per the proposal you need either a medical or basic med to fly at night as a Sport Pilot - pretty narrow carve out.
Too late for me as I am now 80 but one of the restrictions that kept me out of a sport pilot cockpit was prescription drugs. I wonder if the FAA has considered accepting a broader range of medications for anxiety or depression. The FAA is living in another dimension if they unaware that many pilots can and DO function perfectly well with medications.
200 hrs as a Sport pilot. Night vfr and helicopters sound cool. Let’s see what the final rules are!
i have seen somewhere that Night endorsement will be allowed but the pilot will be required to hold either 3rd class or BasicMed medical.
@jeremylauer5234 if they have to get a class 3 then they're better off to just get the private. What I read is you will have to get endorsed.
@@jeremylauer5234 That is what the NPRM says.
Great job AOPA!
I have been working on an attempt to get a medical certificate I haven't actually submitted anything with the FAA yet, but now with a real future for light sport I probably will just go that route. Not that I can't pass a medical just the out-of-pocket expense and the fact that I don't want to live my life always in fear of seeing a doctor. The only issues I see is getting insurance will the insurance industry welcome these changes, or will they be a problem.
A basic observation. The proposed rules look like they will improve things for us sport pilots, easier access, higher performance airplanes etc. But it seems silly to suggest that less oversight, and things like constant speed props, retractable landing gear, and higher cruise speeds will improve safety. Decades of data show the opposite. Slow, simple GA airplanes kill fewer pilots than fast complicated GA airplanes. Am I happy about the proposed changes? Definitely. Do I think safety will be improved? Nope
Holy smokes! Lots of information presented clearly. Can't wait and thanks for sharing this. :)
I would support carrying more than 1 passengers based on 100s of hours flown
This is all good but the faa really need to address ultralight aircraft. They need to allow more reliable engines, brakes would be nice, and a little more fuel capacity for a better flight time/experience. The allowable weight needs to increase to accommodate the safer aircraft that would be created.They should be made safer.
Thank you.
Take care,
Be safe.
Excellent news!
CAR3 Vintage aircraft needs a carve out so we can modernize our aircraft considering almost all of the previous STCs are no longer supported. These aircraft have been orphaned by the FAA, they are not Part 23 aircraft and now experimental are safer and we can not upgrade our aircraft easily.
I have posted comments to the NPRM and I would LUV if other Vintage owners did the same.
The essence of this is to allow the old guys with basic med to keep flying under light sport and keep their Pipers, Cessnas and Bonanzas going.
About time!
Yea!
Thank you, this is incredible news!!! 🛫
Because I haven’t paid enough attention to Light Sport I think I’m a bit unclear on a few things. It seems (but I’m not entirely sure) that there is a disconnect where yes, Light Sport pilot privileges have expanded, but the Light Sport Aircraft category has expanded a great deal. (As in a Cirrus isn’t too far outside what was described, I think?) I’m looking forward to your further coverage once a bit more digesting is done. Thanks!
And so forth and so on....
It sounds like they are doing away with the Light Sport category altogether, and rather changing the limits on what Sport Pilots may fly.
Personally, the *only* thing I’ve wanted to see in LSA is a slight uptick in the weight limitation to include aircraft like the 152, the tomahawk, etc. That would expand, by SO MUCH, the practical aircraft that LSA pilots can access. And let’s be real, if you can operate a 162, you can absolutely operate a 152 or a tomahawk.
Bravo.thenks
Does AOPA have any insight into what some of the manufacturers are doing/planning to take advantage of the new rules?
I wish they would also open basic med to allow some commercial operations such as being able to give rides
so what will be the difference between sport, recreational and ppl if this rule gets implemented, other than ppl can fly with more than one passenger?
I wish they would add kit helicopters to the light sport category.
So after reading this will the current light sports be able to go faster just by changing the prop pitch . I think these same light sports in Europe go faster. Thanks.
What airplane is that on the thumbnail? The colour scheme is exquisite!
I hope these new manufacturing rules make ga more affordable.
It won't. Everything is going up. Guess why....
🤭🤣
Nope.
Thank you for the great news!
So I can fly my Tripacer under light sport when this passes? Sweet!!
As a student pilot (yes, at 60), I have toyed with the idea of LSA and sport pilot certification. The LSA category was supposed to have lowered the price point for entry into GA, but it HAS NOT (really) made much of a difference. With the expanded definition of LSA under MOSAIC, now the 152, and possible 172 will fall into that category. I may rethink my continuation as PP and look into LS Pilot. I already fly under Basic Med.
Does AOPA ever venture into the Part 103 arena? With MOSAIC expanding LSA, Part 103 needs to be revisited too! 55 KIAS for top performance? That's so dated!
It is renewal time for my AOPA membership too. The fact that they have been working on expanding rules to make GA more approachable, and affordable to us geezers who've always wanted to fly just may influence my decision to renew.
68
AOPA and others (Dan Johnson) have unofficially been told, you may not want to venture into Part 103 revisions, because it is overly generous currently (regulations are less than a page) and with today's litigious society, the NPRM may come back LESS favorable.
@@aztecwarrior1421 aztec warrior 1421 says "68". I agree. 68 kts (78 mph) top airspeed makes better sense than 55 kts (63 mph). That at least gets you to the average pattern speed of most aircraft on the downwind. It also makes some limited cross country flights achievable during daylight hours.
@@daricksta08 To be honest, all I'd like to see is the top airspeed increased some (10-20%), and a doubling of fuel capacity. Would being able to cruise along at 70 to 80 mph with 10 gallons of gas be that much more dangerous than the current limits? Not asking for two seats, not asking for night flight capability, not asking for permission to fly above 10K feet. Would I be heartbroken if the tradeoff was for the pilot to at least pass a written exam, have a hand-held transceiver on board, or hold a valid motor vehicle license? Not in the least. Doubling fuel capacity is a safety measure (how many landing strips have MoGas?), and allowing the Part 103 vehicle to operate at almost the same speed as motor vehicles below them are small changes that would enhance the ultralight experience. I do see LSA manufacturers grumbling though! That would cut into what was supposed to be *their* target demographic. I am seriously considering the Merlin Lite. With all-metal construction, it's an inexpensive turn-key option. I would love for the slightly more capable Merlin to fall under the Part 103 rules, but "it's too fast" and "carries too much fuel", even though it is a single-seater two-cylinder aircraft. Buying the complete Merlin Lite package at about $34K sure beats finishing my flight training at $250 per hour, and then trying to find a serviceable aircraft that is "in annual" and not at TBO.
@@abel4776 I don't understand any part of your reply.
" Isn't 250 max below Class A?" I am talking about Ultralight restrictions. I cannot think of a single ultralight with a service ceiling above 15,000' MSL, so yes, I am usually in Class E or G airspace. Apparently you aren't familiar with the regulations for ultralight "vehicles". So, let us open the 2023 FAR/AIM (Gleim Edition) to page 243. 14CFR Part 103: Ultralight Vehicles. Subpart A, Section 103.1, Applicability. (e) If powered, (3) is not capable of more than 55 knots calibrated airspeed at full power in level flight. That ridiculously low airspeed is what I would like to see raised to at least 70 knots. Nowhere near 250. It is truly amusing to be cruising along above a secondary road here in Central Texas and watch the cars and trucks below you zip along faster that you. It also creates an issue when flying the pattern into an untowered airfield. I know that every C-150/152, C-172 and PA-28 I had flown in flight school adhered to the 70 kt downwind, 60 kt base and final speed recommendation. Now throw someone in the pattern at 40 knots downwind, and the pattern rhythm is disturbed. My downwind is 40 knots, base and final can be as low as 32 knots (24 X 1.3). The "power off" stall speed required by 103.1 (e) (4) is 24 kts. or less. As a workaround to this speed disparity, the FAA recommended pattern altitude for ultralights is 500' AGL (See Advisory Circular AC 90-66C). Section 12 explicitly details the pattern for ULVs. So now imagine the disparity of altitudes at a normal untowered airport in my area. Let's pick KGDJ, KSEP or KCPT. Each of those has normal piston-engine planes (1,000' AGL) turbine-powered airplanes (1,500'AGL) and a few ULVs at 500' AGL. Speed on final can be anywhere from 32 kts. to 125 kts. If the ULV could be allowed higher airspeed, then the normal pattern would be no problem. We would be able to slip to slough off speed to a safe landing velocity during short-final.
Fuel capacity isn't a limit anyways." Incorrect. Absolutely incorrect. Again, let us read from the book of rules. 14CFR Part 103. Subpart A, Section 103.1, (e) (2) - Has a fuel capacity not exceeding 5 U.S. gallons. At a cruise fuel burn rate of 1.5 gph for the most efficient engines, you will have only about 2-1/2 hours of cruise time. I base this on having a 1/2 hr fuel reserve, which is not required by the regulations, but I figure it is conservative and should be observed just as if it was a Part 91 VFR Day flight (91.151). So if you are somehow able to maintain 62 mph ground speed (no head/cross wind) then you are good for only 150 miles. When it is time to refuel, your options are very limited. Almost every ULV out there uses MoGas. A good percentage of them are two-cycle engines. 100LL will foul the plugs in a hurry in those low compression engines. If you can fin 94UL, it will be at a larger, towered airfield (i.e. KACT). They don't want us there to gum up the pattern, so no entry into their precious Class D. The excuse they use is that we don't even have Mode C transponders on board, too small to track as a radar contact, etc. Ten gallons. All I ask is for a doubling of the fuel capacity. That opens up limited cross country adventures for those of us with tiny pockets.
Hopefully you can get Canada to adopt some of these changes, particularly when it comes to accepting BasicMed and the medical requirements for a Sport Pilot.
Doesn't Canada have some program where vintage aircraft can be maintained similar to experimental?
Thank you, AOPA
Talked to FAA guy at Oshkosh. Said there was a 90 day comment period. Then another 16 months before a rule making. So basically never gonna happen
The 10,000 MSL 2000 AGL altitude limit makes light sport limitations incredibly dangerous for any pilot in the western states.
Best news of the year!!!
This is exciting. Looking forward to flying a stronger plane that can handle more than 15kts crosswind.
Good news, but don't think for a minute this will reduce the cost of flying. Aviation like all business follows the law of supply and demand. As the demand for aircraft increases so will the price. Look what COVID did to light GA aircraft prices, new or used.
This is awesome news for me. I thought my dream of flying could never be achieved. I was discharged from the Marine Corps for epilepsy so I know I could never pass the medical.
And ... are the insurance companies going to write policies for this new rulemaking?
If this passes, then Robinson R22s and light twins like Duchess should qualify as well.
Very disappointing if a sport pilot will need a medical to fly at night
What about experimental amateur built that meet the new criteria will those fall under the new light sport category? Or will it be only for factory built?
I thought a homebuilt Vans RV-12 was eligible for Sport Pilots today?
Pilots, let's take a victory lap. Don't be pushy, nagging about trivial things. A win is a win.
Professional approach, congratulation!!
Nice to see IFR certification is possible too.
For a sport pilot or just the plane?
@@JoeCnNd Removing the limitation on the plane, but still assuming IFR rated pilot.
@@philipmcbride1275 OK, I was hoping you meant sport pilot could go for ifr rating now.
Although an IFR rating could be a safety factor for pilots that encounter inadvertent IMC or get stuck on top. If a sport pilot were to take the time & have the funds to get it. And not necessarily to go up in IMC conditions, just if you got caught in them. And I wonder if that's how a lot of private rated pilots with an IFR endorsement treat it anyway. Idk maybe I'm all wet.
@@oneninerniner3427 Agree. It's really smart to push to get IFR rating, even if your minimums mostly keep you out of IMC. Great to have the knowledge and experience to handle it. And funnily enough, often easier to fly IFR even on nice days.
Wow it would be so nice to see Skyhawks can be flown with sports pilot privileges.
Yes. The big benefit here is that it opens the door to a sport pilot ticket to every student near a flight school with a 152/172! Finding a school with an SLSA has been quite the challenge!
Wow. But why not 4 people in a four place?
To keep passengers from dying if the pilot makes a mistake or has a medical emergency. The rules allow pilots to fly more planes but still not risk more lives.
With regard to the allowance for sport pilots to fly night VFR, will any specific endorsement be required for private pilots with lapsed medicals who are currently flying under sport pilot rules? Will they need any additional night flying endorsement considering they had already received that as part of their private pilot certification?
So does this mean that a plane like Mikes Scrappy could be a light sport?
Now if aircraft were affordable. And I dont mean a 70 year old one held together with zipties and duct tape, but a good newer aircraft.
I appreciate the changes but the down fall will be those light 4 place planes that are over priced now will become crazy overpriced
This is awesome news! It would be nice if there was another stipulation now that sport pilot has been increased to 4 seat aircraft that you could take your up to two children with you as well. So not necessarily 4 adults but two adults and for parents up to two children so the could do family trips or other family outings. Maybe with the caviar that the must live with them at least part time, or maybe not. I don’t know. While getting closer I think this still keep families from enjoying this joyous wonder as a family which could bring more people such as myself to aviation in general. One by exposing more people to it, two because it brings the price down some for families to do it and brings families together.
I kind of wonder if it's a focus thing. They don't want too many people talking to distract you.
@@JoeCnNd that is also a very good point. I can confirm that my one child is a distraction while driving. I’m not a pilot at this time due to not being able to make that into the budget and not really include them in it. At least with some intercom systems I understand that a pilot can isolate themselves so they only hear the radio and there would be another parent in the cockpit to handle the child or children in the example I made. Honestly I believe with them just being in the plane can be a distraction even without being able to hear them. So again you make a very good point and potential counter argument to my example.
The Government doesn't want to give you too much too fast....
@@dh-flies they don’t want to give us nothing… AOPA hasn’t been trying to get this far for years because they are giving everything they ask for.
Carrying passengers or family members implies additional responsibility on part of the pilot. Not mentioned are requirements for good judgement and up to date skill levels and scenario-based training. A cautious mindset and reducing risk for passengers is a good approach to have.
How might this affect ELSA aircraft?
Smart moves based on the future of aircraft
I guess still you can not change a Cessna 150 to a light sport plane. I have had N5549E for fifty years now and just wonder if you can change it.
So a 150 will be light sport qualified to be flown by a light sport pilot. But is still a certified aircraft & treated as any other certified aircraft maintenance wise I believe. Does that make sense?
@@429thunderjet2 Yep no change for me.
THIS IS AWESOME NEWS :)
If the FAA just announced this then that means it will be at least another 10-15 years before any meaningful results will be implemented. We have only been waiting 20 years since unleaded avgas was announced and it was just approved last year.
A minor correction / clarification / addition to the video at 7:00-7:15: Regarding Sport Pilot night limitations, a Third Class medical or Basic Med will be required as proposed.
Night VFR will require a current airman medical or Basic Med
So in other words you need a private rating to get an IFR endorsement, Right? Why bother with a sport pilot then, just go for your private, like it is now, so no change there if that's the case.
They should atleast include 2 passengers
Where can I find a copy of the NPRM available for comment?
Great news!
I still don’t understand why a medical is so important for a pilot, but an extremely unhealthy and old
person can blaze down the freeway with a bunch of kids in the back with an oncoming 18-wheeler 6’
to the left.
imagine if they made all drivers have to know all of the mechanical knowledge you learn in ground school. Traffic would cut down fast
So Happy.... this is going to get me back into flying... I hope that they allow LSAs under the EASA to immediately be eligible.
Can a PPL pilot operating under sports pilots rules be the PIC of an 2-seat experimental, retractable gear, variable pitch prop, that operates at cruise speed of 150 kts? Max gross =1600lbs,
I wonder if a Vans RV 4 could fall into this category..
You’d have to do a little work to get the stall speed down
I believe if one were to read the proposed Part 61.316 that they deduce that it does. It's on page 296 of the NPRM.
Question, if I go get my pilots license, can I use a light sport aircraft to get my commercial license????
And why is everyone or utube not answering the question???
Will you please give me a answer
Will AOPA welcome members who own personal evtols?
Does this mean that existing experimental homebuilt airplanes can be built by the manufacturer and sold as LSA's as long as they don't go over 250kts cas and meet the maximum stall speed limitations? For example, can Vans, Rans Sling etc sell a completed airplane as an LSA instead of an experimental?
This is great news and I'm glad AOPA was heavily involved... but this scripted "interview" format is a pretty slow way to convey the information.
i just wisxh that they would allow an extra pax... would love to be able to take my missus and dog at the same time.,.... not all the time, but sometimes :D right now the missus has to drive while i take the dog :D
So can I recetify my cessna 150 as an lsa and then get to do all the maintenance on it since I'm also in LSRM? So dumb that I am allowed to work on much more capable aircraft that are certified as light sport
I don't think so. Your 150 is still a part 23 certified aircraft not LSA, but you can now fly it as a sport pilot.
Wouldn't it need to be changed to the experimental category for a annual condition inspection with a repairmans ticket, rather than needing it done by an A&P.
There should be no restrictions on passengers so long as they are immediate family at a minimum (ideally any quantity of non commercial passenger). Let LSA pilots take their kids with them on trips.
Oh swell. I sold my C150 a few years ago for a bargain price because it wouldn't fit Light Sport rules and now they are talking about C180s and maybe even multi engine? Thanks a lot. At least I won't be limited to the few Light Sport aircraft available under the old rules. Maybe the guy who bought my 150 will consider selling it back. Yeah right. For 3 times what he paid me I bet.
I just hope the big certified manufacturers(textron/cirrus/diamond) DON’T try to derail this. There is really no need for certified aircraft for VFR pilots anymore.
Any C150 For Sale?
It looks like they are laying legal grounds for electric aircraft to be flown with sport license because we all know they will be heavy and expensive (VTOL)
She states that this is the first modernization of aircraft certification standards in two decades. I guess AOPA missed the Part 23 rewrite. Not to mention the current light sport regulation was released in 2004, which is just 19 years. That second one was just a minor nit but missing Part 23 just a few years ago is a major oversight.
Jeeze. I can tell you never owned a business. To detailed focused on nothing to succeed.
This is AWESOME NEWS!!!!! Hopefully it won't take 10 years to take effect!!!!
Its supposed to be Jan 1st 2024 isn't it?
@@JoeCnNd I thought they said the end of 2024?
Give the lsrms permission to work on 150s and 152s