FAA NPR Forthcoming???

I think a 4-place Carbon Cub would be a big hit. Maule could get a big boost. Manufacturers can adapt or die. They shouldn't be protected by regulations any more than other industries are.

stewartb said:

I think a 4-place Carbon Cub would be a big hit. Maule could get a big boost. Manufacturers can adapt or die. They shouldn't be protected by regulations any more than other industries are.

Click to expand...

Protected is one thing. ...yanked around is quite another. Also, when that sort of influence and authority exists, it is more than likely that someone will get inside information and profit from it while others lose. Businesses need a stable set of regulations so that they can make a long term investments that aviation needs.

None of my above comments are intended to take a position on what LSA should or should not be. I'm only commenting on any wild fluctuations in regulations.

I just want to put LSA floats on my cub that is certified, but fits LSA rules.

http://www.ransclan.com/forums/show...le-LSA-Weight-Limit-Increasing-To-3600-Pounds

Note Randy's comments.

I was in Sulphur Springs getting an annual inspection at the factory for our Legend Cub. They had heard that max gross weight would be 1750 lbs. I think any gross weight increase would be interesting for American Legend. They are already doing "custom" build experimental cubs through their owner assist program. They could turn into a true certified custom build shop. It is always neat to see what they are working on.

[QUOTE=Eddie Foy; The ox is slow but the Earth is patient.

That is one of my all time favorite movies!!!

The AOPA got way out in front of their skis on this one. EAA has been working on increasing the LSA weight limit and other changes for the past few years with no help from the AOPA. The proposed new weight limit has been all over the place, including the possibility of eliminating the weight limit entirely. At this point we do not know where it will end up. If the 3600 pound limit prevails, the best way to think of it is probably that weight will no longer be a limiting factor for LSA's. Other requirements will effectively place a practical upper limit on weight. No Sport Pilots flying C-185s in the likely future.

As far as getting new planes certified using ASTM standards, that has also been in the works for some time since the FAA has started moving towards performance-based standards rather than prescriptive standards. This is coming as soon as ASTM finished developing the relevant standards. Thank EAA for this one too.

For experimental builders, the EAA is very close to releasing their new Flight Test Manual which will lead to a new FAA-approved option of using a task-based regimen for Phase I flight testing in lieu of the typical 40 hour requirement. This should happen next year.

Bottom line is that the EAA is the one who is working with the FAA on a daily basis to make flying regulations better serve us. The AOPA is focused on lobbying legislators, which is an important but very different task. AOPA saw an opportunity to get some publicity and ran with it. unfortunately they didn't really have all the facts.

It was EAA chairman Jack Pelton who made the announcement. Are you saying Mark pushed him into speaking too soon?

What I am saying is that without context the significance of what was said and what is actually going on was lost.

I think most of us don't really care much about LSA weight restrictions, that's mainly of interest to manufacturers.
What is of interest is upsizing the privileges of a "sport pilot" certificate--
in other words, "will I be able to fly my (insert your airplane here) without a medical?"

It is almost certain that the FAA will be opening up more flying opportunities to sport pilots and private pilots flying as sport pilots (no medical). EAA and FAA are both serious about making the changes. However, it is premature to speculate about exactly what the new rule will look like. If it is anything like BasicMed it will not end up exactly where we want it to, but it will be better than what we have now.