National Aeronca Association Bulletin Board

The Aeronca is not, nor has ever been a Light Sport Aircraft, period. It is a Standard Category aircraft that meets LSA specifications. N86250 lists the definition for a Light Sport aircraft not Standard Category.

Perfect way to describe it. As Paul says when you're flying an Aeronca you're flying a Standard Category aircraft under LSA rules. You're not flying a LSA.

Amen!! By the way Al, your guy emailed me and is coming up to look at my Champ .

Mike

Well, I looked further to the definition of FAR 1.1 and, finally, into the FAA's final rule and here's what I found:

Overview
The FAA believes that there might be confusion concerning what airworthiness certificates apply to light-sport aircraft. Therefore, the FAA is clarifying this issue. A sport pilot may operate any aircraft that meets the definition in § 1.1 of a light-sport aircraft, regardless of the airworthiness certificate issued for the aircraft. An aircraft that meets the light-sport aircraft definition may have any airworthiness certificate that may be issued for an aircraft, such as standard, special, primary, or experimental amateur-built aircraft. An aircraft that meets the light-sport aircraft definition and holds a standard airworthiness certificate must be operated and maintained in accordance with the limitations of that airworthiness certificate.

This is the link:
http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/regulatory/sport_rule.pdf

It looks like I am incorrect, unfortunately, because the FAA doesn't care what the certification basis for the airplane with respect to its eligibility for use under Light Sport rules. I do know of one fellow who had no-bounce gear on his Champ but lack the proper placards and the FAA wrote the fellow a letter saying that his plane was never properly changed, so as far that particular FAA office was concerned, it did not meet the new limits of the type certificate and could stay as an aircraft eligible to fly under LSA rules. It was either saying that a single airplane it never was legal, technically, to fly at a higher gross weight or give the flying community a pass on improperly changing an aircraft, which I thought the FAA saw as the greater of two evils.

I wouldn't want someone to convert their plane only to find after the fact, the FAA tells them they are flying ineligible plane. This is the one tendril of LSA that crosses into type certification. For me, it took the FAA's final rule for clarification since the FAR 1.1 wording refers to light sport aircraft, not type-certificated aircraft. It looks like specificity and precision varies in the FARs. It would have good to have their final-rule paragraph included in the FAR 1.1 to make things plain at its source.

Again, one more reason to write in support of the medical exemption rule!

Carl Prather

Carl Prather wrote: I do know of one fellow who had no-bounce gear on his Champ but lack the proper placards and the FAA wrote the fellow a letter saying that his plane was never properly changed, so as far that particular FAA office was concerned, it did not meet the new limits of the type certificate and could stay as an aircraft eligible to fly under LSA rules. Carl Prather

I have also read the letter from the FAA giving their "answer" to the "Question asked". Asked was that he had a Champ that has the no-bounce gear on it and did not have the Placard and Weight & Balance showing the optional increase in gross weight of 1350 lbs, it still shows 1220 lbs. on the lastest paperwork. Then it still is eligible to operate under the LSA Rules.

If the question was that the gross weight was increased to 1350 lbs and no-bounce gear was installed and that he was unable to find a placard in the aircraft, they would have ruled OMO that the change happened and that the placard needs to be installed to meet the TC and that it is not eligble for the LSA Rules.

The addition of the no-bounce gear is not what takes it out of LSA Rules, its the taking of the option to increase the Gross weight and that requires a new Weight & Balance (Change in Operational limitations) along with the installation of the placard both called out in the TC to increase weight.

The letter is post here some where.

Mike K

OMO