Jim Meade Posted May 9, 2014 Report Share Posted May 9, 2014 I am not holding my breath about the FAA easing medical restrictions on flying small GA airplanes, but it's fun to speculate. What would you do with your LSA if the FAA permitted you to fly faster, higher and in darkness or weather? I flew a Cessna T210 before I elected to not chase the medical. Would I go out and look for another to replace my CTSW? As always, it comes down partly to mission. If money is not the object, one can buy an awfully nice used Cirrus for the price of a new LSA. Or a Cherokee Six or T210. However, my CTLS is Experimental. I would probably first look at making mods that are already flying safely and under certification elsewhere, such as -12° flaps and a constant or adjustable speed prop. Those changes would make it a much more serious traveling machine. I already have a pretty nice panel underway but would have to think about what it would take to file IFR again. That is enticing, as a way to get and down through the midwest winter overcast and make more trips possible. So, for those who would like a little more out of your CT, where would you start? Dream away! (Or would you just walk away from LSA?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Cesnalis Posted May 9, 2014 Report Share Posted May 9, 2014 Jim, It sounds as though, upon relaxing medical requirements you are saying we will have freedom to move our LSA to EAB. Our CTs will continue to be LSA with LSA limitations, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anticept Posted May 9, 2014 Report Share Posted May 9, 2014 Relaxing the medical does not have anything to do with changing type design regulations or definitions. LSA will remain LSA, and E-LSA must continue to fulfil the LSA definition (it's still an LSA). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlyingMonkey Posted May 9, 2014 Report Share Posted May 9, 2014 The question really comes down to keeping your LSA and living with the limitations they have, or going for something faster or larger. I really like my CT and it suits what I do, I have a hard time thinking I'd sell it if the rules changed. I might also pick up an old 172 for cheap though, so I could carry more stuff/people if needed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anticept Posted May 9, 2014 Report Share Posted May 9, 2014 A recommendation for everyone: If you want to keep your LSA, but would also like the option of bigger aircraft, there's a couple things I recommend. First, consider leasing to a flight club or flight school if you won't fly your LSA as much. Secondly, just rent a bigger aircraft if you only need it occasionally. As a side note for leasing: do not just lease and forget. Thats how people get trashed airplanes in the end. If you lease your plane, you must be involved in the operation; only fools give a plane to someone and don't keep an eye on things. That's coming from me who both owns AND runs a training and rental operation. I don't have time to track every little detail of every plane, and our opinions may differ in upkeep. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Cesnalis Posted May 9, 2014 Report Share Posted May 9, 2014 An RV-6 would suit me better than my CT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anticept Posted May 9, 2014 Report Share Posted May 9, 2014 An RV-6 would suit me better than my CT. You have to elaborate when you make such a claim Although RV-6s are nice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Cesnalis Posted May 9, 2014 Report Share Posted May 9, 2014 An RV-6 seats side by side, is fun to fly, has good cruise speed and is economical. It beats my CTSW in speed and aerobatics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevez2436 Posted May 9, 2014 Report Share Posted May 9, 2014 The Flight Design C4 is an all carbon composite four-place light aircraft based upon the advanced design of the popular Flight Design CT series of aircraft. It would be nice to step up to the C4 without a medical and be able to carry more passengers/baggage. I assume though we might be restricted to day VFR under the new regulations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlyingMonkey Posted May 9, 2014 Report Share Posted May 9, 2014 The Flight Design C4 is an all carbon composite four-place light aircraft based upon the advanced design of the popular Flight Design CT series of aircraft. It would be nice to step up to the C4 without a medical and be able to carry more passengers/baggage. I assume though we might be restricted to day VFR under the new regulations. At $250k for the C4, I'll take the RV-6. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S3flyer Posted May 9, 2014 Report Share Posted May 9, 2014 I didn't go down the LSA route to avoid a 3rd class medical. I chose LSA because it fit my mission and provided me with better aircraft choices with modern avionics and safety equipment. I also feel the landing characteristics make LSAs safer due to less energy to dissipate (my landing configuration stall speed is 35 kts). A chute was an absolute requirement. I'd go the same route again but would almost certainly buy used due to the 50% higher prices of today and the heft that has eaten away at useful load. Speed isn't an issue for me as 172-ish cruise is fine for my mission but, to Jim's question, I wouldn't mind a variable pitch prop. Not a deal breaker but it would be nice to optimize the prop based on specific conditions. Enroute IMC capability would be nice so I could cut through a layer and fly on top, too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anticept Posted May 9, 2014 Report Share Posted May 9, 2014 I like my CT because she's tiny, cute, and yet still one hell of a performer across the entire flight envelope. If I could put a tailwheel on, that would be even more awesome; I'd be more comfortable to go try bush flying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doug G. Posted May 9, 2014 Report Share Posted May 9, 2014 The big problem with the variable pitch prop on the US side of the pond is the extra weight it would add. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlyingMonkey Posted May 9, 2014 Report Share Posted May 9, 2014 I like my CT because she's tiny, cute, and yet still one hell of a performer across the entire flight envelope. If I could put a tailwheel on, that would be even more awesome; I'd be more comfortable to go try bush flying. ELSA? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anticept Posted May 9, 2014 Report Share Posted May 9, 2014 Wouldn't trust it. The tail would have to be beefed up, which will significantly affect the CG. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Meade Posted May 10, 2014 Author Report Share Posted May 10, 2014 Jim, It sounds as though, upon relaxing medical requirements you are saying we will have freedom to move our LSA to EAB. Our CTs will continue to be LSA with LSA limitations, right? You're probably right, Charlie. I guess my dream was in a different universe. OK, I retract the wishful thinking. I'll go looking for my old T210 again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doug G. Posted May 10, 2014 Report Share Posted May 10, 2014 One of the big advantages I see to LSA is becoming an LSRM-A so I can work on my plane. Can't do that with a standard certificated plane, even if it qualifies for Light Sport. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sandpiper Posted May 10, 2014 Report Share Posted May 10, 2014 An RV-6 seats side by side, is fun to fly, has good cruise speed and is economical. It beats my CTSW in speed and aerobatics. Or an RV-7. Even an RV-14 but used examples will be harder to find and pricier. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FastEddieB Posted May 10, 2014 Report Share Posted May 10, 2014 One of the big advantages I see to LSA is becoming an LSRM-A so I can work on my plane. Can't do that with a standard certificated plane, even if it qualifies for Light Sport. Absolutely. I may do that course someday. But note that if you convert to Experimental, which you can do any time, there's no requirement for any specific traing to work on your plane, and just a 16 hour course for inspection privileges. Different topic, and already covered elsewhere here, but worth considering. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GravityKnight Posted May 14, 2014 Report Share Posted May 14, 2014 If this is to go into effect... when do you guys think that would actually happen? Not sure what to expect for how long something like this would take to become law... more curious than anything really... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Meade Posted May 14, 2014 Author Report Share Posted May 14, 2014 Of course, you're talking about the class 3 medical modification, not my rather other-worldly excursion into a very unlikely change to LSA definitions. AOPA is making a big push to contact your congress critters in support of this right now. I have no idea when/if it will ever happen. With the UAS issue and other, I wonder if the FAA is feeling a little push back from the public right now? Ah, naw, never happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GravityKnight Posted May 14, 2014 Report Share Posted May 14, 2014 Of course, you're talking about the class 3 medical modification, not my rather other-worldly excursion into a very unlikely change to LSA definitions. Yea... I have toyed with "upgrading" to my private. I don't have any medical issues (that I'm aware of lol) to stop me from passing my 3rd class, but the extra hassle is partly what steered me away. Not to mention an ELSA is a much better fit as the type of plane I want to own. Just would be nice to not be limited to no-night flight, or if I wanted to rent something larger once and a while etc. Was thinking about working on it this summer, but if this law will go into effect in the next year-ish (assuming it goes through period) I would probably just hold off until next summer etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted May 14, 2014 Report Share Posted May 14, 2014 For those private pilots that moved down to a avoid the third class hassle it would allow getting back to four or six place machines Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anticept Posted May 15, 2014 Report Share Posted May 15, 2014 Keep in mind the proposal only applies to recreational flying. I highly doubt that the FAA is going to allow commercial operations without said medical. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anticept Posted May 15, 2014 Report Share Posted May 15, 2014 Commercial pilots, not commercial operations. Many of us flying LSA's have Commercial or ATP licenses. Which is why I said recreational flying, and commercial operations . I can see how it can get mixed up though, since I replied to your post without me being very clear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.