Major expansion of light sport aircraft coming! MOSAIC explained 

Definitely! Thank you AOPA!!🙌🏼🙌🏼🙌🏼

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.

3000 lbs!? Carbon fiber 4 seaters will have enormous payloads!

⁠go to red Stewart airfield for acrobatics training. 2:42 2:44

It is you can your one of the passengers in their eyes

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.

What are you building?

soo.. but is that rly good for Safety everybody's safety ? don't think so

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.

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

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!

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.

I thought a homebuilt Vans RV-12 was eligible for Sport Pilots today?

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.

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.

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.

@@bradrobinhancock8491 Isn't 250 max below Class A? Fuel capacity isn't a limit anyways.

It won't. Everything is going up. Guess why....

🤭🤣

Nope.

Affordability is who prints the money to the debtor. No American gave permission to the IMF to print dollars and badge them as "US Dollars" for our use. High time crime. With no 7 year debt reset system, the debt and devaluation becomes endless.

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.

Doesn't Canada have some program where vintage aircraft can be maintained similar to experimental?

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.

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!

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.

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.

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 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.

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.

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.

It is a JMB VL3: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-3opHsGsI1j0.htmlsi=yT6bG8DJpvLqAHzI

2024