VansAirForceForums  
Home > VansAirForceForums

- POSTING RULES
- Donate yearly (please).
- Advertise in here!

- Today's Posts | Insert Pics


Go Back   VAF Forums > Model Specific > RV-12
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #21  
Old 02-02-2018, 08:40 AM
rmartingt's Avatar
rmartingt rmartingt is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Savannah, GA
Posts: 731
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jesse View Post
But isnít that exactly what the Light Sport rules were? No more medical required. Easier certification.

Even though basicmed was a law, it also did much the same thing.
But from the FAA's POV, those were simply reinterpretations (for Basicmed they at least claim the same standards technically apply) or additional restrictions (in the case of LSA, it was adding regulations to two-seat ultralights--at least as they saw it). And with Basicmed they were pretty much forced by an act of Congress to make it happen. Anyone here really think the FAA would have done it on its own?

A wholesale change to the LSA weight, not just an exemption like Icon has, would be both the FAA admitting it chose a bad figure, but would also mean the FAA would have to contradict its earlier reasoning.

Go read the final Sport Pilot rule as it was published in the Federal Register. Specifically, pay attention to the FAA's comments on why it did things the way it did. The FAA honestly, truly intended for LSAs to mainly be "fat ultralights"--open-frame, cloth-wing aircraft with no electrical system, and mostly topping out under 85kt or so. They set the limits they did (speed, weight, etc.) just to give a little margin or room for outliers, and to allow a few more existing aircraft for training purposes. And they figured the primary purpose of LSAs would be to train ultralight pilots.

They never expected that the vast majority of LSAs would be up near at least one of the limits, and be more or less "real" airplanes. Something like the new RV-12, with glass cockpit and EFI, was completely out of their imagination. And I think if you got a time machine and showed them what has actually played out, the final rule would have been far more restrictive.
__________________
RV-7ER - fuselage structure in work
There are two kinds of fool in the world. The first says "this is old, and therefore good"; the second says "this is new, and therefore better".
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 02-26-2018, 06:55 PM
Tomcat RV4 Tomcat RV4 is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Jacksonville,Fl. 32246
Posts: 209
Default

Let's not forget if FAA were regulating automobiles , 1/2 of population would still be
driving horse pulled bugies ! Tom
__________________
Tomcat RV4
dues paid and worth every penny
Life is uncertain -Eat desert first !
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:21 PM.


The VAFForums come to you courtesy Delta Romeo, LLC. By viewing and participating in them you agree to build your plane using standardized methods and practices and to fly it safely and in accordance with the laws governing the country you are located in.