FAA MOSAIC Rules Update, Midwest LSA Expo Sept 2021.

[@Bobrob51]

I have a PPL and lost my medical 20 years ago (let it expire on the advice of my AME) due to a one off occurance of a disqualifying issue that has never recurred. FAA says I can't fly a Tomahawk or a C-150 without a medical but I can fly an RV-12 under SP without a medical, which I do.

[@Youtuber12345]

don't get me wrong, this is great... but it seems like a whole lot of overcomplicated in an attempt to work around the third class medical system without just changing that.

[@Rich-Flies]

Dan truly is the best source of information when it comes to light aircraft and the upcoming regulations. Thanks for what you do, Dan!

[@rhkennerly]

Superb recap, Dan. You touched on something I think has been holding back the LSA manufacturers for years: uncertainty, particularly over useful load. Comparing HP/Lb and Wing Loading of most LSA aircraft with production aircraft it is apparent that many LSAs are capable of carrying much more weight. In other words, the 1320 lb is an artificial limit (I said most LSAs, not all). Your example of the Jabaru D230 and the Vashon Ranger is an apt example. I specifically rejected the Ranger at the Expo last week because of it's useful load when it is limited to 1320 lbs GW. (Although on paper, as you suggest, the plane could carry several hundred lbs more.) At 70 yrs old and looking for what is likely my last airplane as I ease into LSA medical territory, a 2 or 3 yrs wait is a lifetime, possibly literally. Worse, 2-3 years of dawdling by regulators ensure that many of the innovative designs I saw at the Expo would likely not survive the drought. What killed the Cessna 150 is the same problem that is killing the LSA, a 400-lb useful load isn't very useful in cornfed mid-western USA. Two 200-lbers and a half cup of av gas won't go very far or for very long. Paul Bertorelli in one of his videos made as a side comment that most LSAs take off at least 50 lbs above GW, not as a recommendation but as an observation. He might be right. Clearly, if one is smart enough to get a pilot's license, you're also smart enough to do comparative math and make informed decisions. The FAA only loses more credibility and authority when artificial limits in service of contrived standards are imposed on intelligent, experienced pilots.

[@brianmorrow4729]

He said, in essence, that someone in FAA may have a better handle on this stuff than he does......uh, I doubt it. WOW! This guy really knows his stuff. Sharp mind and insightful analysis...the LSA organization sure has the right guy running their group...!

[@nothingtoseehere4026]

Sport Planes are like kites. Not easy to fly when compared to a 172. They're fun, but I'd argue those who fly LSAs may be better pilots when it comes to dynamic control. Not sure why the FAA thinks big wings are docile, but whatever they want to believe.

[@Tharkunify]

It is one of the great mysteries. Heavier GA are much more forgiving and easier to land than most LSA (except maybe the sling 2). And, in my opinion. IFR flying is much easier and safer than VFR flying in many ways. The rule is backwards.

[@nothingtoseehere4026]

@@Tharkunify #Agreed Flying sport is not a 2nd class cert. FAA is ridiculous in many ways. Who's doing this?

[@DON112751]

Yes, you're correct; and I'd argue that flying LSAs well requires a sensitive seat-of-the-pants feel. I'm a CFI, and we had SLSAs on the line for training. I wasn't able to sign off some other CFIs to teach in them. Why? They couldn't land them! Low wing loading and pitch sensitivity couple to make things very "sporty."

[@DON112751]

I'd add that the CFIs who had problems landing them were the heavy and twin folks. They tend to fly solely by the numbers.

[@randyvanvliet226]

@@Tharkunify You could probably add an E-LSA Van's RV-12 to that list, too. Enough schools using them to teach new pilots how to fly, be it Sport pilot certificate or General.

[@garrygballard8914]

Tks Dan for all your efforts and work you do here, keep us all informed. Its much appreciated old friend.

[@ToyManFlyer1100]

Somebody should give Dan his Honorary Doctorate's Degree.....Anybody listening ???!!!....🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔!!!

[@hermantibbs5644]

Why not just do away with the 3rd class medical for the PPL and allow SPL holders to get additional instruction (and endorsements)and move into a PPL? Maybe put limits on weight, speed and altitude on the latter if they wanted? Maybe limit to FL180 and 200 knots? Would that not be the easiest solution and still be safe?

[@joelv4495]

Agree. I think the endorsement idea should be dramatically expanded, even including private pilots. A pathway from sport pilot to private would also help legitimize sport pilots in the eyes of the instruction community.

[@mykofreder1682]

I have known many people who were very old and died behind the wheel, such people should be not be flying and falling out of the sky in a congested area. It should be simplified where age, disease profile, and medications list coming from your doctor is checked and OKed or not. A 90-year-old who can run a 10-minute mile, has not had a negative health history, is not on medications should be OK, a 65-year-old with issues like congestive heart failure should not get thorough.

[@rhkennerly]

If one had the foresight to get a 3rd class before the cutoff & now are flying basic med, you can still push some serious metal. Basic Med is really not any different than flying spl on a DL. I know guys flying barons & TBMs in hard IMC on basic med. Maybe limiting speed, altitude, complex systems, IMC OPS, & number of passengers on basic med is a better solution. Instead of penalizing pilots who get help with conditions like sleep apnea, the FAA should be rewarding them. I have known plenty of pilots who refused help with depression because of their medical, but who self-medicated with abandon. The whole med thing is just whacky.

[@Jkur2009]

@@rhkennerly if your health is good enough to drive a car you should be able to fly an airplane, period.

[@mattlewis1063]

@@mykofreder1682 While I agree to a point ..... the FAA denied my recent medical for a precautionary medication (equate it to reading glasses, I didn't need it but it made me safer). The FAA said I would be denied as long as I took the medication, my doctor and I discussed it, so I stopped the medication. The FAA still grounded me (hopefully temporarily). The FAA took no consideration of my medical condition (VERY fit) other than one medication. I know several older well experienced (40+ years) pilots who now fly under SPL to avoid having the same problem I experienced.

[@caseyroman58]

The one common sense change I would like to see would be being able to get a new or modified airworthiness certificate for small EAB planes thst once operated beyond the current LSA weight or speed restrictions. Saw an older Kitfox that was paperworked at 1400 lbs, making it a non starter by 80 lousy pounds, speed was never an issue.. Why not have a path for those who would operate such aircraft under the stated weights, speeds, etc., etc. ? Such would sure open up the used aircraft market to the Sport Pilot.

[@kenhurley4441]

I agree Dan,,,, Chris is the BEST! He rolls out the red carpet for everyone. Next year I'm going to Mt. Vernon early and help get the grounds in shape for the show. This year's weather was awesome! Take a vacation next year and come out to Mt. Vernon, IL. Oh and the KR Gathering for 2022 will be at MVN at the same time! Thanks for your great seminar. I look forward to attending them when you're on the schedule.

[@bwcritch]

Great to know the FAA is working with the LSA community, to bad the same cannot be said for the FAA and the r/c hobby.

[@Z06C5]

Thanks for update. Come on FAA. FAA has certification for air taxis, but still nothing for 20 year old LSA. Geez

[@All4Grogg]

On 103 I would like to see two small change that wouldn't in any diminish the intent. From; "Weighs less than 254 pounds empty weight, excluding floats and safety devices which are intended for deployment in a potentially catastrophic situation" To: Weighs less than 254 pounds empty weight, excluding floats, batteries and safety devices which are intended for deployment in a potentially catastrophic situation From: "Has a fuel capacity not exceeding 5 U.S. gallons;" To: Has a stored energy capacity not exceeding 5 U.S. gallons of fuel; 75# of batteries or combination of each fuel and batteries.

[@Anonymous99997]

I wonder if the FAA will say a LSA can have retractable gear, but a Sport Pilot can’t retract them. 😄

[@samuelseidel6148]

I would be fine with that limitation ;)

[@kazansky22]

I just wish we would copy EASA UL rules.

[@rjbishop12]

Dan, I think you are incorrect about the rule regarding CFI's training pilots in LSAs. If the aircraft is a S-LSA, then there is no issue. It's only ELSA or EAB aircraft that require a LODA to be used in training. I think you need to make this clear with your audience... there is a big difference.

[@Bigpigdotcom]

Why doesn’t the FAA start caring about the health of pilots, make discretionary and Special Issuance Medicals more streamlined? Hell, pilots are killing themselves because they are afraid big brother FAA is going to ground them for seeing the doc.

[@SoloRenegade]

not to mention "illegal" maintenance going on because the legal liability of mechanics is too high, and the path for more people to repair their own aircraft properly and legally is impossible for most.

[@kazansky22]

This 100% pilots and contract controllers don't go to the doctor when they should for fear of losing medical.

[@DanFrederiksen]

I forget if you covered it but any allowance for 4 seats and RG? if 1800 lbs or even 3000 is allowed, that makes no sense if 4 seats aren't allowed. I don't think they should increase the weight limits significantly. They could simply set a max stall speed and max weight and free the rest. For retractable gear they could mandate automatic or warning based on ground altitude, either GPS or laser or other if they feel forgetful geezers will fly complex planes. A local here in DK bought a brand new fancy LSA and set it down without gear. Cost a bit to repair :) I would like to see a relatively open category such that even pressurized twin jet is allowed as long as it complies with max stall and max weight. Jets can have much longer TBO and twin engine is nice safety. I'd also like to see LSA extended to IFR flying simply by requiring the modern tech we have today and skipping all the old junk like VOR and ILS. You are only allowed to fly IFR with functioning redundant GPS and synthetic vision and ADS-B. VFR is simply unrealistically restrictive for longer trips and flying by quality synthetic vision is not a 100 hour course. IFR must be dethroned. Computerized ATC sure wouldn't hurt either. Why doesn't FAA hire someone savvy? instead of vogons. Is it a rule that quality minds cannot enter regulating bodies? handing it over to industry I suppose is a pragmatic solution but seems like admitting defeat when there is no reason they couldn't have a wizard on staff. Same with certifications of smaller simple planes. A wizard of the cloth who can ask a few choice questions and look over a construction and comfortably be the smartest man in the room. Let's say hypothetically a Mike Patey, could he not quickly go over a typical LSA complexity plane and spot potential issues with the design and production methods. Imagine certifying a plane in a day at little to no cost. Old planes fail all the time so could intelligently reviewed new planes really be worse? One could argue that warbirds are very dangerous because of age and poor user friendliness. Imagine twin jet LSAs with runway to runway autopilot through IMC and no voice ATC. The rest of GA would drop everything and look on in envy.

[@dh-flies]

Thanks for the updates Dan. You're the Man!!

[@TactlessWookie]

Thank you Dan. Excellent talk. I'm pretty jazzed about some of the coming changes.

[@brucebevers5269]

Thank you Dan for the update on MOSAIC. I always look forward to hearing from you and your aviation perspectives.

[@kowkunt8710]

Excellent talk. Very informative. Most critical being dialog related to training and flight Instructors. Just a question. Drivers Lic Medicals. Are they sufficient enough ? Here in Canada you can get a CV1 for $100.00 and you dam near just walk in and out the door.

[@jcmcclain57]

Great post! Thank you! It makes me wish I would have went ahead and traveled to the expo.

[@DanJohnsonAffordableAviation]

Please, come next year! It’s a great show.

[@ToyManFlyer1100]

Glad I'm not the only one that says "Tur Bine", instead of "Turbin"....😂😂😂😂!!!!

[@gotchagoing8843]

Excellent presentation Dan. Thank you.

[@homertalk]

Really good presentation!

[@bertruttan129]

Great info as always Dan. Wish you were the head of the FAA!

[@PaulAnthonyDuttonUk]

I don’t like this phrase “That’s a special PRIVILEGE” It’s a constraint of liberty even in its current 103 form. If we keep thinking like this then one day we could be taxed to breath under the notion of privilege. If it’s one person flying and they are kept away from populated areas and controlled airspace then there should be no limits and just regarded as a dangerous sport like wing suit flying if the authorities insist on classifying everything. Never doff your cap to government. They work for us and not we for them. 2023 is ridiculous and should not be excepted either.

[@scotabot7826]

So, So very true!!! It makes me sick!!!!

[@AV8R_1]

By the FAA’s own idiotic logic, EVERY flight is a “commercial” flight if you enjoyed the flight. 🙄

[@SoloRenegade]

yup, they consider logging flight time "compensation for hire", therefore all flights, even fun flights, are commercial operations. Never mind the fact you can't exchange accrued flight time for hangar rentals, or to cover maintenance fees, or to fuel your plane, etc.

[@tracyholmes9193]

I get more excited with every post from Dan. I fly a J-3: a certificated, LSA-compliant aircraft. I have my heart set on a biplane, which conforms go all of the LSA rules, except weight and power/airspeed. Given that almost all biplanes that are available today are Experimental, I am concerned that they may not be included in the new rulings. Will I be allowed to buy that Hatz, Acrosport, Stolp that I have dreamed about flying?

[@terrallputnam7979]

I hope they raise the weight to the 1850 soon because my newer Ercoupe will easily fall into this category.

[@vf24renegade23]

The faa might get done in 2023 but then it has to go thru the omb and ntsb who usually holds things up.

[@KevinBentley142]

I'm confused by the medical requirements change. Are the increased weights going to apply to a PPL operating under Light Sports privileges, but not the additional passengers? Or will the increased weight not be available under LSA privileges? Otherwise, this is a great presentation, thanks so much for the update!

[@yonderosa]

Thanks Dan! You give hope!

[@DougBow96]

Thank you! Very informative

[@peteranderson037]

Dan, it seems like these new regulations will render the older Primary Category and Recreational Pilot regulations effectively redundant. What, if anything, do you think the FAA will do with those regulations? Not that I would miss them if they were gone.

[@DanJohnsonAffordableAviation]

Primary Category and Recreational Pilot have been duds since the beginning. The number of Recreational Pilots has actually dropped from a tiny number to half of that. MOSAIC will go well beyond those concepts.

[@jumpywolf892]

Where can we find tested max weight limits for different LSA aircraft? That is a good idea to purchase an aircraft with higher weight limit so if/when it changes you can have more wiggle room.

[@tn_bob5740]

The manufacturer would have that information, though they don't always publish it. You're more likely to find it for designs that are available as homebuilts, because some builders are not limited to sport pilot and would want to know about any higher weight capability. The manufacturer could still tell you though, even if it isn't published. If they won't, I'd personally look for something from a different manufacturer.

[@Jmurse89]

Maybe I missed it, but where can the public weigh in where the FAA has to read our comments?

[@mauriceevans6546]

During the Notice of proposed rule making period. After they annouce the new rules

[@kazansky22]

Well if the new rules come into effect December 2023, and they are supposed to give 16 months for comments then I expect it will be open for comments starting in October(ish) 2022. At least that is my understanding someone can correct me if I'm wrong.

[@jking755]

Excellent information Dan. Thank you!

[@danseals3128]

So are we gonna see any easing up on part 103 for Ultralites?

[@ultralightnews]

Nothing new for 103 - that I know of.

[@crawford323]

I wish he would have specifically touched on Gyroplanes more and even more on scratch built. I will have to re-listen to see what applies and what does not. At the moment my bird is a couple of years away from completion and because of the current rules, just to be safe ( braking of regulations safe ) I have listed my gross weight to match that of Light Sport Aircraft. This oops down in Florida concerning the warbirds instructions, has it impacted Gyroplane training in uncertified 51% built? The Gyroplane industry got an exemption for training in such aircraft in the early 90’s. For the most part this talk brought great news but as he said, changing one word can ripple through the regulations in a way which makes unintended consequences.

[@tatianakharkova1299]

Interesting how the we hole LPA thing got dropped so quickly. If only LSA was drafted in the same spirit as part 103 was.

[@DumbledoreMcCracken]

That was the tail end of the hippy age. Reagan chased the hippies into the board rooms, and the hippies did exactly as expected, took strong-arm control of everything, just as Mao instructed.

[@CaptainCurt07]

✅ Great explanation Dan ✅

[@bikersoncall]

I'm at the FAA page, it seems to indicate that Class B airspace is MSL to 10k ft AGL. ?? 20:32

[@mindlessconsumer]

what about 10,000 ft limit?

[@kazansky22]

Yea I'd like to see it at least go to 12500 with a drivers license medical, or 17500 with a 3rd class or higher.

[@PaulHamiltonCFI]

Thanks greatly appreciated.

[@mehmetvural8095]

have a nice day. I want to learn technical technical and price planning of 2 and 4 light aircraft. how can I learn.? please help me. thanks.

[@f.n.schlub]

Light Sport and Ultralight Flyer -- Don, ultralights need two changes: a dry weight increase to 350-400lbs; and, an upper speed limit increase to 70-75kts ground speed. Stall speed should also probably come up by 5-10kts as well. American small engine design is stagnant and stuck in 2-stroke. With an increase in dry weight, safer and cleaner 4-strokes can be adapted, improved and even developed. At present, for distance over time fuel consumption (not to mention per gallon emissions) Ultralights are less efficient than 1920s truck. Even without any headwind, you can get somewhere faster on a damn moped. Airspace restrictions could be maintained, but a fixed-frequency VFR ADIS-B pulse location transponder should be required. Seriously, Don, the speed/weight formulary dates from hang glider days.

[@DumbledoreMcCracken]

Ground speed? Obviously you have never even tried to fly.

[@ActualKaktus]

Under light sport rules, we should be allowed to fly aircraft that are equivalent to current PPL trainers.

[@DumbledoreMcCracken]

Why not just ask for 747 type ratings under SP rules. SP is the flight rules, LSA is the aircraft certification.

[@mamulcahy]

Excellent talk!

[@patrickk1966]

Thanks!

[@weshillsberry6275]

I just wanna build light sport racer aircraft like sonerai, all the RV's, etc. that fit almost all LSA rules except maybe close on stall speed and little to fast on the cruise speed and fly these little birds under light sport

[@terry12327]

Like your informative talk!

[@ultralightnews]

Thank you 😊

[@HelloWorldETX]

Regarding flight standards, the sport privileges 10,000 MSL limit is insanely unsafe and has to go.

[@gregorybrown4062]

Please clarify

[@samuelseidel6148]

The 10,000 foot rule is silly and should be removed but I don’t see where it is dangerous except in one circumstance I have experienced. When flying over the Grand Canyon a sport pilot to be safe should disregard the 10,000 foot limit to follow the established crossing altitudes on the chart.

[@SoloRenegade]

I've flown "light sport" planes up to 14,500ft DA in the Rockies, over the grand canyon (10,500 and 11,500 were the lowest corridor crossing altitudes I remember using). Also, nothing quite like flying IFR at 11,000ft MSL and only being 2,000ft AGL.

[@ccproperty1519]

@@samuelseidel6148 fly in the mountain west at 10,000MSL or 2000AGL and see how comfortable you are with inhospitable terrain, mountain waves, and downdrafts. 6000 AGL should be the bare minimum

[@HelloWorldETX]

@@gregorybrown4062 Sport privileges has a (greater of) 10,000 MSL / 2000 AGL limit. There is no reason for this artificial 10,000 MSL limit and at 2000 AGL, ATC coverage is spotty and engine out options can be nil. Flying low in mountainous terrain is the single most dangerous limitation put on sport privileges.

[@scotabot7826]

Is the 1320lb gross weight going to increase? Man, it sure needs to!!!!!!

[@mikeryan6277]

So is that 16 months from now or 16 months after the NPRM which you expect at Airventure 2022?

[@Impimpster2000]

All of 2023 and a 4 month minimum of 2022, Oshkosh will be more than enough time.

[@DanJohnsonAffordableAviation]

The 16 months start after the NPRM is released, and I’m predicting that will be at Oshkosh 2022. So the clock starts then.

[@mikeryan6277]

@@DanJohnsonAffordableAviation thanks, the FAA truly teaches patience.

[@samuelseidel6148]

Great news!

[@robertbrandywine]

Did he say go train in a Cessna 150 for your Sport Pilot Certification? That isn't legal is it? You'd have to have a third class medical certificate, I think. I'm in the situation where there is no local Sport Pilot training (or ultralight training). I'd have to go to an out-of-town school for the month or six weeks needed to get certified and that would be a big burden on me and my family. And, even if I did that there are no LSAs for rent locally.

[@ultralightnews]

Many conventional schools now train for Sport Pilot. So you don't have to have a third class medical.

[@robertbrandywine]

@@ultralightnews People keep saying that, but try to find a school that actually *does*. At least they are discussing raising the weight limit to include planes like the Cessna 150/152 and the Diamond A20. That way, I could go to an accelerated training school to get my license in two weeks and when I returned home I could find something to rent, although I suspect the operators wouldn't want to rent to anyone who didn't have a PPL.

[@Mike-01234]

You can get training just can't solo in a 150.

[@beaulong3270]

Ughhh. I didn’t watch the whole video because we ain’t going to get any definitive answer from faa until 2023 ish.

[@gmcjetpilot]

3000 lb LSA... ha ha. "Can still be light and docile with +200hp... if the wings are really big." OK what ever. I think you lost the plot to LSA.

[@wareairaviationservicesllc4933]

@Dan, I just sent you an email. I was really hopping that MOSAIC would change some true vintage aircraft like those certified under CAR3 like my Stinson 108 from Standard to a new Special category. Its truly becoming increasingly difficult to maintain the aircraft when most all previous STCs are no longer supported and no one will invest in new ones bc there are less than 1000 Stinson 108s still flying. Thoughts?

[@Aeronca11]

We're in the same shape with Aeroncas.

[@JoeCnNd]

Basically sport pilots aren't getting anything useful. No 4 seat probably no speed increase.

[@kazansky22]

I really hope they just copy Europe and remove the upper speed limit. Like I've been saving up to buy a European plane because American products are just really slow and inefficient in comparison. I'd rather spend me money here, but, if I have to go to Italy on "vacation" to "build" 51% of my "experimental" European UL, then.... thats alot of hoops the FAA is making me jump through just to spend my money somewhere else because they have compelling products.

[@alexmikhael5061]

little 3 cylinder desel motor generator powering up the batteries and them turning the prop motor..... the generator can run in pulse mode so it's quiet often during the flight..... then when the batteries get down a little bit, (80 to 60% or ''to the standby emergency landing strip'' eh... ) anyhow... yea... the generator starts up and purrrrrs along for a bit spinning the whirliegigger to charge up .... eh... THAT TO ME IS HYBRID!!!

[@kazansky22]

Yea basically just a small efficient motor/alternator that keeps the battery charged, and the battery having maybe a 30 minute life time so if you lose your motor/alternator you have some time to find a spot to put it down.

[@kazansky22]

I just want to be able to buy European UL's like the Risen Superveloce, Taragon, Shark, Blackwing ect.... in the US. I don't mean EAB, or Experimental exhibition, I mean just buying one like normal the same way European "light sport" pilots have been doing it for years. Maybe loosening the regs to be more akin to the European regs will make American products worthwhile, because right now in direct comparison American products are slow, heavy, and inefficient. I'm tired of slow inefficient planes in the US.

[@dionbrandt6176]

Fly now!

[@tn_bob5740]

I don't want single lever control in my LSA. I want a prop I can adjust. Many LSAs, like mine, are homebuilts. Manually adjustable props have been around for a long time, and they're widely understood. They're a technology and capability that are either already understood by homebuilders, or easily learned. The same cannot be said for single lever control. If my prop has a problem, I want it to be with a function I either already understand, or that I can easily learn via the assistance of nearly innumerable fellow pilots who already do. I, as a homebuilder, don't want to add a system that I probably will never understand well, and that will in all likelihood need to be sent off for expensive repairs by someone else while my plane sits grounded. I'll take that extra lever and ease of maintenance every day of the week and twice on Sunday. Leave the computer controlled single lever systems for the software developers who actually might have a chance of maintaining them.

[@Impimpster2000]

The single lever seems to be from a LSA factory plane, homebuilt, well, you're the builder. Build it like your life is in it!

[@printbr]

An Experimental LSA has to be an exact replica of the SLSA version of the same aircraft. After you have a Airworthiness Certificate you can make any changes you want to. if you want to build it any way other than the manufacturer specifies then you will have to register it as an Experimental Amateur Built, E-AB.

[@tn_bob5740]

@@Impimpster2000 , true, but my concern is they'll get approval for single lever based on this emphasis, and not approval for a standard inflight adjustable prop.

[@tn_bob5740]

@@printbr , mine is E-AB. But a light sport E-AB can only have what's approved under the light sport rule, hence my concern. I have nothing against single lever. I just don't want emphasis on it to result in that being the only inflight adjustable prop that's allowed.

[@lees7610]

talking for 30 years, nothing ever happens. FAA answer to everything , is the sane . stop people from flying small planes

[@regdor8187]

How many private pilots and aeroplanes are there in Russia and China......That is the model that will soon show up on our doors.....

[@kazansky22]

I don't know, but I really want the European UL's here, Taragon, Shark, Blackwing, Risen, ect. Or I want American companies to make fast efficient planes that will match or exceed what all the Europeans get to enjoy.