Flying the JMB Aircraft VL3

[@keatonhatch6213]

I don’t know what’s more impressive, the performance of this airplane or how much technology has advanced that I thought the opening clip was from Microsoft Flight Simulator.

[@T25de]

^^

[@daveshepherd7582]

Looks like the P51 from the side, I think that’s why it so attractive to me.

[@aopaluxembourg]

Really impressed by this performance. There’s a lot of innovation in these VL3 Evolution. Congrats !

[@PacificDark]

By Odin's beard! That is a serious work of art with impressive performance. I could fly to Salt Lake in 1.5 hours and right around $50 in fuel. Aircraft like this would fuel ( no pun intended...maybe) serious growth in the G.A sector in the U.S. Freaking regulations are stifling innovations.

[@Max_Janszen]

Yeah hopefully they open things up with MOSAIC, still waiting 2 years later

[@evan002]

Really like the rotax engine simply from a price point. Nice to see it in high performance application.

[@The_ZeroLine]

Gorgeous, functional and economical. A rarely seen combination of traits.

[@shawnwedge5833]

That is a beautiful aircraft!

[@rlkinser]

Wait, the FAA is restricting innovation?? Ya don’t say.

[@TheIndyspace]

It actually goes against their charter for them to provide so much restraint, but that hasn't slowed their roll at all... 😔👎

[@alexdarcydestsimon3767]

;-)

[@bighaasfly]

Anyone else having flashbacks to the original Lancair 200/235? Way back in the day. That was 100/115 horse too.

[@maniagokm3186]

Thats exactly what I thought this was.....

[@TheIndyspace]

It's not exactly like anyone is re-inventing the wheel here, is it..? 👌😜

[@alexdarcydestsimon3767]

Funny as it is... The VL3 is now tested with a turboprop ...

[@alexdarcydestsimon3767]

@@TheIndyspace ;-)

[@Jeffopar]

Wow, that is gorgeous!

[@DragerPilot]

Looks like a winner. Efficient, quick and good looking.

[@PaulAnthonyDuttonUk]

As a Brit has been quite obvious to me for a long time that the FIA does a great job in killing the light sport market in America. America is supposed to be a land of freedom yet clearly this does not extend to the sky. If America is to produce innovative and competitive product in this sector then the industry needs to be unshackled from having to comply with all these arbitrary rules less the next new design be yet just another cub variant. Let’s not forget that the east of Europe has a legacy of talented designers and engineers left over from soviet days who at this time still serve a cost base much lower than America’s so really the FIA should be giving the home grown market as much elbow room as it can.

[@tropicthndr]

This is straight out (Textron) preventing these planes from flooding the U.S market, they lobbied the feds to keep them out because it makes their Stone Age designed piston market look really stupid. Allowing these planes to compete with Cessna and Bonanza’s would mean huge investments in redesign to maintain a leadership role. They can’t force insurance companies to charge high fees like they do for all Textron brands but for a tiny plane the rates have to be lower so Textron is crying.

[@Jkur2009]

@@tropicthndr Dude, what are you talking about?? textron is preventing the import of European aircraft??? maybe you should tell companies like pipistrel and technam.

[@Jkur2009]

You are correct, the FAA sucks. All they want to do is create more restrictions.

[@PuppyDogPilot]

What is the FIA? And someone who lives in a country that still worships and supports a monarchy should not lecture anyone on freedom.

[@michaelvandyne6480]

That man is right, It is a work of art. I love this plane.

[@ajgriffeth7899]

Lets go MOSAIC! haha really aren't asking for too much, c'mon FAA! Great video AOPA

[@jdean2131]

Man! That looks like a WWII FIGHTER! NICELY DONE ✅

[@2507gs]

That is a NICE looking airplane!

[@ActualKaktus]

This aircraft is both beautiful and exciting I'm in my 40s, and by the time I'll be able to afford one, I'll be well into my 50s. I hope the FAA continues to improve the Sport Pilot program and get rid of some of these silly restrictions. We shouldn't need more than an endorsement from a CFI to use retractable landing gear, or to go faster than 120 knots.

[@A.J.1656]

So what's keeping it from being certified under part 23? Is there any benefit to it being certified as an LSA to someone with all the appropriate ratings and medical to fly anything they want? I just want one. Haha

[@travisminneapolis]

Pretty impressive plane - when will the FAA rules / regs ever get updated?

[@Z06C5]

Beautiful plane. Faster than a Bristell. Hope FAA does let this be a lsa aircraft

[@cholubaz]

It has retracts and is too fast for LSA isn't it?

[@pazmanyflyer1]

@@cholubaz With current LSA rules...yup.

[@JoeCnNd]

I'm thinking america light sport just got way better.

[@enigma6482]

What are the restrictions to travel and general use when bringing the VL3 in as an exhibition experimental?

[@davidh7799]

What a beautiful aircraft, I love it

[@rafsmith1993]

“this is the first one in the US…and they’ve really taken off” 🥁Bada-dum! Thank you, I’ll be here all week! 🙋🏻Tip your waitresses!

[@mauriceevans6546]

Four in the 🇺🇸

[@GabbieGirl007]

Now i want this such a beauty

[@noahneutral7557]

I'd love to own one one day, it looks good!

[@oryjen]

Very nice design!

[@philipbyrnes7501]

Loved all of the descriptive comments at the beginning, pity he missed the most important one tho, Affordable. If only they were . . . But I’ve always been a dreamer they say, oh well lol

[@PiefacePete46]

Well... as me ol' mate Meatloaf said: "Two out of three ain't bad!" Maybe "Yer gets what yer pays for" applies? It certainly looks good enough to eat!

[@Dzordzikk]

Nicest UL plane ever and very high quality. Made in Czech Republic, Europe.

[@foesfly3047]

The 1320 pound weight limit is silly, considering, we need any 2 seat aircraft to be large enough and structurally strong enough for 2 adult males, along with sufficient fuel and at least 50 pounds of cargo. 1600 seems a more reasonable number, since this JMB, Arion Lightning and others make all the numbers work effectively at about this weight. The ridiculously slow max stall speed required to meet LSA spec are dangerous. Such low wing loading means your aircraft behaves as a leaf in the wind, unless conditions are calm, especially during landing phase of flight. Allow retractable landing gear and inflight adjustable props an option via performance endorsements and drop the silly top speed limit. The most important design factor IMO, should be that the airframe has only 1 or 2 seats. If there is substantial cause for 3 or 4 seat LSA, provision that option, also via appropriate endorsement. Of course such logbook endorsements require formal training.

[@speedomars]

This aircraft IS NOT A LIGHT SPORT in the SLSA spec category. It has retractable gear and its cruising speeds are far too high. Doesn't matter about weight.

[@Surestick88]

Isn't the purpose of the light sport class pleasure flying? If you want an airplane that can be used for travel maybe you should get a PPL? It seems like building airplanes that would be considered high performance for light sport is a bit of mission creep of what the light sport rules were intended for.

[@speedomars]

@@Surestick88 The original promise of SLSA and light sport was to get CHEAPER aircraft. That promise never materialized...instead the higher priced products created a crush of a lack of capability and useful load for relatively obese and overweight middle-aged and older pilots. So now there is a hue and cry to expand the category to accommodate and justify the prices, fat pilots and speed so the aircraft can more readily be flown longer cross-country distances. When it comes to travel, people routinely fly Cessna 172s cross country...an aircraft not much faster or more capable than most light sport aircraft.

[@kazansky22]

This guy gets it!

[@mr.ginnationfunlifestyle3891]

To make it clear! The VL3 is a high performance Airplane with complexity in systems. Nothing for greenhorns and not trained low time pilots! You need training and kind of a type rating on this performance plane. Otherwise it will end in useless accidents. We here in Europe have 3-4 days training with the delivery process.

[@DeraldAlford]

I really would like to fly this one.

[@awol2019]

You can in 6-10 months . That's the delivery time .

[@lars9966]

@@awol2019 And if u havev 200k laying around

[@TENpilot]

Beautiful views and plane !!!

[@Eltern10]

Would love to have this as a wallpaper....any possibility to get some shots of this plane?

[@Dzordzikk]

Hi, no problem. Use Google images and put there JMB VL-3 915.

[@Eltern10]

@@Dzordzikk ​Thx, that's just what I did but I wasn't able to find any pictures of this specific plane. Just love the colour and design of this one.

[@Dzordzikk]

@@Eltern10 No chance, too new plane to see this exactly on GI.

[@rhone733]

Looks amazing. Still fighting with the FAA to get my medical for GA. It'd be nice not to need that for private flights.

[@mehmetvural8095]

This plane is a very beautiful plane. Please I would like technical details and price information. VL3 . thanks.

[@Grimgrak1]

Whats the range at 195 knots?

[@mr.ginnationfunlifestyle3891]

About up to 600 Miles

[@adamorand88]

I just saw this exact plane (registration N915VL) in Tampa and talked to the current owner that bought it, who is the one that flew most of it's 600 hours or so working for JMB

[@user-sf9pq5ox7w]

Beautiful plane! What is the price in the US?

[@Bill3558]

Where can I buy one??

[@regdor8187]

Aircraft Make & Model: 1984 Neibauer Lancer/Lancair 200 - N384L Length: 19 feet, 8 inches Wingspan: 23 feet, 6 inches Empty Weight: 650 pounds Gross Weight: 1,275 pounds Crew: 2 Powerplant: Continental O-200 Horsepower: 100 hp Cruise Speed: 192 mph Maximum Speed: 213 mph Range: 1,000 statute miles

[@maniagokm3186]

Looks nice, but seems to me it was bouncing around pretty good even on this photoshoot. Maybe its just happenstance, but like a lot of LSA-type designs, it might not be a happy xc machine. Just a thought.

[@lrowlands53]

Flying is bouncing on air. If you don't like it, don't fly or aim for a C130, but they bounce too, just slower.

[@ictpilot]

Hopefully they'll offer a mirrored cockpit panel to fly with your right hand on the stick.

[@AWool5460]

How do you contact someone to have a closer look at this good looking aircraft. Can't seem to find a contact in the US to speak too. Thanks

[@Dzordzikk]

Hi, can I ask you on what speed and flight level you can get this fuel consumption 30 miles/gallon?

[@thehillbillyengineer3795]

I've flown but never owned my own a/c (former Navy AT AIMD). If available, was younger... I'd buy this plane. Is there one in Texas? I'd pay for fuel for a ride! My fav plane to fly (sight-see) in MSFS.

[@MDM_REALIFE]

Can these be imported to Australia? Anyone got a link to buy one?

[@wasmachinejohn]

i fly it a lot inmfsf 2020 i love it that it is an standard plane

[@pfatt2]

194k @ 15.500. That’s very scary. With the turbine coming, even higher altitudes and airspeeds will be sought. Since flutter is a function of TAS, how has that been taken into account? What flutter studies have been done on this airframe and where could I see those studies? This is a plane I have had an interest in for a good while now and with the coming turbine option, I will almost certainly have one… all other things considered.

[@alphabetagamma4142]

This one has 1800 nm range at 140kn cruise speed. That's in.sane.🤯🤯

[@JacobTJ1]

One Beautiful bird

[@bristleconepinus2378]

that is a beautiful sport plane.

[@suzukirider9030]

Very nice aircraft indeed! Thankfully didn't try to squeeze it into the LSA's weight limit, which results in aircraft with very limited performance. What's the cost difference between the Rotax 912, 914 and 915 versions? The 915 is powerful enough to lift the 4-seater Sling-TSi, so a 2-seater with RG power by it will be FAST!

[@johnwighton]

It’s the same weight, 600kg. Efficiency via good design, carbon fibre construction. In the UK was have adopted the same 600kg weight limitation but the aircraft are classed as Microlights if they can demonstrate 45kt stall speed. LSA in the USA will evolve, hopefully to enable a global standard. We are already using ASTM requirements, in part.

[@429thunderjet2]

That is one pretty bird for sure. We can only hope the FAA loosens up the ropes on LSA here in the states ,it's definitely a travesty in my opinion.

[@philv3941]

Wich rules differs between ULM/EURO LSA and US LSA that can prevent a VL3 to be authorized ? I allways thought it was more easy in the US, less restrictive than by there in europe

[@429thunderjet2]

@@philv3941 have you checked out the light sport "rules"...? What's the big deal about speed w the FAA? and then weight? well, the new mosaic thing supposedly coming next year will possibly allow a higher gross weight, fadec control = electronic digital throttle, prop & mixture combined into one control. Max speed not sure. & some other stuff, probably not retractables though. I forget exactly now. So we'll see.

[@philv3941]

@@429thunderjet2 thx Dennis

[@429thunderjet2]

@@philv3941 you bet, check out Light Sport and Ultralight Flyer on you tube, Dan Johnson did a update on mosaic about two months ago, I'm going to have to revisit it myself.

[@philv3941]

@@429thunderjet2 i'll check, i believe you

[@regdor8187]

AKA Lancair 200.....circa 1985 ??

[@FaithHopeLove77]

good first plane? Looks amazing

[@RobertMayfair]

Looks great. Wonder if I would fit inside?

[@georges.]

I doubt it.

[@malakov5]

I love this planes aesthetics. Very Lancair 320 inspired. However, what isn't mentioned here is the hefty price tag: 165-230k. Honestly that's pushing RV-10 area and that has 4 seats...or baggage if you are flying for 1-2.

[@yooo7774]

The one in Oshkosh was around 300k this year

[@a.osunaiv6124]

So?

[@ToeTag1968]

If you're comparing on price alone, sure. Speed/range are pretty different.

[@angela1984a]

The market leader. Is there anything better than this out there in this category?

[@andrewmorris3479]

Blackwing 915 is the best, Risen 915 is the fastest, the VL3 915 is definitely top 3.

[@angela1984a]

@@andrewmorris3479 Curious. What makes the Blackwing better than the VL3 915? Not sure I could personally come to terms with the looks of the Risen...

[@alexdarcydestsimon3767]

I'd be really interested to see if this new US LSA set of rules comes to life what US companies can make to do "even more" than Europeans... Can be nice.

[@scottw595]

How do you get 194 knots when the never exceed speed or VNE is 183.5? If you’re using true airspeed say it. Real numbers would be nice.

[@JustSayN2O]

If the pilot is IFR rated and current, can this airplane be flown IFR? The voice-over description was somewhat murky in this regard. Also, any parachute like the Bristell?

[@oisiaa]

Yes. Full IFR if properly equipped.

[@andrewmorris3479]

It has a chute.

[@hefeibao]

@@oisiaa I thought FAA prohibits LSA from flying in known IMC?

[@oisiaa]

Yes. Is registered as experimental.

[@oisiaa]

@@hefeibao If it's registered as experimental you can fly IFR.

[@dreamdiction]

30mpg ? I'd like to hear more about that? Speed? Altitude? Flaps? RPM?

[@andrewmorris3479]

For instance, the Risen aircraft can do 200 knots true burning 6.8 GPH at 10,000ft. That’s 230 mph at 33.8 mpg.

[@bc82870]

That s a beauty.

[@doinkmcdude1957]

Licensing this aircraft in the US as ‘Experimental Amateur Built’ would be in contradiction of FAA rules. The only way this aircraft could be operated in the US is as ‘Experimental Exhibition’ with the accordingly restrictive rules associated with such. The statement in the video about EAB is incorrect and misleading.

[@coolhari2000]

About time the faa stopped restricting LSA weight, speed limit and engine requirements.

[@Santos.Sarmento]

In all these videos in which it appears flying, there is a feeling of being very nervous and unstable.

[@ctn830]

How much?

[@Reloadeez]

This is the LSA speed rule, "A maximum airspeed in level flight with maximum continuous power (VH) of not more than 120 knots CAS under standard atmospheric conditions at sea level," It's speed at sea level not altitude. Have a throttle limiter that engages at low altitude and disengages at altitude, problem solved.

[@karlanovakova220]

First seconds of the video I tought - that plane look like our neigbhours plane. 10 seconds of googling nad WOW - that plane is really czech plane. I saw it fly many times - really elegant and fast plane.

[@jollygreen4662]

So I dont need a vfr qual for this?

[@georges.]

What would make you think that ridiculous thing?

[@a.osunaiv6124]

Huh?

[@hefeibao]

Everyone *knows* the VLA rules need updating, the question is what are we going to do about it? Is there any drive to petition the FAA? From what I read at least, even the FAA acknowledges this, but doesn't seem to have enough energy to overcome inertia. IFR capable - aren't *all* VLA prohibited from entering in to known IMC?

[@hefeibao]

Thanks for others' comments - if it's registered as experimental you can fly IFR, but if not, not.

[@mauriceevans6546]

You can fly it IFR if you are a private pilot with ifr rating. Experimental not needed

[@speedomars]

Updating SLSA is different than what this plane represents. You will NEVER see LSA having retractable gear or constant speed props.

[@mauriceevans6546]

@@speedomars that is exactly what mosaic is going to do for light sport in the expected rules change. Light Sport seaplane already have retractable gear. Higher weight, higher speed, retractable gear and constant speed prop

[@speedomars]

@@mauriceevans6546 SLSA sea planes can have retractable gear because they have floats. But they are still restricted to 1420 lbs (ICON A5 got an exception, one off), fixed pitch props, top cruising speed of 120kts and two seats.

[@crjetpilot]

A beautiful plane and would be a joy to fly! I agree with others though, it doesn’t belong in LSA category.

[@a.osunaiv6124]

Wouldn’t take much to make a LSA version…

[@mauriceevans6546]

They already have a light sport version

[@garrygballard8914]

The US needs to catch up and even show the Europeans a few things.

[@Walterwaltraud]

U already do in better regs. This probably the only exception.

[@Walterwaltraud]

...is...

[@speedomars]

The US is ahead of this thing, are you kidding? Check out Velocity Aircraft. Faster, more capable and less money.

[@awol2019]

@@speedomars You are correct. However , a person, may not have the time, skills , or space availability, to do a build.

[@speedomars]

@@awol2019 There are builders. But even among certified manufactuers at this level there are plenty of choices better than this thing... Remember, its a two seater and yes, it is fast, but it is a retractable and cannot be insured as such for most pilots that have no retractable time...and at this level of the market that means most of them.

[@ABC-rh7zc]

Add a BRS and it might make it to #1 on my Christmas wish list!

[@awol2019]

BRS Parachute, included as standard equipment.

[@ABC-rh7zc]

@@awol2019 Thanks, I will let Santa know!

[@speedomars]

It has a BRS chute. Most Europ designs do.

[@andrewvaldez6658]

If the FAA doesn't remove or dramatically reduce restrictions, it will only further hurt aviation domestically.

[@elmar001]

lol I fly this plane a lot in MSFS.

[@andy347]

I get 195 knots with my Velocity XLRG (4 place) and only slightly higher fuel burn (12 gph). If I slow down to 175 knots, I can burn 9 gph (Continental IO-550, 310hp)

[@thatguyalex2835]

While I don't fly planes, I love the mathematics and physics behind it (and the tech). May I ask how much fuel economy you get at 130 knots? If you get a higher efficiency at 130 knots, you might as well fly at that speed, unless you are on a tight schedule flying passengers and such. :) Do you fly passengers?

[@andy347]

@@thatguyalex2835 A Velocity is an Experimental category aircraft (Homebuilt) and you are prohibited from flying them for hire. My passengers are my friends and family. I haven’t slowed down that much, because what’s the point? The reason I got a Velocity was to get from point A to point B quickly and comfortably with four people at a reasonable cost.

[@thatguyalex2835]

@@andy347 Wow, that sounds pretty cool. :) I guess speed is in its name. I love experimental technology, and it is pretty awesome that it can be built as a kit/homebuilt. Since it is experimental, that means the FAA does not allow commercial flights with them, as you said?

[@andy347]

@@thatguyalex2835 correct

[@fever436]

Such a sexy looking bird!

[@Triple_J.1]

This is a modernized, carbon Lancair 200/235.

[@gliderfs621]

I never noticed that this plane has the same shape (almost) than a P51. Similar design, similar performances !!!

[@nicelez]

Efficient?? Better look at a Varieze or a Long-EZ well above 30 mpg.

[@stevecunningham6821]

Since when has the FAA been concerned about aviation? The FAA only seems interested in destroying general aviation.

[@PacificDark]

Sure seems like it, doesn't it?

[@stevecunningham6821]

@justsomeguyhere I know. It is quite sad to see.

[@mtadc1545]

Hahaha wait till you come across CASA here in Australia. The FAA are angels compared to CASA 😂

[@mr.ginnationfunlifestyle3891]

This LSA Mustang, 😉..oh sorry, the LSA VL3 Experimental (in the US) is one of the best LSA/ Ultralight you can buy. Unmatched worldwide, strong quality built with high developed modern tech standards. The specs are really tough and outstanding. Must have in the two seater category. And yes I know, you get a used Cirrus Bonanza or C182 for this money, but that is in particular here not the point to compare. Totally different story.

[@speedomars]

This plane is not LSA. It is not certified and it is not a kit.

[@mr.ginnationfunlifestyle3891]

@@speedomars if you can read my text carefully, you will see, I wrote an experimental aircraft in the US(!) and besides that it is an LSA/ Ultralight for fact in Europe! Where it comes from.

[@hendsonyu5167]

Wait, it has retractable landing gear. Cool！

[@xAKALISx]

What America needs are planes that are more affordable or corporations to stop inflating the salary of the top earners. In the 70s the average income was between 10,000 and 15,000. A brand new Cessna 150 went for about $6000 in the 70s. The median home cost you about 45,000. In 2021 the average salary is about 52,000. Those 50 year old planes are going for between 30,000 and 50,000 now. This is for VFR avionics for a 150. IFR is between 35,000 and 60,000 folks. A brand new Cessna 172 will set you back 400,000. Your median home now costs 350,000. These are averages. You could find planes and houses for less or more. Just as the salaries may be less or more. The age group where things are still affordable just continues to increase.

[@maxleitschuh7076]

It looks like a great plane that would be great to have here. But I don't think it should be an LSA. There's a lot wrong with the LSA regs, but fundamentally those planes should still be low, simple, and slow. Do we really want light sport-licensed pilots pushing 200 kts in complex aircraft? The solution here should be to make the full type certificate process far cheaper and easier for GA manufacturers, not to extend LSA far beyond what it was supposed to be.

[@Stubby0266]

The pitot tube position doesn't look right.

[@normannutbar424]

Looks like a Cirrus with a hint of Mustang!

[@speedomars]

Laughing. Not even close. First it has a bubble canopy (hot). Second it has retractable gear, Cirrus is fixed. Third, it is half the speed of an SR22 or SR22T.

[@normannutbar424]

@@speedomars well yeah, they’re the “hint of mustang” bits.

[@Goontrader2]

Can someone put a Turboprop in this ? 🤤

[@loganmick1]

Ask Mike patey

[@DanFrederiksen]

Imagine it with two tiny turbofan engines instead and pressurized cabin. Going 700km/h with the same fuel economy.

[@georges.]

Imagine you with a functioning brain....

[@DanFrederiksen]

@@georges. you are so clever

[@oisiaa]

This is one of my favorite aircraft. One as seen here will run you nearly $300k though.

[@awol2019]

Not true. These aircraft start at $165,000 base model , and that includes delivery. Even with Top level upgrades , you won't go past $240,000 - $250,000. Please, go to their site.

[@oisiaa]

I'll have to go back and see. I specced one out and remembered it being about $300k. That's with the 915is and really top avionics.

[@awol2019]

@@oisiaa That could be possible . Most people will not get a PFD and a MFD or rig it for IFR . However if you change out interior, and get garmin products instead of Dynon, yes it is possible .

[@oisiaa]

@@awol2019 I'm definitely speccing mine for IFR, autopilot, and with a G3X panel.

[@patjohn775]

There are a lot of other planes I’d rather buy at that price

[@t.reeves]

If the FAA would just let the turbo version be LSA I need 180kts +

[@edwinkania5286]

Nice plane

[@RARenfield]

All those FAA restrictions that Europeans don't have. In the "land of the free?" Funny stuff.

[@martinhunek9949]

This aircraft is actually not certified by European EASA. It is under opt-out. Meaning that it is "certified" under the rules of individual countries inside the European Union, and they are not under the EASA supervision. In the Czech Republic, where it is being made, there are also additional limitations in this category: - MTOM 650 kg - No spins and spirals - VFR day only - No VFR on top - No bank angle over 45° - Piston engine only - Non-commercial use only (exception is pilot training) - Special type of pilot certificate needed - PPL(A)/CPL(A)/ATPL(A) is not valid to fly these Also, the maintenance is different: - Can be done by anybody (no EASA Part-66 technician is needed) - No mandatory maintanance - owner resposibility This can make these planes dangerous, especially on the second-hand market. These airplanes look good, fly fast and cheap, but there is a price involved - safety. Especially when these airplanes are flown under these EASA opt-out rules (they can be safe under FAA - depending on maintenance rules). These EASA opt-out rules were originally made for an amateur build, but now they are abused for factory-made models without proper CS-23 type certificates. Do not complain about FAA regulations; the mess of EASA opt-out is far worse than that.

[@TheNahkahiiri]

Sexy machine, for a fixed wing ;)

[@kazansky22]

I just hope they allow constant speed props, retracts and remove the upper speed limit and raise the lower speed limit, LSA's are way to floaty, terrible flying in windy conditions. And way to slow to be worth the money.

[@speedomars]

You will see none of those things in LSA. At best they will up the gross weight and cruise speed to about 140kts. You will NOT see retractable gear or constant speed props in LSA.

[@mauriceevans6546]

@@speedomars the proposed rule making due to come out in August of 2023 is by industry insiders to contain 1. Higher weight 2. Faster speeds 3. Constant speed prop 4. Retractable gear as we already them on light sport sea planes. 5. Use of four seater aircraft 6. LSA can use plane to make money.

[@speedomars]

@@mauriceevans6546 You will not see a constant speed prop or retractable gear in ANY expansion of LSA in the US. And any speed increase will be 140kts and down. And you definitely wont see four seats. There is already a category for aircraft like that, its called a GA plane under 10,000 lbs gross.

[@mauriceevans6546]

@@speedomars well! These proposals have been spoken on by several insiders namely Dan Johnson who has worker on this for the last 5 years. Along with AOPA and EAA. Everyone of these items have been discussed amd the light sport industry manufacturer's are already anticipating the changes I have spoken of.

[@mauriceevans6546]

@@speedomars kzbin.info/www/bejne/Z6CalWaAlKmkrrM

[@cmdmd]

Cool plane. Really. If you are willing to write the company a check and then wait 1.5 years, hoping nothing happens to them.

[@mikeryan999]

Didn't look over his shoulder when banking....oooops.

[@gusrodriguez6102]

Está hermoso aunque sigo prefieriendo al BF109E4 y al BF109K4

[@johnboleyn4024]

To everyone commenting about the LSA restrictions in the USA, i think you are missing the point of the LSA category of aircraft. The recreational pilot certificate, was created to allow more people, who wanted to fly, the opportunity to be pilots. It has reduced training and medical requirements. Only 30 hours of training/total hours and a driver's license. The training is not for IFR, complex, or high speed aircraft. The LSA category provides an aircraft, that is safe for a Recreational Certificate holder, to operate. If you want to fly high, fast, complex, more than 2 seat aircraft, just get 5 more hours of training and complete the private pilot certificate. This is a cliche, but let's not create a second wave of pilots flying airplanes they aren't ready to fly, like Bonanza's and doctors in the 1960's and 1970's. The FAA is not restricting progress, at least in this category of aircraft. No one with 15 hours of training(the minimum required to get a recreational certificate) , no IFR requirements, should be flying a complex aircraft, at 15,000 feet, especially if there is no oxygen system in the aircraft. An insurance company, is going to require at least 10 hours of training to transition to a complex aircraft, anyway. They may require 20 hours for a low time private pilot, without an IFR rating. The video stated that this aircraft with the higher horse power engine, complex set up, could be operated in the experimental category in the U.S., so anyone that has a private pilots certificate, and a complex endorsement can fly it. The FAA has already put the Basic Med process in place, so it's not that hard to qualify medically for a private pilot's certificate. I'm all for getting more people flying, and this aircraft looks amazing, i would love to own one. Recreational pilots should not be in this aircraft, unless they have a minimum number of flight hours, and additional training.

[@speedomars]

Not quite. You do not need a private or recreational cert to fly SLSA or LSA. All you need is much reduced traning as an LSA pilot and a DL.