Those LSA limits by the way is for a European market. The USA is a BIG country to explore, with tall, big (and fat) people.
Completely false (except the last sentence
). LSA is entirely an American set of rules "made in America, 100%" completely different from European rules. In Europe we have Ultralight or Microlight (UL) which is very different. The UL rules are (2 seaters): MTOW 450 kg - 992 lbs (472.5 with rescue shute), and min stall speed of 35 knots. That's it. There are no other limits, no speed limit, no limit on which engine can be used or propeller - you can have a jet engine if you want. Practically this means an UL registered plane is a 1+1 seater, with two persons on board you can forget about cross country with luggage and lots of fuel. A license for UL is much easier and cheaper than PPL, and the medical is similar to car medical. Rules and regulations for UL are operated by private organisations (EAA could be such an organisation for instance), not the aviation authoroties. The aviation authoroties only "certify" the organisations. There are operational limitations: no acro, only day VFR, only 10 NM from shore.
There have been
lots of talk about simply increasing MTOW to 600 kg (1320 lbs), to "harmonize" the MTOW with the American LSA rules and to make the planes true 2 seaters in terms of practical operation. Judging by the way things are looking at the moment, this will
not happen. Instead a new class is likely to come, somewhat similar to the VLA class (Very Light Aircrafts) already existing in some countries, but seldom used due to being too similar to "ordinary" planes. MTOW will likely be around 800 kg (1760 lbs), 2 seats max, PPL will probably be needed, other than that nothing is known.
The 912 is "spec'ed out" for the european UL rules. That is why they designed the engine in the first place, and this is where 90% of them are used. With MTOW of 600 kg, an increase in power to 120-130 HP sounds reasonable. IMO the Jabiru 3300 looks much more spec'ed out for LSA than the 912.
Even Van doubts the viability LSA class (he wrote about it in the RVator) but felt compelled to participate in the market for fear of being left behind.
In Europe the UL class has exploded in the last 20 years. From consisting of overprized poor quality "lawn chairs" importet from the US, it now consist of hundreds of different manufacturers producing anything from the simplest design with 2 stroke engines to high tech, high quality aircrafts outperforming Cessnas and Pipers. The Rotax 912 is a key element here. The reason for this is cost (cost of equipment and cost of operation) and more or less a complete removal of the bureaucracy of the aviation authoroties that is strangling GA. The last reason being the most important, but have little effect without the first. The total cost of UL vs GA is typically 1/3 for similar performance, but the initial cost of UL vs GA can be much lower, less than 1/10 for license + fully a functional aircraft. For most people this means the cost of the ticket of obtaining a license and an aircraft is reduced to 1/10 of what it was 20 years ago, and you get that ticket without the tireing bureaucracy. The only contender is experimental aircrafts, but you have to spend 5 years building it.
The american LSA is simply trying to copy this, but maybe you are strangling it with rules and regulations all from the start? It seems also that you are starting in the wrong end with the top of the line products limited only in performance by those rules, instead of exploring what
can be done much cheaper and much simpler. The Sonex is an exception here, still you have to spend some years building it.
