VAF Forums

VAF Forums (https://vansairforce.net/community/index.php)
-   RV-9/9A (https://vansairforce.net/community/forumdisplay.php?f=5)
-   -   RV-9 LSA Discussion (https://vansairforce.net/community/showthread.php?t=67700)

DrillBit 01-25-2012 09:57 AM

Let's acknowledge some naval aviators have ovaries of titanium! :)

rockwoodrv9 01-25-2012 10:16 AM

Army pilots too
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by DrillBit (Post 621566)
Let's acknowledge some naval aviators have ovaries of titanium! :)

Agree on the Navy and Air Force, but don't forget the Army pilots. My son is an AH 64 Apache pilot. I would suggest flying the Apache might be as exciting as any of the RVs. The hellfire missles help with the thrill factor!

pierre smith 01-25-2012 12:01 PM

There are RV-9's as LSA.
 
From a year ago:

http://www.vansairforce.com/communit...light=rv-9+lsa

Best,

rockwoodrv9 01-25-2012 02:40 PM

thanks for link
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by pierre smith (Post 621626)

Thanks Pierre. I did a search earlier to see if this had been discussed, but somehow missed that thread. After reading all the posts, I am encouraged that it has been discussed and done by other builders. As for those posting about how dirty it was and they felt soiled because someone was trying to get away with something, that's an OK position to take.

For me, it looks like it may be possible to get around a rule that is in the process of being changed - hopefully, without having to build 2 planes. For me it is the chance to be flying again in a plane that I consider safer because of the high altitudes where I live. If I could put a larger engine on the 12, I would do that. I could put a climb prop on and I am sure that would help. I admit - it is a way to get around a regulation written years ago that I don't believe is based on facts or statistics. If there were accident reports showing Sport Pilot licensed pilots were crashing because of medical issues, or if I felt I was not medically fit to fly, I would continue to fly right seat and not be concerned what plane I built.

With all the posts now and from this link, I think this has been discussed about as far as it needs to be. Thanks to all those who offered information and their feelings about a -9 that meets the requirements to be flown by a sport pilot.

Mel 01-25-2012 03:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rockwoodrv9 (Post 621671)
For me, it looks like it may be possible to get around a rule that is in the process of being changed - hopefully, without having to build 2 planes.

First I would like to make it clear that no rule is "in the process of being changed."

At best, what AOPA and EAA are asking for is an "exemption" for certain aircraft to be flown by pilots without a current medical. Even it this does happen, which I hope it does, it will not be a rule change per se.

RV10inOz 01-25-2012 04:50 PM

Quote:

At best, what AOPA and EAA are asking for is an "exemption" for certain aircraft to be flown by pilots without a current medical. Even it this does happen, which I hope it does, it will not be a rule change per se.
Just for the educational content, the medical exemption is now written into our new rule set, and prior to that being released we will have an exemption instrument in place. Yes it happened down under, thanks to the SAAA with support from AOPA Australia.

I think you willbe far happier with your RV-9 under this system.:)

rockwoodrv9 01-25-2012 05:29 PM

change
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by RV10inOz (Post 621708)
Just for the educational content, the medical exemption is now written into our new rule set, and prior to that being released we will have an exemption instrument in place. Yes it happened down under, thanks to the SAAA with support from AOPA Australia.

I think you willbe far happier with your RV-9 under this system.:)

That is great and gives me hope it can happen here too. Maybe it will give more data for the FAA to consider. (lol)

I completely agree that I would be happiest with the -9, and that is what I will probably do. I may build it and do what is necessary for it to be LSA compliant, or just play the FAA game and pass the medical.

I understand what has been proposed and what the chances are - as much as you can understand government. I have spoken to the FAA, EAA, AOPA, and several certified flight physicians. It isn't as simple as it could be. The easiest would be to allow up to 180 or 200hp airplanes to be flown with a Sport Pilots license under the same rules they currently have. That is too simple.

My understanding of the proposed changes are to fly one of the planes included, I would have to get a class 3, get my pilots license, let the medical expire, and I would be allowed to continue to fly that plane under sport pilots rules. The added step of having to get the class 3 is ridiculous to me. If I would be allowed to fly the plane with an expired medical, why did I need it in the first place?

Just from the former pilots I know, eliminating the class 3 requirement for 180 or 200hp and under planes will give aviation the biggest increase since after WWII. That may be the problem. The FAA knows that and I don't think they are interested in growing general aviation. That is sad.

Ron Lee 01-25-2012 05:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rockwoodrv9 (Post 621719)
Just from the former pilots I know, eliminating the class 3 requirement for 180 or 200hp and under planes will give aviation the biggest increase since after WWII. That may be the problem. The FAA knows that and I don't think they are interested in growing general aviation. That is sad.

I do not have data to support my view but I doubt that the 3rd class medical is even a minor impediment to MOST new pilots. I suspect that the high cost is a bigger barrier to the few people who have an interest in the first place.

rockwoodrv9 01-25-2012 06:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ron Lee (Post 621726)
I do not have data to support my view but I doubt that the 3rd class medical is even a minor impediment to new MOST pilots. I suspect that the high cost is a bigger barrier to the few people who have an interest in the first place.

Until the price of flying comes down, I don't think there is much chance of younger people even taking flying lessons. The price isn't coming down anytime that I can see so the only other thing is to get pilots who were forced out of the left seat back into the air.

When I was raising my kids, I didn't have enough money to keep flying. Now that we are empty nesters and I have progressed in my career, we have the extra money to spend on flying. I say we because my wife wants to fly too. We could just buy a plane, but building one has always been my dream. For business, we have the company plane we take. I just want to fly around and have fun!

I know at least 4 guys that have their own plane, but can't legally fly it because they can't renew their medical. Im not saying they don't fly, just that their medical has expired. I know several other former pilots that are afraid to try to pass their medical so they won't be disqualified for a Sport pilot license. Just ask the guys hanging around the airport talking rather than flying. I think the number is larger than you think. I have no data other than the pilots and former pilots i know, but just those guys probably doubles the starts last year!

AirHound 07-12-2020 09:08 PM

How to take 9A gw up? Not the builder!
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Mel (Post 621292)
I believe the 44 mph stall speed listed on Van's website is with full flaps.

Mel, If I bought a 9a EAB Light Sport compliance what do I do to get it back to regular 9a gross wt 1730 ? I know however once it’s gw is back up it can’t come down again. Thanks


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:03 AM.