LSA will fail if the target is merely the 700-thousand existing pilots. We'd all have to lose our medical at once to make that option viable.
LSA will succeed when vendors find a way to reach the 50 MILLION or so who would take up flying as a passtime if it were no more difficult, dangerous, or expensive than golf or motorcyling.
None of the current offerings even come close to reaching that market. Most are rag-and-tube Cub lookalikes that the average joe would never set foot in, much less purchase. A few, like the -12, at least look modern, but they still aren't any easier to fly.
Here's what's needed:
-- Modern, sporty look that inspires confidence
-- Automotive-style interior
-- Stall-proof (or at least idiot-resistant)
-- No rudder pedals
-- No mixture control
-- Drives like a car
-- Twist-grip accelerator, with detents for take-off, climb, cruise, land.
-- Traffic display
-- On-board weather
-- GPS that displays a map that a non-pilot might recognize (and doesn't require a degree to operate).
-- Glideslope landing display with integrated AOA
-- A few, simple guages that don't all look the same to non-pilots
-- Idiot lights to monitor systems
In other words, an updated Ercoupe with modern avionics (some of which hasn't been invented yet).
Then, someone needs to invent a new kind of airport where people can go to fly these things. It will look more like a country club than an airport. Most people will be about as likely to buy their own plane as they would a golf cart.
And we'll need some way to manage a 50-fold increase in the number of aircraft in the air. LSA's will probably need an autopilot that prevents the plane from getting too close to other traffic or venturing into commercial airspace.
If it sounds expensive, it would still be an order of magnitude simpler than a Corolla. How much do you think your Toyota would cost if they only built 500 a year?