What's new
Van's Air Force

Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.

"New" Kitplane Article on ELSA - Citing "Flaws"

cactusman

Well Known Member
http://www.kitplanes.com/issues/29_3/builder_spotlight/Understanding_Experimental_Light_Sport_Aircraft_20376-1.html

Overall I found it to be a good article, I just had a problem with the last paragraph and the idea that E-LSA builders could mod their aircraft AFTER cert is somehow a "flaw" without mentioning the good that has come out of many of the mods from the early builders here. None actually affect the way the airplane flies I think, all are designed to make ownership, inspections and life easier for the owner/builder.

Many of which have been adopted in the continuing evolution of the RV-12 which imo is part of what is making it a popular new kit, well that and the fact that premium auto gas is now 1.99!

That makes my operating cost pretty close to an even ten bucks an hour. Heck it cost me $100 to take my wife to Barett Jackson to just look today!
 
Last edited:
I have always looked at it as a flaw in the system. The reason to build an RV12 in the E-LSA category, is to have an established (factory) aircraft built by you. If you can modify it at will, the next owner has no standards to go by.

Build to factory specs, and leave it alone so the next owner knows what he is purchasing, or build it EXPERIMENTAL.

There should be NO in between.
 
NO IN BETWEEN !!!!!

That's a poor way to look at ELSA.

canopy lock, second stand alone GPS, auxiliary fuel tanks, tie down rings, smoke systems, camera mounts ..... And the list goes on

These are all mods that enhance the -12. Some "mods" have been incorporated into new kits. It's all part of the "EXPERIMENTAL" world we can enjoy by building E-LSA.

If you don't agree with it, get an SLSA or a Cessna.
 
Gasman - consider that maybe the "next buyer" of the ELSA RV12 doesn't feel he needs more rules to be looking out for him and preventing him from evaluating the mods that were done and judging their suitability. Buyers that do feel that way can buy SLSAs.

My RV-12 has ADSB (before the Van's kit), split rear bulkheads, canopy lock, oil drain, and a few other minor things. It will soon have the oil cooler moved forward an inch and the Bender Baffle. All of which are meticulously documented in the logs. If those mods "scare away" some future buyer, that is mine and his issue to deal with and the heavy hand of regulation to save us from ourselves in this case is not welcome.

We all want Part 23 reform. Well, that already exists in the form of an ELSA. Why shouldn't all small aircraft in -let's say - non-commercial service (exception:training) be ASTM and "E" modifiable (perhaps requiring an A&P) and not just those that fit the LSA spec?
 
An E-LSA IS an experimental aircraft. That is what the E stands for. We are free to make improvements without interference from impractical rules.
 
EXPERIMENTAL means experimental whether it's EAB or ELSA. The rules may be different on the build, but buyers must understand there are no guarantees on configuration. Caveat emptor! The logs should document deviations from the SLSA basis, but buyers have a responsibility to determine what they ar buying.

The ELSA process gives us a great deal of freedom. We don't need the regulatory ratchet screwing it up.
 
What a surprise - I didn't know there was a new article on the RV-12 in my magazine! Did my staff slip one past me?!

Followed the link - March of 2012 issue - whew! Not new at all...and before it was my problem.... ;)
 
What a surprise - I didn't know there was a new article on the RV-12 in my magazine! Did my staff slip one past me?!

Followed the link - March of 2012 issue - whew! Not new at all...and before it was my problem.... ;)

All I know is it came in my email today and was the lead story in some email from Kitplanes entitled "Homebuilder's Portal"

I saw the lead story about E-LSA and clicked! Happy to send you the email I received.
 
The Homebuilder's Portal (by KITPLANES) is a free, monthly, online publication to which you have apparently subscribed. Each month focuses on a topic that might be of particular interest to GA pilots learning about the experimental world and most of the feature articles each month are recycled from old KITPLANES issues. (Subscriptions are available on the www.kitplanes.com webpage. Click on the Homebuilder's Portal button on the right side of the page.)
 
New Rules??

What a surprise - I didn't know there was a new article on the RV-12 in my magazine! Did my staff slip one past me?!

Followed the link - March of 2012 issue - whew! Not new at all...and before it was my problem.... ;)

Paul.... You made me laugh out loud!!!
 
The Homebuilder's Portal (by KITPLANES) is a free, monthly, online publication to which you have apparently subscribed. Each month focuses on a topic that might be of particular interest to GA pilots learning about the experimental world and most of the feature articles each month are recycled from old KITPLANES issues. (Subscriptions are available on the www.kitplanes.com webpage. Click on the Homebuilder's Portal button on the right side of the page.)

Thanks Louise - I am a subscriber, I guess I mistook that email for the actual magazine, I didn't realize it was an older article. Sorry to drag you through this - I think it was a very good article and I think you are a very good writer.

BTW, do you still think allowing Experimental Light Sport Aircraft builders the ability modify their airplanes after cert, given all the great mods on VAF and how Van's has adopted some of them, is still a flaw?

I gotta say, this little niche in the business is what attracted me to building and owning my own airplane. I am not an engineer, nor an A & P - I've spent all my free time flying and building a career, but I have never owned my own airplane - certified scares me $$$-wise, the EAB (older kits) intimidate the heck out of me, but the RV-12 seemed to really hit the sweet spot with me.

Economy, structure for the builder, the freedom from certified regs of experimental, it's all there for me.
 
Thanks Louise - I am a subscriber, I guess I mistook that email for the actual magazine, I didn't realize it was an older article. Sorry to drag you through this - I think it was a very good article and I think you are a very good writer.

BTW, do you still think allowing Experimental Light Sport Aircraft builders the ability modify their airplanes after cert, given all the great mods on VAF and how Van's has adopted some of them, is still a flaw?

I gotta say, this little niche in the business is what attracted me to building and owning my own airplane. I am not an engineer, nor an A & P - I've spent all my free time flying and building a career, but I have never owned my own airplane - certified scares me $$$-wise, the EAB (older kits) intimidate the heck out of me, but the RV-12 seemed to really hit the sweet spot with me.

Economy, structure for the builder, the freedom from certified regs of experimental, it's all there for me.

The article was written by former Kitplanes editor Dave Martin. Not Louise (not that she couldn't have written it ;))
 
once again - sorry for the confusion...I just her name on the email and assumed....

---------------------------------
Homebuilder's Portal and News
View this email in your browser

Homebuilder's Portal
Editor's Note
Looking at the E-LSA Options
By Louise Hose

For many pilots, light-sport airplanes offer everything they want at substantially less cost and hassle. Experimental Light Sport Aircraft (E-LSA) provide many options and, generally, even further cost advantages. But, the world of LSA and the accompanying alphabet soup of designations are pretty confusing. For example, two identical RV-12s can fly into Oshkosh in late July. One (registered with the FAA as E-LSA) will be able to park in Homebuilt Parking while the other (registered as S-LSA) must tie down in the ?North 40.? And, while both of these planes must fly VFR during the day, another similar RV-12 (registered E-AB) can add some lights and radios to fly IFR. Confused yet? This month?s feature articles will walk you through the confusion and look at just a few popular LSA options.

In addition, a new series started in the current issue of KITPLANES?, The New Guy. It will also appear here each month in The Homebuilder?s Portal. The series will report on the process and progress of a first-time kit airplane builder.

Louise Hose has built and flies an RV-3 and is currently building a Sonex Xenos motorglider with her husband. They live in Dayton Valley Airpark near Carson City, Nevada. You can write to her at: [email protected].


In this Issue:
Understanding Experimental Light Sport Aircraft
Ask the DAR: ELSA Certification
Zen Light Stuff: Repairman Inspection course reprise
Flight Review: Jabiru J230 Light Sport
Traveling Machine: Just how good is the RV-12 as an all-?rounder?
It?s a Cub Thing: CubCrafters
The New Guy
Completions
Homebuild/Experimental/Kitplanes?-Related Press Releases.
What?s in KITPLANES? this Month?
Kit Stuff
Classified Ads
Next Month in the Homebuilder's Portal by KITPLANES?
 
I have always looked at it as a flaw in the system. The reason to build an RV12 in the E-LSA category, is to have an established (factory) aircraft built by you. If you can modify it at will, the next owner has no standards to go by.

Build to factory specs, and leave it alone so the next owner knows what he is purchasing, or build it EXPERIMENTAL.

There should be NO in between.

I believe there already have been eloquent responses in defense of the E-LSA concept but one element has not been mentioned and on this I agree with you:
Because they have to be built per the plans which reflect the model certified as an S-LSA by the kit vendor, E-LSAs on their first flight are as safe as any S-LSA (or any certified plane for that matter). This was a major factor for my choice of the RV-12 kit, being an inexperienced builder/pilot.
So, I agree with you but my agreement stops after the phase 1 test and the reason was explained well in previous posts defending the E-LSA concept :D
 
Because they have to be built per the plans which reflect the model certified as an S-LSA by the kit vendor, E-LSAs on their first flight are as safe as any S-LSA (or any certified plane for that matter).

I disagree with that.
A single person, often with no prior aircraft building experience builds it.
There is not the same level of quality control and intrinsic knowledge existing in the E-LSA builders shop as there is in a normal production environment.
Add to the fact that at final inspection (or even tech. counselor inspections) no one audits every step of the construction manual to be sure everything has been assembled exactly as described.
There are numerous instances of problems that developed in flying RV-12's that were caused by construction errors.

I agree that an RV-12 certified as an E-LSA is likely safer on first flight than a run of the mill experimental amateur built, but I think it would be wrong to consider it comparable to any factory (professionally) built aircraft.
 
Last edited:
I agree that an RV-12 certified as an E-LSA is likely safer on first flight than a run of the mill experimental amateur built, but I think it would be wrong to consider it comparable to any factory (professionally) built aircraft.

Scott's points all make sense. Whether E-LSAs are actually safer during the initial 5-10 hours vs. E-AB remains to be proven. Now that hundreds of RV-12 kits have been assembled and flown, statistically we should be closer to knowing whether there is truth to the theory.

One factor is transition training availability. As more flight schools add RV-12 S-LSAs, I'm hopeful that a lot more options will be available for new E-LSA pilots. Should over time be another benefit vs. E-AB transition choices. I suspect poor/no transition training has tarnished the safety record of new experimentals as much as poor construction - but I don't have data on that either!

(p.s. I was more than satisfied with JetGuy's excellent instruction for me, but as of a year ago I knew of only two RV-12 transition training options (with a LODA) in the US. That just seems inadequate given the number of E-LSA RV-aircraft.)
 
The amount of safety difference depends on many factors so it would probably be nearly impossible to ever quantify with the level of detail most accident reports usually contain.

I think the biggest factor is whether the E-AB being compared to the RV-12 was completed using a proven installation for the engine (FWF type kit where the entire design has been well proven) vs a guy that rolled his own (entirely designed the engine installation, redesigned the fuel system, etc.).
I am not saying that it would automatically be less safe. I am saying it has the potential to be, depending on who designed and installed everything.
With an E-LSA RV-12, that factor has been largely compensated for.

The transition training factor would be much harder to guess, though since the RV-12 by nature is supposed to be easier to fly than a lot of other E-AB aircraft, it should be safer in the hands of an inexperienced pilot (no transition training) than many other E-AB aircraft.
 
I disagree with that.
A single person, often with no prior aircraft building experience builds it.
There is not the same level of quality control and intrinsic knowledge existing in the E-LSA builders shop as there is in a normal production environment.
Add to the fact that at final inspection (or even tech. counselor inspections) no one audits every step of the construction manual to be sure everything has been assembled exactly as described.
There are numerous instances of problems that developed in flying RV-12's that were caused by construction errors.

I agree that an RV-12 certified as an E-LSA is likely safer on first flight than a run of the mill experimental amateur built, but I think it would be wrong to consider it comparable to any factory (professionally) built aircraft.

Agree completely, based on personal experience.
 
I disagree with that.
A single person, often with no prior aircraft building experience builds it.
There is not the same level of quality control and intrinsic knowledge existing in the E-LSA builders shop as there is in a normal production environment.
Add to the fact that at final inspection (or even tech. counselor inspections) no one audits every step of the construction manual to be sure everything has been assembled exactly as described.
There are numerous instances of problems that developed in flying RV-12's that were caused by construction errors.

I agree that an RV-12 certified as an E-LSA is likely safer on first flight than a run of the mill experimental amateur built, but I think it would be wrong to consider it comparable to any factory (professionally) built aircraft.


On the other hand the makers of certified airplanes were brought to their knees in the nineties by lawyers using small airplane accidents to question the safety of their design/manufacturing. Granted there was an abuse of the law which has been corrected since but ...
 
I see the plane as experimental no matter what the stage based on what others have said WRT the builder. There's no way of knowing how careful or the level of understanding someone had once a project is finished. I'd also point out that this is the only non- EAB that Vans puts out and I have a set of 9 plans that are every bit a detailed. Personally I think too many are married to the ELSA label. Your plane will say experimental on it somewhere for the first flight or it won't fly, period.
 
Back
Top