LSA Safety Data/Statistics??

[Steve Brown]

Does anyone know where safety Data/Statistics for LSA can be found?

There are implications for the future of LSA, but also other aircraft & ratings. If reducing the regulatory strangle hold for LSA does not result in a higher accident rate, it may be hard for the FAA to justify continuing it for the rest of GA.

Especially, if the "No Medical" rule does not result in more accidents or incidents related to pilot health issues, it will be hard to explain why that should not be extended to private pilots. I think this is especially true since the LSA pilot population is almost certainly statistically skewed with a high number of pilots that would have issues with the normal class 3 medical.

[the_other_dougreeves]

Try searching the NTSB's accident database.

I assume you're talking about special LSA (S-LSA) and not experimental LSA, since most of those should be converted "fat" ultralights (Yes, I know, the -12 can be E-LSA, but at the moment, there aren't any AFAIK). If you search for "light sport", you get 97 entries. Most of these are E-LSA and some are certified aircraft with the words "light sport" present in the narrative. Looks like about 40 or so S-LSA incidents / accidents.

Lots of landing / takeoff incidents, which is consistent with my understand of LSA handling characteristics, particularly for mid/high time pilots who are transitioning to LSA with their low momentum in the flare and light weight (affecting crosswind and gusty wind operations). A few fatilities, some of which are stall/spin, some of which are fuel starvation, some of which are unknown.

I would say that the landing / directional control on the ground type of accidents are of interest since there are so many. Most LSA don't handle the same in the flare or on the ground as spam cans, so pilots who transition from them to LSA are going to need some extra time to transition. I think this will be reflected in insurance rates for LSA shortly - time in type will count a lot more than total time.

I'm recalling my first landing in a 172, which came after 160 hours in LSA and in about 10kt of wind. As I flared the airplane and it ploped in, I started laughing. "What?" says my instuctor, thinking something's wrong. "That's it?" I say. Easy in comparison to every LSA I've landed.

Now, getting to your point about medical issues. I don't know of a LSA accident that was determined to be due to a medical issue that would have disqualified them from a medical. There certainly may be some, but I just don't know of them.

I do know of recent glider accidents (one of them fatal) that were medical related, but remember, gliders operate under different rules even than LSA - no medical is required, nor is a driver's license. PIC is required to certify that they can fit to act as PIC and complete the flight in a safe manner (sorry, don't have the exact FAR off the top of my head).

My opinion is that transition training and proper landing technique in the flare are the biggest problems facing LSA safety right now. Stall/spin awareness is the second. Training (both students and CFIs) can do a lot to address the first and second. Stall warning horns might help with the second - most LSA don't have them, and for students, stall horns can help give yet another cue that a stall is approaching.

TODR

[allbee]

I second that on the landing of an LSA. I have a kitfox that I've flown now for 1200hrs. tail wheel. It is different from the Cessna. Now when I went down to portland to fly the RV6A. I found it very different, because I was treating it like a Cessna, why I don't know. It is also different than the 3point in the kitfox. After a couple balloons at the runway and a couple oh XXXT's. I figured out that the RV's land just like the kitfox on a wheel landing. Until then I was way behind the airplane.

So if you think that landing an LSA is easy, think again, different than the Cessna, you need to fly it to the ground basically than land. Also, many of these LSA's are very responsive in relation to the Cessna as well.

On the med side. I think there shouldn't be any difference in statistics. Just the stuppid things that people do.

[the_other_dougreeves]

Originally Posted by allbee

So if you think that landing an LSA is easy, think again, different than the Cessna, you need to fly it to the ground basically than land. Also, many of these LSA's are very responsive in relation to the Cessna as well.

Just a quick comment - I don't want anyone to think that S-LSA are some kind of wild beasts that would rather flip over than land calmly - this is not the case. Rather, they require slightly different technique than Cessnas and other certified airplanes. I like to think that they keep you honest - no going to sleep during the landing, gotta keep dancing.

And think about it this way: Take "S-LSA" and replace with "taildragger" and the statements are still true. Taildraggers are often feared by those who haven't flown them, but to those who fly them, most enjoy it. Same with S-LSA.

TODR

[allbee]

Just got to remember that an LSA is quick, don't fall asleep at the stick is all. Got to remember, the Cessna is a lazy, slow responder. The LSA's either tail wheel or nose wheel will give you more for your input. Very fun.

[craigvince]

I have about 150 hours in light sports now, since I sell them. It took about 10 landings before I got the hang of it. After that, I could spot land them almost every time. Interestingly enough, after flying the LSAs, I flew an RV-9A for the first time, and landed it just like the LSA.