----[Please read http://ercoupers.com/disclaimer.htm before following any
advice in this forum.]----


Below you will find my comments to the feds on the "Sport Pilot Program".
I
am sure others of you have other views and comments and I would ask that
you please take the time to make them to the DOT so that your thoughts
will
be counted.




Let me first say that the Sport Pilot Proposal is a major step in the
right
direction to promote safe additional aviation activity and in all cases it
should go forward with only small clarifications. As with all written
instruments there are some small areas that I will bring to your attention
that I would ask that you kindly consider some clarifications, which I
will
propose to remove some of the ambiguity in the current proposal.

In section VI. Section by Section Analysis of the Proposal
1.1  Definition of a "Light Sport Aircraft"
   The definition criteria by themselves are fine, many will want higher
   everything and in time we may find areas that may need some small
   adjustment. The problem, as I see it, is that the Proposal has a good
   clear definition for a "Light Sport Aircraft" but it does not address
   how existing aircraft, and for that mater, future aircraft will be
   determined to be compliant with the definition. Will the pilot's word
be
   acceptable or will we need certification by the manufacture? If so what
   about homebuilts and aircraft with out a proper manufacture currently,
   such as the Ercoupe. In the case of the Ercoupe, Univair holds the Type
   Certificate but they may not have a manufacture's engineering expertise
   or capability to determine by appropriate flight test and documentation
   the compliance of a given aircraft with the "Light Sport Aircraft"
rules
   or definition. They may also have no interest in the work required as
   they may see no practical way to recover the cost of such testing and
   certification of compliance to the rules established in the "Light
Sport
   Aircraft" final rules. I would suggest that as you have found the sign
   off by rated personal as appropriate for the stipulation of a "Sport
   Pilot's" skills and the granting of approval to expanded authority to
   use his privileges then a similar program may work just as well by
   permitting individuals with an FAA Airframe and Powerplant Mechanics
   certificate to make such a determination and to make a simple entry
into
   the aircraft's log book stipulating that the aircraft has been found to
   be compliant with the "Light Sport Aircraft" requirements. These
   individuals are highly trained people who have demonstrated their
   ability to the FAA and who have a great deal to lose if they are found
   to have stretched the rules as they would be open to the loss of their
   lively hood if found to be seriously at fault. This solution would add
   little or no cost and would use existing infrastructure until large
   numbers of new production aircraft are available to replace the
existing
   aircraft. It is very important to the General Aviation industry to have
   this fine new program get off to a strong start and I am sure that this
   clarification will greatly improve the probability that the "Sport
Pilot
   Program" will be well received by the current General Aviation industry
   and it will permit people to get involved several years earlier as it
   will take some time for new aircraft built to fit these new rules to
   become available in meaningful quantities.

   In the same area of definitions it would be appropriate to clarify how
   the 1,232 pounds maximum takeoff weight is to be applied. We all know
   what it means, simply that a Sport Pilot may not takeoff in an aircraft
   that starts the takeoff at a weight above 1,232 pounds and this is fine
   and simple. Where we have a need for a clarification is in how this
   limit will be interpreted. Is it the "Maximum Gross Takeoff Weight"
from
   the Type Data Certificate or is it a simple limit to be determined at
   that takeoff? To use an example, in the case of the Ercoupe 415-C it
has
   a certificated "Maximum Gross Takeoff Weight" of 1,260 pounds as found
   in the Type Data Certificate. However it can easily be limited by the
   pilot to the "Light Sport Aircraft" limit of 1,232 pounds with little
   loss in utility. We have good president for this in many certificated
   aircraft they are certificated in two categories at the same time at a
   lower maximum gross weight and some times a restricted Center of
Gravity
   limit they are qualified in the Utility Category and at a higher gross
   weight and with an expanded C.G. envelope they are certificated in the
   Normal category. It is simply up to the pilot to know the limitation
and
   to operate the aircraft within the limits if they wish to use the
   Utility Category capability. In the same way if we leave the "Light
   Sport Aircraft" maximum takeoff weight as a simple limitation to be
   observed by the pilot at the time of any takeoff then we have achieved
   the desired result and we may make the process of including many
   existing aircraft in the current pool of aircraft that may be used by
   Sport Pilots until the industry can supply new aircraft that will be
   more attractive to pilots. These aircraft are currently certificated
and
   maintained to the higher standard of Normal Category aircraft assuring
   safe aircraft in the beginning and they are currently available so that
   the program can get rolling from day one instead of having to wait for
   industry to develop and produce in quantity new compliant aircraft.
With
   this simple clarification many current aircraft will be usable now, yes
   some will be effectively one seat aircraft with the 1,232 pound limit
   but as they are all Normal Category aircraft they can be used with
   currently certificate flight instructors at their higher maximum weight
   during training just as they would be today for dual instruction and
   when restricted to the "Light Sport Aircraft" maximum weight limit they
   may well be functionally single seat aircraft. A good example of this
   would be the Cessna 150/152 which is well proved to be a safe and
   effective training aircraft and it would be just fine with one person
in
   it for operation by a properly trained "Sport Pilot".

   As background information, I am a Commercial Pilot and an Airframe and
   Powerplant mechanic and look forward to the positive effects of this
   proposal.

   Thank you for your consideration of the above.


   Best regards,
   Vern Hendershott

==^================================================================
This email was sent to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aVxiLm.aVzvvT
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^================================================================

<<attachment: winmail.dat>>

Reply via email to