Just don’t insure your airplane. Everyone cancel your insurance and make them drop the prices. They need us more than we need them. Insurance is not required anyways.
@@CascadiaAviation if everyone goes on strike and cancel their insurance for at least 3 or 4 months straight and just fly a little or don’t fly at all for that amount of time, I think that would get their attention, or it could hurt them financially. I think its worth to try it.
It may be semantics but they're actually removing the weight limit rather than increasing it. They're increasing the stall speed to 54 Kts and since stall speed is directly influenced by weight that mathematically puts a effective weight limit at 3000 lbs. I'm thinking you probably are just summarizing to keep it simple but transparency is good.
You should do a video on how safety may improve. The stats between a da40 and just about any LSA is staggering, especially fatalities. I suspect the higher wing loading will help a good deal.
I'm a retired ATP-ASMEL (age 67). I've been thinking about dipping my toe into the LSA field. But I really want something like a C-150, C-140, Gruman AA-1, C-172 etc. BUT NOW...I COULD DO IT!!!!! YooHoo! Can't wait. Honestly, in my mind I think I would just do Touch-and-Go's (when I was younger I loved to do pattern work. Started fly with my Dad when I was 14). I will lose sleep over this tonight! :) GREAT PRESENTATION! I just subscribed. Thank you. BTW, I soled in a C-140 out of San Fernando Airport in Southern Calif, 2800 foot strip, when I was 17 and still in High School. Great times.
Nice video Mike! You have brought up an interesting twist… Light sport pilots being allowed to fly more heavy and complex machines… with extra seats. Ordinary pilots run out of gas, and fly VFR into clouds… A light sport pilot should be able to follow the rules equally well as an ordinary Private Pilot… A pilot has to know his personal limitations… and abide by them… no matter what the FAA allows. 😀
I sold my Cherokee right before covid sent prices to the flight levels. The guy I sold it to offered to sell it back to me for 20k more three years later. Biggest mistake I've ever made.
When it first became a thing, I billed Sport Pilot/LSA as what Recreational Pilot always should have been. It looks like the FAA is taking things a step further to Private Pilot light. It's been a while since I was active in the industry so I'm not sure what the difference in training is anymore or what the gap/cost is in pilot certification is to go just a little faster and carry more than one extra person. On the aircraft side, I think this is a great move to bring more models into the fold and adapt to the changing, markets, tech and landscape.
In regards to pricing, it could be once the new rules take affect, those LSA planes that are on the used market would go down in price. I say that since the new rules would allow buyers to now look at higher performance aircraft and those current LSAs could become more of a bargain.
I was on board until the part about trying to determine how pricing will be affected. There are too many variables which we don’t know. Currently if you are targeting light sport you have to spend to cut weight, that goes away for most. Also many experimental get to become light sport which will increase competition. In a normal market prices should come down over time with this kind of change. Although supply will remain limited for some time so it’s possible this primarily will decrease used prices, we’ll see.
I think the most positive impact is that a lot of planes that are experimental now, will be certified and that will allow owners to offset some costs by renting/leasing the airplane. Whereas that isn’t really an option with non certified airplanes.
I personally think that the legacy aircraft manufacturers have fought tooth and nail to keep current restrictions because they do not want competition. You only have to look at how slow innovation has been implemented over the last few decades with regards to aircraft design. Now with many new aircraft manufacturers coming online with increadable new designs and cutting edge processes the FAA and associated agencies can no longer "protect" the old cartel of airframe manufacturers. I suspect even the passenger number restrictions will go in time. Regards from South Africa
It's not just airframe design that's been stale for decades, it's engine design as well. Incorporating the same technology in any automobile (electronic fuel injection, electronic ignition, liquid cooling, electronic engine controls) would bring the segment out of the dark ages.
This is the best comment. Big corporate interests are always the bottom line, and their just mafia bullies of innovation and restricting access to anyone who isn’t on the take.
Speed goes up, complexity goes up: insurance goes sky high and so do prices in an already price prohibitive space. This sounds great on paper, but just like the original LS rule was supposed to drop aircraft prices and never did, this is just going to add to the cost issues. When I started flying 9 years ago I could rent a Tecnam P92 for $95/hr wet. Now you can’t find anything less than $145/hr wet in the area. Insurance doubled during that time, hull values have skyrocketed and it has become increasingly cost prohibitive.
I'm not a pilot (yet) although I've been a software developer for 40+ years. I have not paid much attention to aircraft for most of that time, but prior to 1985 I did get some exposure to it. I also worked as an architect for two different startups that got me some exposure to some of this stuff. One was building a "GPS-driven real-time moving map display" -- what we simply call "a GPS" today. The other was a service for private pilots to use that allowed them to file flight plans and request current WX and advisories to be FAXed to their location (typically a hotel) the night before they were scheduled to leave, so they could get the latest data in the morning and review it BEFORE checking out, returning their car, and getting to the FBO, only to find there was a weather front moving in and they could not leave for a day or two. (This was in the 90's.) Technology has evolved significantly since then, but they were a lot of fun to design and build. The biggest difference I'm noticing today is in the cockpit technology -- aka, the "glass panels". Off-hand, what I'm seeing is that relatively top-end tech is doubling or tripling the price of the low-end aircraft. The net economic effect of that in the bigger scheme of things is ... that should reduce insurance costs significantly, as well as reduce the training and expected workload on pilots. I see these smaller jets like the Cirrus and HondaJet now have the ability to take-off, fly their entire route, and land, all without pilot intervention. I know how slowly the FAA moves, and I'm sure this was feasible 20 years ago and it has taken this long for it to filter down to the point where a 1970's C-150 that until recently cost $25k can be retrofitted with the latest tech stuff that costs $80k and end up as a plane that can literally fly itself and now is worth $125k. So while it's easy to look at the "sport flyer" vs. "PPL" the way you are, the biggest economic drivers are going to be cockpit tech that takes more and more of the responsibility for recognizing and avoiding critical situations away from the pilots. But after watching lots of these videos, one message I'm hearing is that over the past 25 years or so, the failure rates of small aircraft has shifted from mechanical and equipment failures to PILOT errors. Just like in the self-driving car world, the solution is going to be getting humans out of the equation and let computers avoid these collisions. As an aside, as a casual observer, I cannot wrap my head around how it's even statistically possible that two aircraft heading in different directions on headings based on different flight plans and destinations can ever possibly collide in mid-air, or even come close! The statistical likelihood of that happening randomly is about as high as winning the lottery. Yet it happens with extreme regularity. This is a SYSTEMIC PROBLEM, as well as a HUMAN problem. And given the current state of technology, it should never even happen. Like folks who refused to get a COVID vaccine and ended up dying of COVID instead of just being miserable for a week or two, there are pilots who will simply refuse to allow the use of tech to ensure these critical scenarios are avoided at all costs. I mean, if it's possible to have a button that will take any craft out of any kind of spin or stall that the vast majority of pilots can NOT do, then why isn't that required on virtually EVERY aircraft? And why does it require the pilot to push a button rather than detecting the situation automatically? I'm guessing that EGO plays a HUGE factor in why some of these accidents happen to begin with. A lot of these aircraft today ARE equipped with advanced tech, and that stuff adds nearly $100k to the price. But it should also slash the insurance rates if used to actively prevent pilot-caused accidents. Today, the PIC is still "in charge". But there was a crash in Utah recently where the pilot (an elected official) and his family all died because he (the PIC) appears to have made a Really Bad Decision and attempted to fly out under conditions that a properly-equipped computer (or an older and wiser pilot) would have said, "absolutely not!" We put breathalyzers on cars that prevent someone from starting them if they're too drunk. But the REAL problem is that these device actually DO prevent a large number of drivers from driving -- and that happens WAY too much simply because the drivers don't know they're "too drunk". Here in AZ, one beer in the past two hours will typically put you over the line, so it's not exactly rocket science to figure out. Ideally, once these systems are installed, they'd never be used. They are ... sometimes a LOT. So what does that tell you about the basic judgment abilities of the drivers? As they say, you can't fix stupid. But if we can interrupt it by requiring monitoring by a computer that can override the PIC at the right time, then the overall operating costs should go way down as the accident rates based on "Pilot error" drop. Of course, then the computers might increase in cost because they will become the targets of lawyers whenever there's a failure. (Someone is ALWAYS likely to get sued, right?) But we need MORE of this equipment, and the FAA needs to rebalance everything to increase the safety rates by moving critical decisions from relying on often under-trained pilots (often just situational) over to computer systems run by AI and sophisticated analytical models that are far beyond the abilities of most pilots. Unfortunately, we're probably 10-20 years and thousands of deaths away from that happening. But that's where it's heading, IMHO.
Best value in a Light Sport is an original vintage 1940s Piper J3 Cub. It is certified, has good support from the owner community, and when you sell it you get your money back. Costs $30-50K (with outliers of course.) Can't fly fast or carry much more than two people, but more fun than a person should have, and will make you a better pilot.
It is really hard to say how the new rules are going to affect the GA market but ultimately if people want to get into GA they should probably not try to second guess the market and just get into GA as nobody is getting any younger.
If I owned a 1320, LSA because of no medical and I could now qualify to fly something roomier that my wife and I could pack two suitcases, and get somewhere faster, then would I would sell my current LSA and upgrade. And I think a lot of pilots are going to do that and therefore the demand for the 1320 lsa’s is going to go down and the supply will go up and they will be cheaper. I think the current GA certified might possibly even go up in price. That’s just my personal opinion.
Interesting, i had no idea these changes are in the pipe by the faa. I am seriously looking at buying a Risen 915, its like a mini Lancair.... it is 200-250 kts, 100% fits into this. 2 passenger LSA. 1,100 nm range above 200kt cruise. this new rule change might make me do it immediately.
@@branchandfoundry560 it's a great little airplane. and those fowler flaps... 30 kt stall at full flaps... brs, equipped, autopilot, safety feature, push a button and it will fly to the nearest airport autonomously, etc etc etc. well well worth it's price. but these new rules... FL to IA, in 5 hrs solo at 15,000-17,000 ft easy and never close to vne.
Looking to buy my first airplane to train in. My dad has his PPL and wants me to get a used Piper Archer II circa 1980 (his favorite plane). I'd rather go experimental, but it looks like the prices are similar and I like the 4-passenger option... I also think, realistically, my dad will fly it more than I do and I want him to enjoy the plane as much as me. What should I do?
Perhaps look into the Van's RV-10? It's actually renowned for being comfortable for even tall people (they speak of four 6'4 individuals having great room not including space for baggage/equipment.) It's four huge seats and a fantastic aircraft! A lot recommend the RV-14, but the RV-10 has the four seats where the RV-14 and RV-14A are two seaters (but also fantastic aircraft!)
Weight from 1320lbs to 3000lbs Speed from 120knots to 250knots Constant speed prop Retractable gear Night flight Stall speed from 45knt to 54knt Helicopters for light sport Turbine engines
Im totally agree mike and hope to increase the limitation of LSA but in my opinion the light aircraft with two seat price will be down why becouse why i will buy two seat insted of 4 that i can use with same licance
There is no weight limit, but a Clean CAS stall limit of 54. It could roughly work out to about 3000 pounds, but they do not mention a weight. These already certified GA aircraft will not change to a "certified" light sport aircraft, but a sport pilot will be able to fly them.
So much misinformation in this video. Thanks for pointing out these few items. And it’s not exactly misinformation just not 100% correct. Such as having now hard and fast wieght
Sir, if the FAA does increase weight, speed etc, what LSA will have seating for four, retractable landing gear and most of all a turbo or turbine powered????
You think that the FAA has moved on this quickly. LOL they have been at this for awhile. I have been on the ASTM Committee for some time working on this problem. This isn't just an over night thing. We have been on this for years mojo. And the new rules are perfect and about time. Now you don't have to be a special weight yourself or size of the pilot. Just thought I would let you know.
Excellent information and perspective Mike. Although aircraft prices have risen to a all time high, I don’t think they will increase. Well at least not double in price like they did over the last few years. I’ve even seen some prices drop on experimental aircraft.
Perhaps they realize that pilots are job security. If everyone quits flying, there will be less jobs. There’s still the airlines, but it wouldn’t require as many FAA workers.
@@GeneralSirDouglasMcAI I feel like it is something along those lines. I am sure a bunch of old rich guys bitched and moaned about how the LSA category is too limiting (and it is) but damn this is a welcomed over correction!
The biggest problem with price has been scalability. Most of the industry is still hand built. I'm not aware of any mass production techniques making it over from let's say the automotive world for stamping and forming. Why? The economics just aren't there. I think, the first to create the VW bettle of aviation will revolutionize the industry. However, you cannot do that until you have more pilots. Chicken and Egg.
@CrossWindsPat absolutely. It shouldn't remain accessible to just a few though. The technical aspects of fling make this a great driver for STEM and other related fields.
Seems newer LS aircraft will result in used 1320 aircraft going down in price, but then again new pilots entering market means those prices might go up. I suspect the new rules will not significantly affect rate of new LS pilots, therefore I'm hoping we'll see a price decrease in used 1320 planes.
I'm fixing to go to LSA school next summer. I'm gonna build a team mini-max. a little over 7 grand for the pane and a little over 2 grand for the engine.
I am an Ercoupe owner and flyer. I am pleased to know this as now I can probably move up to a larger and more capable plane. My son and I are both larger men. He weighs 220 and I weigh 230 together it makes it impossible for us both to use my Ercoupe or his Piper 140 with full fuel without being over gross. This would make a C180 or a Piper 235 a real possibility.
Mike. Great video and you are likely right about prices, unless supply increases. I own a 150 and would love a DA20 or 40. If they can become light sports the prices of these planes will go up because they are highly desirable. Let’s see where everything trends…. BTW you need to fly up and visit us in Dahlonega 9A0. I’ll be back in the fall to get focused on training. That’s the toughest part of flying these days…. At least for me. Keep up the great content!
Stall speed is going to be the determining factor, if it stalls too fast, it won't qualify. Cirrus will never stall slow enough, so that will make aircraft safer because they will be able to have a higher gross, but if it can't land slowly, it won't qualify.
Mike, why did you not mention about the 54knots stall speed and freedom about engine categories and number of engines? I think this is a key component.
Mosaic or not, with these financing rates, it would be insane for prices to stay this high. In theory, people should have less disposable income because it now needs to go to debt servicing for more essential things. On top of that, aviation finance is also impacted making acquisition costs that much more expensive, so even if prices stay the same, the cost to pay the same price goes higher, which should drive prices down. Planes are sitting on Trade-a-Plane for months. People don’t want to pay those prices at those rates. And, one ridiculous trend is kitting out these old old planes with crazy avionics to try to squeeze new value out of them. I think many people are going to find out that most people flying GA just don’t care that much about having the latest and greatest in avionics for an old plane. People updating old planes should have stopped at GPS and decent autopilot, but no they’ve gotta have the dual G5s, the gfc500, touch screens, dedicated engine monitor, bunch of extra junk. They shove all this tech in these planes without thinking about who is even looking at that plane. If you’re wanting top-of-the-line glass cockpits and avionics, you’re not also looking at a 1962 M20C.
If they really want more people becoming pilots, they need to figure out a way to reduce the cost of certifying aircraft. That'll make all aircraft going forward less expensive which means more people can afford to get into flying. We need Ultralight costs but still able to fly cross country and over populated areas and with reasonable degrees of speed, and we need them to be made in the same volume of the J3 cub.
I've been looking while working on my ppl and it seems like the prices have dropped in some of the popular brands. Saying that you have to have the ability to move fast, meaning if you still work during the week you will miss out on some good deals when you are limited to weekends looking at aircraft.
More pilots might lower price for insurance - more customers to spread the risk. But more pilots will raise the price of planes, because demand will go up. There is no free lunch. Short of a major resurgence in GA - like we had in the 60s - GA will remain an affluent person's game.
One thing I'm not clear on is if IAs still have to work on older aircraft that can be classified as LSAs. This could reduce the cost of updating the older fleet with things like avionics that right now are prohibitively expensive.
Don’t buy anything trust me. Shit is hitting the fan. The democrats are holding out until elections then crash to blame republicans. I’m not even an American. I live in the richest country in the world…denmark
This is all great, but do you know how long the wait list is for a new Diamond DA-40NG? About two years. Supply, of lack thereof is what keeps prices high. Getting more supply will help as manufacturing ramps up for now less restrictive and as a result more useful aircraft, but it will be a while
I definitely don’t think the prices will go up a lot if at all. Maybe on some popular brands that will have a hire demand, however there will be a lot more LSA now to choose from, since the weight limits and speed increased. So why go for popular brands? People will start buying planes with lower demands and lower prices, therefore the demand on popular brands will eventually drop too. They will have no choice but compete with other companies, so they will start reducing prices too if they want to stay on the market. I think prices will be shifting based on demands. I guess we’ll see what the future brings. The idea with LSA changes is to generate more pilots not airplanes, but to give more options to choose from to the new pilots. Hopefully this new rules work to our benefit to help us all to find what we like for affordable prices. Great video.
You spoke about supply and demand. Ok these new rules will will increase the number of desirable LSA types available (increase supply). What about demand? Will the number of people looking to get into aircraft ownership increase? No doubt there will be current LSA owners who will be looking to upgrade to higher performance. But who will buy their old LSA? I suspect current owners be willing to sell their old LSA at a discount to enable their new purchase. So perhaps the current LSA fleet might see some downward movement on price in favor of the flash new options becoming available (these will certainly not get cheaper). But the positive is, this might make the current LSA fleet more accessible to new entry pilots ownership goals.
I always thought the LSA planes were terrible. Expensive with little utility. Now, if this goes through, we'll be able to get up in the air so much more easily and not feel limited
LSA was always primarily aimed at older pilots who aged out of their medical and still wanted to fly, so they could have a way to still go up and fly around on a nice Sunday morning without having to maintain a PPL. It was NOT about making flying more accessible. Some people thought it would, but really it was just for people who couldn’t get a medical to be able to do something.
While I agree with your perspective (I’m a 4500 hr commercial pilot) I would also agree with Dan Gryder that, this is a recipe for pilot deaths. I like the freedom but this is reckless. It took me time to learn how to stay ahead of fast prop planes like a turbo Centurian, much less than 250 it’s. I’m an Aerostar fur. Nobody should fly one unprepared and untrained. WTf. Train to fly. This is not enough.
You really aer doing amazing things I have to say! your channel is so cool and your knowledge is outstanding to say the least! I am so inspired by you and all you teach us here online" I wonder is it possible to apply as a foreigner to your company and if there is a position come over and work by you guys? thanks! Kind regards, Christopher
I think all the experimental EAB manufactures will go into taking their kits and making them LSA instantly because now all those kits which were for planes that were over a MGTOW of 1320 and now can be legal as LSA. These planes are already to designed to be easy to assemble so with experienced labor they should be able to assemble them more economical. I think this will create a bunch of airplanes at the $200k new vs. the current $300k new price point.
250 and complex is not appropriate for the skill required to get an LS pilot cert and basic med. There are some IFR holds limited to 175 but you can't have an instrument rating on an LS cert anyway. The weight seems a touch high, but still ok.(The mass limits of any category are mainly about limiting damage to others in an off airport landing balanced by the training level of the pilot[s].) Really even 2000 or 2500 would be reasonable. You can load 4 seats of a c172M with full tanks for a 4 hour flight and still only be at the 2300 max TOW. And LSA can only carry 2 people. I would see 200kts as a more logical break point. Because the sport cat is mainly a limit of the pilot cert, (training and medical) and the lowest speed limit is 200kts (below B shelves). By limiting the aircraft to 200kts the pilot doesn't incur the extra workload and complexity of considering that additional regulation during flight. Reducing extranious training and regulation-memorization allows more focus on the basics that really matter. From experience I've seen a ton of pilots that have difficulty just safely entering and flying a basic pattern. Especially a consideration when you combine this with the reduced training of a sport pilot cert, and basic-med basically allowing older folk with reduced reaction times and the increased speed cap.
Its sad because the low cost becomes high cost because of popularity. A lot of people got into light sports because it was more affordable and now that's not the case.
The reason airplanes cost so much is parts cost alone . A battery for my plane is $350 12 volts. Spark plugs is $38 each. there are 2 per cylinder. . Cost in aviation has gone through the roof. SO even to buy used engine they have double in price.
overall agreed that mostly good, except that insurance rates will rise in time due to increased crashes and fatalities from "pushing the envelope" by lowering the named weight and speed standards
Technically I mean unless you are financing in airplane or renting one you technically don't even need insurance anyway. Everybody that's interested or that does aviation knows this however we all know that it's a good thing to have so if anything does go wrong insurance can come out and recover the aircraft or if something else mechanically goes wrong and it's proving to be a detective part more than likely insurance can cover that whereas if you don't have it you're paying out-of-pocket and God forbid something goes wrong you or your family have to pay for a recovery operation. There is pros and cons to having insurance on an aircraft sometimes it's better to be safe than sorry then again insurance can also eat up a lot more money that you don't want to waste it all depends on the person and the preference. I know I'm a huge aviation fanatic and eventually I will be getting some stuff situated where I get my civilian pilots license and maybe one day in aircraft but sometimes it's just better to rent than own but if I ever do own one I'll put insurance on it for a while I think that new pilots should actually be required to have insurance for at least 5 years and then I also think that if you're over 75 and you're flying you should also be required to have insurance on the aircraft that you're flying if it's yours just due to the fact that you never know what's going to happen and if you died and the plane goes down and a residential or urban area that's going to be a mess and even at that in remote places nobody's going to do the recovery unless they have insurance or you find a nonprofit organization to do the recovery. But it's the pilots choice and their preference and whatever they feel more comfortable with I'm just saying that if I buy an airplane and even if I paid for it out-of-pocket completely and something does go wrong and it is a malfunction I wouldn't want my airplane replay so I can get back into the air insurance would definitely be a good thing to have.
Absolutely not true. Stats don't prove that out and the FAA mentioned that in the proposal. We lose 20 to 30 pilots a month and the overall majority are private pilots
I disagree with most of your assumptions. These rule changes only impact the opportunities and aircraft available to Sport Certificated pilots. It will not make them "certificated" airplanes. Insurance costs are mostly based on Pilot ratings, Pilot hours (total and in the platform) and the biggie is replacement cost. Aircraft/expensive aircraft that are built in Europe are much more expensive to insure do to the cost and availability of replacement parts. What makes you think that costs of aircraft are going to decrease? Engines, avionics, materials are not decreasing they are only increasing...one of the big reasons aircraft manufacturers have such high prices is they are covering their liability because of expensive litigation...The only reason that current LSA's would decrease in price is that now Sport pilots will be able to fly (not necessarily afford) larger planes. Bottom line is that flying airplanes as a hobby is expensive and if you can't afford it then find another hobby.
Remember that Certificated pilots can legally fly LSA airplanes but wouldn't ordinarily because of the MGTOW, passenger seats and speed issues. Now an LSA can have a profile of a C182 but can use the manufacturing technologies of ASTM that Cessna cannot use either by regulation or because the original FAA blessed design specified old ways of doing things. For example, Cessnas don't use "blind" rivets! They are all hand pressed. They don't use a carbon fiber spar or blow molded gas tanks. They don't laser cut on CNC machines the rivet holes. There has never been an incentive for Cessna and Piper to recertify the 172/182/2xx to reduce cost. That is why EAB kits easily qualify as LSA and the lighter two seat ones were often offered as an LSA. One final point is that the cost of Lycoming/Cont. engines is through the roof. LSA airplanes can use other options. That is going to be a savings. Between the labor savings, cost of labor, engine savings, etc. I think there will be some downward pressure on costs of new planes. A new C182 is $700k! I have to believe a knockoff 182 LSA to ASTM standards can be had for $400-450k. An RV10 performance wise is similar to a SR22 and a quickbuild/builder's assist cost is like $350k now. So add another $50k in labor and make it an LSA for $400k that is a bargain. This won't bring down the prices of C150s but it is going to change the dynamics of the market.
I have been a Private pilot for more than 40 years and I currently own and fly an EAB that is AW'd at LSA standards. Remember Sport Pilots are "certified" as well, the biggest difference is their medical is based on having a drivers license and not requiring a separate medical exam. I do believe there might be a hit on the current LSA market as Sport Pilots will now be able to fly the larger planes and not need the lighter A/C. Regarding engine cost, have you priced Rotax engines lately (Rotax is probably the most used engine in the LSA market and they are not cheap)? The 912-914 won't be enough HP for the heavier planes and the 915/916 are running 38-50K plus. Regarding the cost of Cessna's and Piper's you will find that a huge portion of the cost is 'liability" related. These cost increases have translated into the used airplane market as replacement parts cost has increased for them as well (so blame the Lawyers). I am not making this up it is a fact that has been presented on many media sources. Regarding insurance, case in point, I live in Florida and have no claims for storm damage on my home (my insurance goes up every year), because there are fewer providers in the market, which means they can charge higher costs. The same is true in the aircraft insurance market, less providers equal higher cost. I know of several pilots who own their plane and only carry liability as they can't afford hull insurance (which is the most expensive part of an insurance quote). So my point is: What about these proposed changes is going to improve the market? I say little to none. It will just put more (probably less experienced) pilots into larger/faster planes.
I helped build an RV10 a few years ago. It is 4 place. Wonderful airplane. If you do go that route, look up Dwight & Sean at Meadow Lake, CO (KFLY) and pick their brains. They're one of the greatest resources for building RVs.
With more aircraft slowly coming on line it means prices will very slowly come down. However, you are right that it will not be dramatic or soon. Still long term this is a good thing.
The idea of dropping the insurance could be a viable option if the person has the ability to replace it if something went wrong and they survived. With the ability of placing assets inside of trusts, you may have come up with a way of being able to opt out of insurance. Anything I have said are just ideas. I know it won’t work for everyone but if this discussion is not had then no meaningful reform will take place within the insurance industry as a whole. I certainly will be looking forward to reading more on this topic.
Pipistrel/Textron still claim they will have Part 23 cert for the Panthera in 2025, but only after EASA approval. So maybe 2027. This is for the gas version; the hybrid is still vaporware.
Personally I think the FAA should just let PPL use drivers license for medical. There is very little difference between PPL and Sport with these rules so just merge them and drop BasicMed/Medical from PPL.
Mentioning the maximum speed and weight limit increases without mentioning the stall speed limit seems rather pointless. But I guess if you want to get people fired up and excited that RV-10s and 182s might become Lisa's, even when we know they won't be then I guess job well done!
Da40, rv10, doesn't meet the new mosaic rules because of the stall speed. We will see new four place aircraft like the new texas aircraft company's four place aircraft with 200 hp continental or the four seat goforair at 300,000 that showed at oshkosh. 1. Weight limit from 1320lbs to 3000lbs 2. Speed from 120knots to 250knots 3. Constant speed prop 4. Retractable gear 5. Four place aircraft 6. Night flying with basic med 7. Light sport helicopters 8. Turbine and multi engine. 9 stall spped from 45 knots to 54knt
Some really good valid points mentioned there, especially with regards to insurance and aircraft prices. I'm sure insurance companies will find any reason to capitalise on the new category :P If prices keep going up and up I imagine it'll get to the point where sales will slow because how much can people keep forking out? If and when that happens the second hand market will be more attractive, and prices of new aircraft will decrease or stagnate, due to slowing sales. Then the vicious cycle will start in the second hand market, it will become in demand more and more, increasing prices to the point where the new aircraft market will begin to look attractive again. And on it goes :P I wish CASA (Civil Aviation Safety Authority) in Australia was as forward thinking as the FAA. CASA is a draconian beauracratic protect-the-jobs-for-the-boys institution. All they seem to do is drag their feet and take forever and a day to make worthwhile changes. When I first read about MOSAIC in an Australian flying magazine, I was pretty excited too, thinking CASA might look at it all and decide to follow suit. But, and it's a big BUT, I can see that that will not happen. They've recently introduced a new category for LSA up to 960KGs, just over 2100lbs. So after all this beauracatic feet shuffling trying to get this weight increase sorted I can't imagine they'd be bothered to increase it any further, which really sucks. And unlike the FAA who have done research over the last twenty years to show that flying on an FAA medical or a drivers licence has not revealed any significant differences in accident rates, so flying a bigger aircraft on a drivers licence level of fitness isn't a gamble. Whereas CASA have done little to bugger all research and just arbitrarily chose to increase to 960kgs. The "Safety" in CASA in this case should read as "Paranoia without bothering about facts" :P In Australia we have slightly different categories to the US, we have recreational pilot and GA pilot ratings. RA pilots fly LSA or Amateur-built aircraft only. We don't have an experimental category per se, Amateur-built aircraft includes experimental. And we don't have a Sport Pilot category either. Within the GA pilot ratings the first achievement gained by student pilots is RPL, Recreational Pilot Licence, it used to be called the GFPT (General Flight Progress Test). They can stop there if they wish and can continue with other endorsements, such as Navigation, flying in CTA, etc., but it's usually the first step to a PPL. The RPL allows a pilot to fly GA aircraft up to 1500kgs (Interestingly, in my log book after completeing the GFPT, it states I can fly aircraft under 5700kgs) and can only carry one passenger, but if they have a Class I or Class II medical certificate they can carry more than one passenger. As for an RA pilot, this certification is RPC (Recreational Pilot Certificate). They're restricted to only being able to carry one passenger, cannot fly at night and can only fly an aircraft up to 600kgs (1320lbs), until the new category of the MTOW of 960kgs comes in to play, whenever that will be. When the new rule is in place an RA pilot will be able to fly up to a C152. So the new MTOW of 960kgs in Australia will be useful for aircraft manufacturers to make aircraft which can carry more weight, which will be great for RA pilots, but it's still not a whole lot to get excited about, unlike MOSAIC.
If FAA objective to kept us safer, then why are they not doing what Europe is doing for Ultra lights? The reason why ultra lights are dangerous is from the low weights restrictions. By increase the weights for ultra light the plane can be build saver just like Europe's FAA rules are for ultra lights. Example is Europe's ultra light plane called the Shark and their many other version of that plane. The USA FAA should follow the same rules Europe does for Ultra lights to make the saver and the will create more business in the US too.
Just don’t insure your airplane. Everyone cancel your insurance and make them drop the prices. They need us more than we need them. Insurance is not required anyways.
So if I get in an accident and have a ton of liability they can take my house?
@@CascadiaAviation if everyone goes on strike and cancel their insurance for at least 3 or 4 months straight and just fly a little or don’t fly at all for that amount of time, I think that would get their attention, or it could hurt them financially. I think its worth to try it.
@@CascadiaAviation Plus side is you will probably be dead so you wont have to worry about it! Fuck insurance companies right to hell I say.
@@CascadiaAviationNot if you were foolish to put your house 🏡 in your name in the first place.
@@1230mkelly care to elaborate?
It may be semantics but they're actually removing the weight limit rather than increasing it. They're increasing the stall speed to 54 Kts and since stall speed is directly influenced by weight that mathematically puts a effective weight limit at 3000 lbs. I'm thinking you probably are just summarizing to keep it simple but transparency is good.
You should do a video on how safety may improve. The stats between a da40 and just about any LSA is staggering, especially fatalities. I suspect the higher wing loading will help a good deal.
No mention of 54 knot clean stall speed requirement?
I'm a retired ATP-ASMEL (age 67). I've been thinking about dipping my toe into the LSA field. But I really want something like a C-150, C-140, Gruman AA-1, C-172 etc. BUT NOW...I COULD DO IT!!!!! YooHoo! Can't wait. Honestly, in my mind I think I would just do Touch-and-Go's (when I was younger I loved to do pattern
work. Started fly with my Dad when I was 14). I will lose sleep over this tonight! :) GREAT PRESENTATION! I just subscribed. Thank you. BTW, I soled in a C-140 out of San Fernando Airport in Southern Calif, 2800 foot strip, when I was 17 and still in High School. Great times.
What about your prediction a few months ago that LSAs would come down in price due to builder assist programs?
Nice video Mike!
You have brought up an interesting twist…
Light sport pilots being allowed to fly more heavy and complex machines… with extra seats.
Ordinary pilots run out of gas, and fly VFR into clouds…
A light sport pilot should be able to follow the rules equally well as an ordinary Private Pilot…
A pilot has to know his personal limitations… and abide by them… no matter what the FAA allows. 😀
I sold my Cherokee right before covid sent prices to the flight levels. The guy I sold it to offered to sell it back to me for 20k more three years later. Biggest mistake I've ever made.
When it first became a thing, I billed Sport Pilot/LSA as what Recreational Pilot always should have been. It looks like the FAA is taking things a step further to Private Pilot light. It's been a while since I was active in the industry so I'm not sure what the difference in training is anymore or what the gap/cost is in pilot certification is to go just a little faster and carry more than one extra person. On the aircraft side, I think this is a great move to bring more models into the fold and adapt to the changing, markets, tech and landscape.
In regards to pricing, it could be once the new rules take affect, those LSA planes that are on the used market would go down in price. I say that since the new rules would allow buyers to now look at higher performance aircraft and those current LSAs could become more of a bargain.
I was on board until the part about trying to determine how pricing will be affected.
There are too many variables which we don’t know.
Currently if you are targeting light sport you have to spend to cut weight, that goes away for most. Also many experimental get to become light sport which will increase competition.
In a normal market prices should come down over time with this kind of change. Although supply will remain limited for some time so it’s possible this primarily will decrease used prices, we’ll see.
I think the most positive impact is that a lot of planes that are experimental now, will be certified and that will allow owners to offset some costs by renting/leasing the airplane. Whereas that isn’t really an option with non certified airplanes.
Not certified but approved through astm standards and they will no longer be experimental
@@mauriceevans6546 yes. But I guess I meant - rentable. :)
@derekradcliffe3313 yes. Plenty of options
I personally think that the legacy aircraft manufacturers have fought tooth and nail to keep current restrictions because they do not want competition. You only have to look at how slow innovation has been implemented over the last few decades with regards to aircraft design. Now with many new aircraft manufacturers coming online with increadable new designs and cutting edge processes the FAA and associated agencies can no longer "protect" the old cartel of airframe manufacturers. I suspect even the passenger number restrictions will go in time.
Regards from South Africa
It's not just airframe design that's been stale for decades, it's engine design as well. Incorporating the same technology in any automobile (electronic fuel injection, electronic ignition, liquid cooling, electronic engine controls) would bring the segment out of the dark ages.
This is the best comment. Big corporate interests are always the bottom line, and their just mafia bullies of innovation and restricting access to anyone who isn’t on the take.
Speed goes up, complexity goes up: insurance goes sky high and so do prices in an already price prohibitive space. This sounds great on paper, but just like the original LS rule was supposed to drop aircraft prices and never did, this is just going to add to the cost issues.
When I started flying 9 years ago I could rent a Tecnam P92 for $95/hr wet. Now you can’t find anything less than $145/hr wet in the area. Insurance doubled during that time, hull values have skyrocketed and it has become increasingly cost prohibitive.
Don’t forget fuel doubled to tripled as well.
I'm not a pilot (yet) although I've been a software developer for 40+ years. I have not paid much attention to aircraft for most of that time, but prior to 1985 I did get some exposure to it. I also worked as an architect for two different startups that got me some exposure to some of this stuff. One was building a "GPS-driven real-time moving map display" -- what we simply call "a GPS" today. The other was a service for private pilots to use that allowed them to file flight plans and request current WX and advisories to be FAXed to their location (typically a hotel) the night before they were scheduled to leave, so they could get the latest data in the morning and review it BEFORE checking out, returning their car, and getting to the FBO, only to find there was a weather front moving in and they could not leave for a day or two. (This was in the 90's.) Technology has evolved significantly since then, but they were a lot of fun to design and build.
The biggest difference I'm noticing today is in the cockpit technology -- aka, the "glass panels". Off-hand, what I'm seeing is that relatively top-end tech is doubling or tripling the price of the low-end aircraft. The net economic effect of that in the bigger scheme of things is ... that should reduce insurance costs significantly, as well as reduce the training and expected workload on pilots. I see these smaller jets like the Cirrus and HondaJet now have the ability to take-off, fly their entire route, and land, all without pilot intervention. I know how slowly the FAA moves, and I'm sure this was feasible 20 years ago and it has taken this long for it to filter down to the point where a 1970's C-150 that until recently cost $25k can be retrofitted with the latest tech stuff that costs $80k and end up as a plane that can literally fly itself and now is worth $125k.
So while it's easy to look at the "sport flyer" vs. "PPL" the way you are, the biggest economic drivers are going to be cockpit tech that takes more and more of the responsibility for recognizing and avoiding critical situations away from the pilots.
But after watching lots of these videos, one message I'm hearing is that over the past 25 years or so, the failure rates of small aircraft has shifted from mechanical and equipment failures to PILOT errors. Just like in the self-driving car world, the solution is going to be getting humans out of the equation and let computers avoid these collisions.
As an aside, as a casual observer, I cannot wrap my head around how it's even statistically possible that two aircraft heading in different directions on headings based on different flight plans and destinations can ever possibly collide in mid-air, or even come close! The statistical likelihood of that happening randomly is about as high as winning the lottery. Yet it happens with extreme regularity. This is a SYSTEMIC PROBLEM, as well as a HUMAN problem. And given the current state of technology, it should never even happen. Like folks who refused to get a COVID vaccine and ended up dying of COVID instead of just being miserable for a week or two, there are pilots who will simply refuse to allow the use of tech to ensure these critical scenarios are avoided at all costs. I mean, if it's possible to have a button that will take any craft out of any kind of spin or stall that the vast majority of pilots can NOT do, then why isn't that required on virtually EVERY aircraft? And why does it require the pilot to push a button rather than detecting the situation automatically? I'm guessing that EGO plays a HUGE factor in why some of these accidents happen to begin with.
A lot of these aircraft today ARE equipped with advanced tech, and that stuff adds nearly $100k to the price. But it should also slash the insurance rates if used to actively prevent pilot-caused accidents. Today, the PIC is still "in charge". But there was a crash in Utah recently where the pilot (an elected official) and his family all died because he (the PIC) appears to have made a Really Bad Decision and attempted to fly out under conditions that a properly-equipped computer (or an older and wiser pilot) would have said, "absolutely not!"
We put breathalyzers on cars that prevent someone from starting them if they're too drunk. But the REAL problem is that these device actually DO prevent a large number of drivers from driving -- and that happens WAY too much simply because the drivers don't know they're "too drunk". Here in AZ, one beer in the past two hours will typically put you over the line, so it's not exactly rocket science to figure out. Ideally, once these systems are installed, they'd never be used. They are ... sometimes a LOT. So what does that tell you about the basic judgment abilities of the drivers?
As they say, you can't fix stupid. But if we can interrupt it by requiring monitoring by a computer that can override the PIC at the right time, then the overall operating costs should go way down as the accident rates based on "Pilot error" drop. Of course, then the computers might increase in cost because they will become the targets of lawyers whenever there's a failure. (Someone is ALWAYS likely to get sued, right?)
But we need MORE of this equipment, and the FAA needs to rebalance everything to increase the safety rates by moving critical decisions from relying on often under-trained pilots (often just situational) over to computer systems run by AI and sophisticated analytical models that are far beyond the abilities of most pilots.
Unfortunately, we're probably 10-20 years and thousands of deaths away from that happening. But that's where it's heading, IMHO.
Champagne is ready in here! Great video :)
Best value in a Light Sport is an original vintage 1940s Piper J3 Cub. It is certified, has good support from the owner community, and when you sell it you get your money back. Costs $30-50K (with outliers of course.) Can't fly fast or carry much more than two people, but more fun than a person should have, and will make you a better pilot.
It is really hard to say how the new rules are going to affect the GA market but ultimately if people want to get into GA they should probably not try to second guess the market and just get into GA as nobody is getting any younger.
Today is someday 😊
I wouldn't buy a plane now until rule becomes law. Why buy a plane that will be limited
@@mauriceevans6546 That's a fair point.
Oh yeah!!! faster and retractable landing gear, count me in
If I owned a 1320, LSA because of no medical and I could now qualify to fly something roomier that my wife and I could pack two suitcases, and get somewhere faster, then would I would sell my current LSA and upgrade.
And I think a lot of pilots are going to do that and therefore the demand for the 1320 lsa’s is going to go down and the supply will go up and they will be cheaper.
I think the current GA certified might possibly even go up in price.
That’s just my personal opinion.
Interesting, i had no idea these changes are in the pipe by the faa. I am seriously looking at buying a Risen 915, its like a mini Lancair.... it is 200-250 kts, 100% fits into this. 2 passenger LSA. 1,100 nm range above 200kt cruise. this new rule change might make me do it immediately.
There's a recent video from Oshkosh '23 that profiles that airplane and how it was specifically designed specifically to fit the new MOSAIC.
@@branchandfoundry560 it's a great little airplane. and those fowler flaps... 30 kt stall at full flaps... brs, equipped, autopilot, safety feature, push a button and it will fly to the nearest airport autonomously, etc etc etc. well well worth it's price. but these new rules... FL to IA, in 5 hrs solo at 15,000-17,000 ft easy and never close to vne.
DO IT I WANT ONE TOO!!!! Best use of a rotax there is out there.
Aren't the upgrades and maintenance more expensive on a certified plane as opposed to experimental?
Yes
Depends on if the owner actually built it or not, and has a Repairman's Certificate to officially attend to its maintenance.
Yes
@@EJWash57 Parts for Experimental are cheaper
A+ content as always. FYI - the microphone on that camera is kind of hard to understand
Looking to buy my first airplane to train in. My dad has his PPL and wants me to get a used Piper Archer II circa 1980 (his favorite plane). I'd rather go experimental, but it looks like the prices are similar and I like the 4-passenger option... I also think, realistically, my dad will fly it more than I do and I want him to enjoy the plane as much as me. What should I do?
Perhaps look into the Van's RV-10? It's actually renowned for being comfortable for even tall people (they speak of four 6'4 individuals having great room not including space for baggage/equipment.)
It's four huge seats and a fantastic aircraft! A lot recommend the RV-14, but the RV-10 has the four seats where the RV-14 and RV-14A are two seaters (but also fantastic aircraft!)
Thanks for the update Mojo. I heard there was major changes proposed, but not heard any details
Weight from 1320lbs to 3000lbs
Speed from 120knots to 250knots
Constant speed prop
Retractable gear
Night flight
Stall speed from 45knt to 54knt
Helicopters for light sport
Turbine engines
Im totally agree mike and hope to increase the limitation of LSA but in my opinion the light aircraft with two seat price will be down why becouse why i will buy two seat insted of 4 that i can use with same licance
I had your same smile, listening to the relaxation of the rules...
There is no weight limit, but a Clean CAS stall limit of 54. It could roughly work out to about 3000 pounds, but they do not mention a weight. These already certified GA aircraft will not change to a "certified" light sport aircraft, but a sport pilot will be able to fly them.
So much misinformation in this video. Thanks for pointing out these few items. And it’s not exactly misinformation just not 100% correct. Such as having now hard and fast wieght
A lot of incorrect information. MojoGrip I appreciate your enthusiasm but please take the time to read the NPRM and get the facts before broadcasting.
Sir, if the FAA does increase weight, speed etc, what LSA will have seating for four, retractable landing gear and most of all a turbo or turbine powered????
You think that the FAA has moved on this quickly. LOL they have been at this for awhile. I have been on the ASTM Committee for some time working on this problem. This isn't just an over night thing. We have been on this for years mojo. And the new rules are perfect and about time. Now you don't have to be a special weight yourself or size of the pilot. Just thought I would let you know.
Thanks for the clear presentation.
Excellent information and perspective Mike. Although aircraft prices have risen to a all time high, I don’t think they will increase. Well at least not double in price like they did over the last few years. I’ve even seen some prices drop on experimental aircraft.
As much as I love the FAA lightening up, I gotta say that is pretty wild. 250 knots, 3k lbs and retracts are a lot of serious planes.
Perhaps they realize that pilots are job security. If everyone quits flying, there will be less jobs. There’s still the airlines, but it wouldn’t require as many FAA workers.
@@GeneralSirDouglasMcAI I feel like it is something along those lines. I am sure a bunch of old rich guys bitched and moaned about how the LSA category is too limiting (and it is) but damn this is a welcomed over correction!
I don't see a weight limit not sure where that came from its written as 54knot clean stall speed
The biggest problem with price has been scalability. Most of the industry is still hand built. I'm not aware of any mass production techniques making it over from let's say the automotive world for stamping and forming. Why? The economics just aren't there. I think, the first to create the VW bettle of aviation will revolutionize the industry. However, you cannot do that until you have more pilots. Chicken and Egg.
Flying isnt for everyone. I always feel a lot safer in a beat ass Cessna 152 flying over i95 in Miami than I do driving on it.
@CrossWindsPat absolutely. It shouldn't remain accessible to just a few though. The technical aspects of fling make this a great driver for STEM and other related fields.
Seems newer LS aircraft will result in used 1320 aircraft going down in price, but then again new pilots entering market means those prices might go up. I suspect the new rules will not significantly affect rate of new LS pilots, therefore I'm hoping we'll see a price decrease in used 1320 planes.
Did they change the minimal stall speed as well?
Unless some vastly improved engines go into production, it seems unlikely that GA aircraft speeds will increase in any significant way.
I'm fixing to go to LSA school next summer. I'm gonna build a team mini-max. a little over 7 grand for the pane and a little over 2 grand for the engine.
I am an Ercoupe owner and flyer. I am pleased to know this as now I can probably move up to a larger and more capable plane. My son and I are both larger men. He weighs 220 and I weigh 230 together it makes it impossible for us both to use my Ercoupe or his Piper 140 with full fuel without being over gross. This would make a C180 or a Piper 235 a real possibility.
Hello Mike! Hope you are well, friend!
Mike. Great video and you are likely right about prices, unless supply increases. I own a 150 and would love a DA20 or 40. If they can become light sports the prices of these planes will go up because they are highly desirable. Let’s see where everything trends…. BTW you need to fly up and visit us in Dahlonega 9A0. I’ll be back in the fall to get focused on training. That’s the toughest part of flying these days…. At least for me. Keep up the great content!
Total BS on the Biden add.....
DA20 and 40 are already fully certified aircraft, qualifying as LS would have minimal impact on their costs or demand.
Stall speed is going to be the determining factor, if it stalls too fast, it won't qualify. Cirrus will never stall slow enough, so that will make aircraft safer because they will be able to have a higher gross, but if it can't land slowly, it won't qualify.
Mike, why did you not mention about the 54knots stall speed and freedom about engine categories and number of engines? I think this is a key component.
Pulled the trigger already 🎉
Mosaic or not, with these financing rates, it would be insane for prices to stay this high. In theory, people should have less disposable income because it now needs to go to debt servicing for more essential things. On top of that, aviation finance is also impacted making acquisition costs that much more expensive, so even if prices stay the same, the cost to pay the same price goes higher, which should drive prices down. Planes are sitting on Trade-a-Plane for months. People don’t want to pay those prices at those rates. And, one ridiculous trend is kitting out these old old planes with crazy avionics to try to squeeze new value out of them. I think many people are going to find out that most people flying GA just don’t care that much about having the latest and greatest in avionics for an old plane. People updating old planes should have stopped at GPS and decent autopilot, but no they’ve gotta have the dual G5s, the gfc500, touch screens, dedicated engine monitor, bunch of extra junk. They shove all this tech in these planes without thinking about who is even looking at that plane. If you’re wanting top-of-the-line glass cockpits and avionics, you’re not also looking at a 1962 M20C.
Forrrr real.. I just want a simple magenta line and altitude and heading AP. Motherfuckers are out here with Cessna 172's looking like an Airbus.
Lol
If they really want more people becoming pilots, they need to figure out a way to reduce the cost of certifying aircraft. That'll make all aircraft going forward less expensive which means more people can afford to get into flying. We need Ultralight costs but still able to fly cross country and over populated areas and with reasonable degrees of speed, and we need them to be made in the same volume of the J3 cub.
I've been looking while working on my ppl and it seems like the prices have dropped in some of the popular brands. Saying that you have to have the ability to move fast, meaning if you still work during the week you will miss out on some good deals when you are limited to weekends looking at aircraft.
More pilots might lower price for insurance - more customers to spread the risk. But more pilots will raise the price of planes, because demand will go up. There is no free lunch. Short of a major resurgence in GA - like we had in the 60s - GA will remain an affluent person's game.
Insurance has never gone down.
@@EJWash57 Yeah, I really screwed that one up. My bad.
I'm excited for the upcoming aircraft!
One thing I'm not clear on is if IAs still have to work on older aircraft that can be classified as LSAs. This could reduce the cost of updating the older fleet with things like avionics that right now are prohibitively expensive.
Legacy Certified aircraft will still follow the same rules they always have for maintenance.
What was the red tail dragged you showed towards the end of the video?
It's a Just Aircraft SuperSTOL (N926JB).
Thanks for breaking it down like that Mike. Great video..!
Planning on purchasing in Jan/Feb and frankly overwhelmed with so many options. Good to hear this though!
Don’t buy anything trust me. Shit is hitting the fan. The democrats are holding out until elections then crash to blame republicans. I’m not even an American. I live in the richest country in the world…denmark
I’m hoping with the increase of interest rate, asking prices of some of these planes will come down.
This is all great, but do you know how long the wait list is for a new Diamond DA-40NG? About two years. Supply, of lack thereof is what keeps prices high. Getting more supply will help as manufacturing ramps up for now less restrictive and as a result more useful aircraft, but it will be a while
I definitely don’t think the prices will go up a lot if at all. Maybe on some popular brands that will have a hire demand, however there will be a lot more LSA now to choose from, since the weight limits and speed increased. So why go for popular brands? People will start buying planes with lower demands and lower prices, therefore the demand on popular brands will eventually drop too. They will have no choice but compete with other companies, so they will start reducing prices too if they want to stay on the market. I think prices will be shifting based on demands. I guess we’ll see what the future brings. The idea with LSA changes is to generate more pilots not airplanes, but to give more options to choose from to the new pilots. Hopefully this new rules work to our benefit to help us all to find what we like for affordable prices. Great video.
The continued 1 passenger limit is kind of a bummer for cross country family travel.
Buy a used experimental. the builders sell them for the cost to build minus labor.
Where can I find an RV10 at cost excluding labor? I would love that.
You spoke about supply and demand. Ok these new rules will will increase the number of desirable LSA types available (increase supply). What about demand? Will the number of people looking to get into aircraft ownership increase? No doubt there will be current LSA owners who will be looking to upgrade to higher performance. But who will buy their old LSA? I suspect current owners be willing to sell their old LSA at a discount to enable their new purchase. So perhaps the current LSA fleet might see some downward movement on price in favor of the flash new options becoming available (these will certainly not get cheaper). But the positive is, this might make the current LSA fleet more accessible to new entry pilots ownership goals.
An excellent informative video. Thank you, Mike.
I wonder how much of this has to do with the coming fully electric platforms and the need for battery systems?
Do you need a medical to fly a light sport airplane when the rules change?
Will these rules also affect experimental helicopters?
Great vid. I wish our Aviation Authority would wake up. Greetings from South Africa.
I always thought the LSA planes were terrible. Expensive with little utility. Now, if this goes through, we'll be able to get up in the air so much more easily and not feel limited
LSA was always primarily aimed at older pilots who aged out of their medical and still wanted to fly, so they could have a way to still go up and fly around on a nice Sunday morning without having to maintain a PPL.
It was NOT about making flying more accessible. Some people thought it would, but really it was just for people who couldn’t get a medical to be able to do something.
While I agree with your perspective (I’m a 4500 hr commercial pilot) I would also agree with Dan Gryder that, this is a recipe for pilot deaths. I like the freedom but this is reckless. It took me time to learn how to stay ahead of fast prop planes like a turbo Centurian, much less than 250 it’s. I’m an Aerostar fur. Nobody should fly one unprepared and untrained. WTf. Train to fly. This is not enough.
Perhaps they should also increase the speed limit of FAR 103. The present speed limit of 55 knots is a bit restrictive and does nothing to save lives.
You really aer doing amazing things I have to say! your channel is so cool and your knowledge is outstanding to say the least!
I am so inspired by you and all you teach us here online"
I wonder is it possible to apply as a foreigner to your company and if there is a position come over and work by you guys?
thanks!
Kind regards, Christopher
Hi Mike, like yer content, wish I could say the same about your sound quality. You're a seasoned RUclipsr......built in mic? c'mon man.
I think all the experimental EAB manufactures will go into taking their kits and making them LSA instantly because now all those kits which were for planes that were over a MGTOW of 1320 and now can be legal as LSA. These planes are already to designed to be easy to assemble so with experienced labor they should be able to assemble them more economical. I think this will create a bunch of airplanes at the $200k new vs. the current $300k new price point.
I love the thought of being able to purchase a fully built Vans RV from the factory (besides the 12).
250 and complex is not appropriate for the skill required to get an LS pilot cert and basic med. There are some IFR holds limited to 175 but you can't have an instrument rating on an LS cert anyway.
The weight seems a touch high, but still ok.(The mass limits of any category are mainly about limiting damage to others in an off airport landing balanced by the training level of the pilot[s].)
Really even 2000 or 2500 would be reasonable. You can load 4 seats of a c172M with full tanks for a 4 hour flight and still only be at the 2300 max TOW. And LSA can only carry 2 people.
I would see 200kts as a more logical break point. Because the sport cat is mainly a limit of the pilot cert, (training and medical) and the lowest speed limit is 200kts (below B shelves). By limiting the aircraft to 200kts the pilot doesn't incur the extra workload and complexity of considering that additional regulation during flight.
Reducing extranious training and regulation-memorization allows more focus on the basics that really matter. From experience I've seen a ton of pilots that have difficulty just safely entering and flying a basic pattern. Especially a consideration when you combine this with the reduced training of a sport pilot cert, and basic-med basically allowing older folk with reduced reaction times and the increased speed cap.
Its sad because the low cost becomes high cost because of popularity. A lot of people got into light sports because it was more affordable and now that's not the case.
The reason airplanes cost so much is parts cost alone . A battery for my plane is $350 12 volts. Spark plugs is $38 each. there are 2 per cylinder. . Cost in aviation has gone through the roof. SO even to buy used engine they have double in price.
overall agreed that mostly good, except that insurance rates will rise in time due to increased crashes and fatalities from "pushing the envelope" by lowering the named weight and speed standards
You may be understimating the effect of higher interest rates on the prices going forward
Changing Rules for Flying cars???
A pilot told me- WILL BE ABLE TO FLY WITH THE DRIVER LICENCE.
Technically I mean unless you are financing in airplane or renting one you technically don't even need insurance anyway. Everybody that's interested or that does aviation knows this however we all know that it's a good thing to have so if anything does go wrong insurance can come out and recover the aircraft or if something else mechanically goes wrong and it's proving to be a detective part more than likely insurance can cover that whereas if you don't have it you're paying out-of-pocket and God forbid something goes wrong you or your family have to pay for a recovery operation. There is pros and cons to having insurance on an aircraft sometimes it's better to be safe than sorry then again insurance can also eat up a lot more money that you don't want to waste it all depends on the person and the preference. I know I'm a huge aviation fanatic and eventually I will be getting some stuff situated where I get my civilian pilots license and maybe one day in aircraft but sometimes it's just better to rent than own but if I ever do own one I'll put insurance on it for a while I think that new pilots should actually be required to have insurance for at least 5 years and then I also think that if you're over 75 and you're flying you should also be required to have insurance on the aircraft that you're flying if it's yours just due to the fact that you never know what's going to happen and if you died and the plane goes down and a residential or urban area that's going to be a mess and even at that in remote places nobody's going to do the recovery unless they have insurance or you find a nonprofit organization to do the recovery. But it's the pilots choice and their preference and whatever they feel more comfortable with I'm just saying that if I buy an airplane and even if I paid for it out-of-pocket completely and something does go wrong and it is a malfunction I wouldn't want my airplane replay so I can get back into the air insurance would definitely be a good thing to have.
LSA aircraft are expensive to insure because they are generally flown by less experienced pilots. Thus higher accident rate.
Absolutely not true. Stats don't prove that out and the FAA mentioned that in the proposal. We lose 20 to 30 pilots a month and the overall majority are private pilots
I disagree with most of your assumptions. These rule changes only impact the opportunities and aircraft available to Sport Certificated pilots. It will not make them "certificated" airplanes. Insurance costs are mostly based on Pilot ratings, Pilot hours (total and in the platform) and the biggie is replacement cost. Aircraft/expensive aircraft that are built in Europe are much more expensive to insure do to the cost and availability of replacement parts. What makes you think that costs of aircraft are going to decrease? Engines, avionics, materials are not decreasing they are only increasing...one of the big reasons aircraft manufacturers have such high prices is they are covering their liability because of expensive litigation...The only reason that current LSA's would decrease in price is that now Sport pilots will be able to fly (not necessarily afford) larger planes. Bottom line is that flying airplanes as a hobby is expensive and if you can't afford it then find another hobby.
Remember that Certificated pilots can legally fly LSA airplanes but wouldn't ordinarily because of the MGTOW, passenger seats and speed issues. Now an LSA can have a profile of a C182 but can use the manufacturing technologies of ASTM that Cessna cannot use either by regulation or because the original FAA blessed design specified old ways of doing things. For example, Cessnas don't use "blind" rivets! They are all hand pressed. They don't use a carbon fiber spar or blow molded gas tanks. They don't laser cut on CNC machines the rivet holes. There has never been an incentive for Cessna and Piper to recertify the 172/182/2xx to reduce cost. That is why EAB kits easily qualify as LSA and the lighter two seat ones were often offered as an LSA. One final point is that the cost of Lycoming/Cont. engines is through the roof. LSA airplanes can use other options. That is going to be a savings. Between the labor savings, cost of labor, engine savings, etc. I think there will be some downward pressure on costs of new planes.
A new C182 is $700k! I have to believe a knockoff 182 LSA to ASTM standards can be had for $400-450k. An RV10 performance wise is similar to a SR22 and a quickbuild/builder's assist cost is like $350k now. So add another $50k in labor and make it an LSA for $400k that is a bargain. This won't bring down the prices of C150s but it is going to change the dynamics of the market.
I have been a Private pilot for more than 40 years and I currently own and fly an EAB that is AW'd at LSA standards. Remember Sport Pilots are "certified" as well, the biggest difference is their medical is based on having a drivers license and not requiring a separate medical exam. I do believe there might be a hit on the current LSA market as Sport Pilots will now be able to fly the larger planes and not need the lighter A/C. Regarding engine cost, have you priced Rotax engines lately (Rotax is probably the most used engine in the LSA market and they are not cheap)? The 912-914 won't be enough HP for the heavier planes and the 915/916 are running 38-50K plus. Regarding the cost of Cessna's and Piper's you will find that a huge portion of the cost is 'liability" related. These cost increases have translated into the used airplane market as replacement parts cost has increased for them as well (so blame the Lawyers). I am not making this up it is a fact that has been presented on many media sources. Regarding insurance, case in point, I live in Florida and have no claims for storm damage on my home (my insurance goes up every year), because there are fewer providers in the market, which means they can charge higher costs. The same is true in the aircraft insurance market, less providers equal higher cost. I know of several pilots who own their plane and only carry liability as they can't afford hull insurance (which is the most expensive part of an insurance quote). So my point is: What about these proposed changes is going to improve the market? I say little to none. It will just put more (probably less experienced) pilots into larger/faster planes.
I wish something with helicopters was included I'm thinking about rv 10 if that's the 4 seater
I helped build an RV10 a few years ago. It is 4 place. Wonderful airplane. If you do go that route, look up Dwight & Sean at Meadow Lake, CO (KFLY) and pick their brains. They're one of the greatest resources for building RVs.
@@branchandfoundry560 I appreciate that
With more aircraft slowly coming on line it means prices will very slowly come down. However, you are right that it will not be dramatic or soon. Still long term this is a good thing.
250kts is insane
The idea of dropping the insurance could be a viable option if the person has the ability to replace it if something went wrong and they survived. With the ability of placing assets inside of trusts, you may have come up with a way of being able to opt out of insurance. Anything I have said are just ideas. I know it won’t work for everyone but if this discussion is not had then no meaningful reform will take place within the insurance industry as a whole. I certainly will be looking forward to reading more on this topic.
Maybe liability only insurance, if you have the ability to replace the airframe.
Oh nice!
Pipistrel/Textron still claim they will have Part 23 cert for the Panthera in 2025, but only after EASA approval. So maybe 2027. This is for the gas version; the hybrid is still vaporware.
Personally I think the FAA should just let PPL use drivers license for medical. There is very little difference between PPL and Sport with these rules so just merge them and drop BasicMed/Medical from PPL.
LSA pilot here and this new is exciting because it opens up the Cessna's and Piper's that can be flown with and endorsement. Thanks for sharing Mike
Thanks for the great info!
Percents change with weight is 127%, percent change with speed is 108%. I have an IQ similar to Chris langan
I think the point Mike is missing is airplanes. Aren't more expensive? The dollars just worth less? However, it's great to see the FAA woking on this.
Suggestion: always us a lapel mic.
Mentioning the maximum speed and weight limit increases without mentioning the stall speed limit seems rather pointless. But I guess if you want to get people fired up and excited that RV-10s and 182s might become Lisa's, even when we know they won't be then I guess job well done!
Thanks, Mike. Really interesting!
When hard times shows it's head, GA aircraft will drop in value. When the choice is the airplane or the house, the house wins.
Da40, rv10, doesn't meet the new mosaic rules because of the stall speed. We will see new four place aircraft like the new texas aircraft company's four place aircraft with 200 hp continental or the four seat goforair at 300,000 that showed at oshkosh.
1. Weight limit from 1320lbs to 3000lbs
2. Speed from 120knots to 250knots
3. Constant speed prop
4. Retractable gear
5. Four place aircraft
6. Night flying with basic med
7. Light sport helicopters
8. Turbine and multi engine.
9 stall spped from 45 knots to 54knt
Turbine?!?!? Hot damn! Risen 915 with a turbine anyone?
@CrossWindsPat they are testing the turbine in Europe in the bristell, jmb and the tl stream
Is that all da40 models?
@@michaelshostack2547 I based that on stall speed. I am not sure of different models
Some really good valid points mentioned there, especially with regards to insurance and aircraft prices. I'm sure insurance companies will find any reason to capitalise on the new category :P
If prices keep going up and up I imagine it'll get to the point where sales will slow because how much can people keep forking out?
If and when that happens the second hand market will be more attractive, and prices of new aircraft will decrease or stagnate, due to slowing sales. Then the vicious cycle will start in the second hand market, it will become in demand more and more, increasing prices to the point where the new aircraft market will begin to look attractive again. And on it goes :P
I wish CASA (Civil Aviation Safety Authority) in Australia was as forward thinking as the FAA. CASA is a draconian beauracratic protect-the-jobs-for-the-boys institution. All they seem to do is drag their feet and take forever and a day to make worthwhile changes.
When I first read about MOSAIC in an Australian flying magazine, I was pretty excited too, thinking CASA might look at it all and decide to follow suit. But, and it's a big BUT, I can see that that will not happen. They've recently introduced a new category for LSA up to 960KGs, just over 2100lbs.
So after all this beauracatic feet shuffling trying to get this weight increase sorted I can't imagine they'd be bothered to increase it any further, which really sucks. And unlike the FAA who have done research over the last twenty years to show that flying on an FAA medical or a drivers licence has not revealed any significant differences in accident rates, so flying a bigger aircraft on a drivers licence level of fitness isn't a gamble. Whereas CASA have done little to bugger all research and just arbitrarily chose to increase to 960kgs. The "Safety" in CASA in this case should read as "Paranoia without bothering about facts" :P
In Australia we have slightly different categories to the US, we have recreational pilot and GA pilot ratings. RA pilots fly LSA or Amateur-built aircraft only. We don't have an experimental category per se, Amateur-built aircraft includes experimental. And we don't have a Sport Pilot category either.
Within the GA pilot ratings the first achievement gained by student pilots is RPL, Recreational Pilot Licence, it used to be called the GFPT (General Flight Progress Test). They can stop there if they wish and can continue with other endorsements, such as Navigation, flying in CTA, etc., but it's usually the first step to a PPL.
The RPL allows a pilot to fly GA aircraft up to 1500kgs (Interestingly, in my log book after completeing the GFPT, it states I can fly aircraft under 5700kgs) and can only carry one passenger, but if they have a Class I or Class II medical certificate they can carry more than one passenger.
As for an RA pilot, this certification is RPC (Recreational Pilot Certificate). They're restricted to only being able to carry one passenger, cannot fly at night and can only fly an aircraft up to 600kgs (1320lbs), until the new category of the MTOW of 960kgs comes in to play, whenever that will be. When the new rule is in place an RA pilot will be able to fly up to a C152.
So the new MTOW of 960kgs in Australia will be useful for aircraft manufacturers to make aircraft which can carry more weight, which will be great for RA pilots, but it's still not a whole lot to get excited about, unlike MOSAIC.
Hopefully, this will eventually lower the values of old planes. It's crazy how much old planes cost.
Interesting and exciting times ahead I hope.
If FAA objective to kept us safer, then why are they not doing what Europe is doing for Ultra lights? The reason why ultra lights are dangerous is from the low weights restrictions. By increase the weights for ultra light the plane can be build saver just like Europe's FAA rules are for ultra lights. Example is Europe's ultra light plane called the Shark and their many other version of that plane. The USA FAA should follow the same rules Europe does for Ultra lights to make the saver and the will create more business in the US too.