But...the LSA weight is based on nothing scientific. It is simply a number some guy at the FAA dreamed up. In Europe the LSA-like rules allow for a bit more weight and a host of more complex options to include retractable gear, CS props, and even helicopters. The ability to fly a little faster or something more stable on windy days is a nice option. I am looking forward to the pending rules change if only, as someone else wrote, it makes the FAA more of an advocate organization rather than an enforcement group.
Yep- for
@RedFive, the current Light Sport Aircraft rules were meant in part to cover the so-called "heavy ultralights," that is many two seat ultralights that were too heavy (and one too many seats) for Part 103 rules but weren't necessarily registered with an N-number. A lot of people had sort of looked the other way, because of the safety benefit of a two seat trainer, and the fact that those airplanes weren't really capable of going anywhere so they weren't really a problem. (Think of it more like provide a path to legal citizenship, ha ha.)
The other end of the LSA spectrum is a basic two-seat, 100~ish knot, day VFR runabout. The LSA rule was intended to help revitalize general aviation by offering something that was much lower cost but still capable. The problem is
the current weight limit limits capability a little too much.
A lot of the heartache with the current LSA rules, if you want to point to a good example, is that the Cessna 150/152 is ineligible by being about
300 pounds too heavy. That says a lot about the weight limit. Of course every airplane is a compromise of many conflicting goals, and when you're limited to a
1320lb max gross weight then you have to choose between payload or structure- pick one or the other. That's not to say that the modern crop of LSAs are flimsy, but they're not built for decades of abuse like an old 152 and they handle and fly like very light airplanes.. Now, a substantial part of the general aviation demographic is, to put it bluntly, "fat old guys," and that's their own fault for eating into their payload (a pun!). But putting aside their dietary and exercise habits, these are some pretty valid reasons for revising the LSA max gross weight limit.
Food for thought and it's just one side of the argument. The opposite side of the argument is... well, there isn't much to the other side. The original LSA rule was a step in the right direction and it was also a very good step and a big step, but if it's a bit bigger step then it will be great.