What defines Ultralight V. LSA

[puddles_7]

Hi Everyone,

 

I am trying to get my head around what is an Ultralight and what is an LSA. The in-flight adjustable prop query on the RAA website specifies LSA so it appears that in-flight adjustable props on Ultralights are OK. This lead me to study the RAA Technical Manual (Sec 7.4 and 7.5). Both sections redirect to CAO 95.55 for some clarification. Collectively para 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5, 1.6, 1.8, and 1.9. When I checked the latest CAO 95.55 on the CASA website in section 1 there is only 1.1, 1.2, &1.3.

 

Can anyone direct me to the right info or explain it in plain English for me?

 

I don't own an aircraft so it is legally a non-issue other than the fact that I feel pretty stupid for not being able to decipher the gibberish. I asked my CFI but he went a bit vague once I started asking too many questions.

 

I am curious about 19, 24 and experimental regos.

 

Cheers

 

Puddles

 

 

[winsor68]

Hi Everyone,I am curious about 19, 24 and experimental regos.

Cheers

 

Puddles

There seems to be 2 schools of thought within Ra-Aus on this subject in my experience... those that think they know... and those that don't know...

 

I am sure there are those that actually do know... but they seem to be few and far between and I am yet to meet one.

 

There seems to be so much guess work involved on deciphering any of the regs Ra-Aus flies under... The real catch is that I reckon CASA just recently cottoned on to this fact recently too.

 

 

[Guest Crezzi]

Both sections redirect to CAO 95.55 for some clarification. Collectively para 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5, 1.6, 1.8, and 1.9. When I checked the latest CAO 95.55 on the CASA website in section 1 there is only 1.1, 1.2, &1.3.

The current version of CAO 95.55 was released in 2011 - the Technical Manual hasn't been updated since 2007 so it references the previous revision of the CAO

 

Cheers

 

John

 

 

[Guest ozzie]

Oooo i so tempted to say a few words on this.

 

 

[Mriya]

LSA stands for "Light Sport Aircraft". This a a category of aircraft where the initial design certification and ongoing airworthiness support is primarily the responsibility of the aircraft factory/designer. In effect CASA (or the appropriate National Airworthiness Authority) outsource any initial or ongoing airworthiness responsibility relating to a LSA category aircraft. Due to the design requirements LSA aircraft air also commonly registered in the ultralight category as they qualify for registration by RAAus (Some operators, including my employer, have opted for VH registered LSA's, which CASA also allow to be registered by them and then requiring a CASA PPL to fly them).

 

So in short a LSA aircraft is defined by the certification process (and rules). In fact I believe with some aircraft it has been possible to specify whether you wanted it delivered with a factory LSA CofA, or alternatively with a conventional CofA issued by the NAA. The implications of this choice are how you get modification/repair approvals (ie, Factory Approval vs CASA CAR35 Engineer)

 

Hope this helps.

 

 

[rgmwa]

LSA's also come in two flavours - SLSA (factory built LSA aircraft) and ELSA (kit-built homebuilt experimental aircraft that is an exact copy of the SLSA certified original built by the kit manufacturer).

 

rgmwa

 

 

[David Isaac]

Well, so far that appears to vaguely define what LSA is. However, the question was what is the difference between an Ultralight and an LSA?

 

Can we have a comparison in a simple Global point for point form on the important matters.

 

For example, doesn't an LSA require a Special Certificate of Airworthiness, which is not required for a 19 registered Ultralight? I am not clear on this.

 

Also I believe no mods can be done to an LSA except by the manufacturer, but mods can be done to a 19 registered Ultralight? Is that correct?

 

Another question, can an LSA be converted back to a 19 Ultralight?

 

Also is it true that an LSA can only have ASTM certified equipment but an Ultralight is not restricted to ASTM? An example in this case would be an inflight adjustable prop where none are ASTM certified so no LSA can have one but a 19 Ultralight can.

 

I believe these are some of the most common initially confusing issues.

 

 

[puddles_7]

Winsor68 --Your summation is pretty close I think, despite all my asking around the flyers I know there are varied answers but no-one can point me to the actual info.

 

Crezzi -- I guessed that CASA had updated their document and RaAus hasn't, still doesn't help because I can't find the older CASA stuff to see what those clauses were. I suppose I will have to wait for RaAus to catch up.

 

The LSA postings are all good "grist for the mill" but I still don't know how the conditions are different to Ultralight.

 

David Isaac - there are always more questions the deeper you dig. Some of those that you posted are similar to what is crashing around in my head.

 

As I stated before I have no plane but am always looking (and dreaming) so I need to be aware that any hard earned cash goes the right way. There are quite a few aircraft advertised with retractable undercarriage and in-flight adjustable props, are these planes no longer a saleable item? One of the specific questions I have is in relation to 24 registered Jabirus. Obviously being '24' it would be factory built, so we throw away the engine and replace it with a rotax 912. Does this mean the rego changes to 19? Does this mean MTOW goes from 600kg to 544kg? Does it stay as a 24 rego but carries and "experimental" sticker?

 

If there ia a Guru out there who is conversant with these regs I would love to hear from you. If you don't want to publish the info in case you start WW3 I am happy for you to PM me

 

Cheers

 

Puddles

 

 

[Guest Andys@coffs]

ASTM is the American standard, there are other non American standards used around the world, however there seesm to be an issue around CASA acceptability of the pedigree of the CoA, it needs to come from a manufacturer in country or the NAA of that Country who is a signatory to the ICAO convention.

 

The other main difference between an ultralight (19 registered) and an LSA or NAA certified aircraft (24 registered) is that you can train in the latter but not the former (with some exceptions).

 

19 Registered means the owner determine the airworthiness each time they fly, they also get to choose basically whatever they want in terms of configuration and fitout, 24 is constrained to the aircraft as per the CoA and any changes that the manufacturer is prepared to allow (in compliance with the appropriate standards) and support, hence the issues around the IFA props.

 

It would be my suggestion that if looking for an expert then to me I would go to those that have the power of veto and get the info from them, The sports aviation dept within CASA run by Lee Ungermann would be a great source of definitive info I would have thought.

 

Im in no way an expert and may well be perpetuating myth here, so given that you paid exactly $0 for the info you now know what its worth !

 

Andy

 

 

[David Isaac]

I know there are Jabs out there that are 24 regoed and have had Rotax 912s fitted under an STC (Supplemental Type Certificate) by a CAR 35 Engineer.

 

I guess that is legal because they are still 24 regoed and still used for training. The STC did cost a bomb.

 

 

[Guest Andys@coffs]

. There are quite a few aircraft advertised with retractable undercarriage and in-flight adjustable props, are these planes no longer a saleable item? One of the specific questions I have is in relation to 24 registered Jabirus. Obviously being '24' it would be factory built, so we throw away the engine and replace it with a rotax 912. Does this mean the rego changes to 19? Does this mean MTOW goes from 600kg to 544kg? Does it stay as a 24 rego but carries and "experimental" sticker?If there ia a Guru out there who is conversant with these regs I would love to hear from you. If you don't want to publish the info in case you start WW3 I am happy for you to PM me

 

Cheers

 

Puddles

In relation to the specific questions above, in-flight adjustable props, are things that can be removed and replaced the aircraft in toto is not unsalable as a result, however caution and some appropriate warranty terms and conditions in the sale agreement (one written on paper not verbal!) would be called for I believe. 24 Registered Jabiru's have dual pedigrees I believe, some are 24 by virtue Factory built and CASA issued CoA, others are LSA which are very different but both result in 24 registration. Pulling out a J engine and replacing with a R, if the aircraft is 24 reg will require a fair bit of time on the phones and geting approvals in writing before you start I would suggest. Is it the case that you can allways start 24 and go to 19, I dont believe that is the case at all, but again get it in writing from those who manage the process.......for what that is worth!

 

My 230 is 19 registered and was theerfore limited to 544Kg's but in discussing this with Dean Tomkins recently he advised that as the 230 is now LSA and my aircraft was built from a Kit and is substantively as per the J design Im allowed to go 600kgs...... I guess that will be tested in the next month or so when I submit my rego for renewal and have the dreaded MTOW sticker photograph submitted......The irony is that if my 230 was VH registered then the MTOW would be 700Kg's....

 

Andy

 

 

[rgmwa]

Also I believe no mods can be done to an LSA except by the manufacturer, but mods can be done to a 19 registered Ultralight? Is that correct?

SLSA (24 reg) mods have to be done (or approved) by the manufacturer, while ELSA (19 reg) mods can be done by the builder. But in either case the mods are not allowed to take the aircraft out of the LSA parameters (eg 600kg MAUW, etc).

 

Also is it true that an LSA can only have ASTM certified equipment but an Ultralight is not restricted to ASTM? An example in this case would be an inflight adjustable prop where none are ASTM certified so no LSA can have one but a 19 Ultralight can.

LSA is a performance category, not a certification system and this causes a lot of confusion. The certification is either SLSA or ELSA. However, an SLSA will come with a certified engine eg 912S (and I assume certified instruments), whereas the engine you put in your ELSA will normally be an uncertified 912ULS and most instruments don't need to be certified (an exception would be a transponder). This extract from AC21-41(0) defines LSA aircraft:

WHAT IS A LIGHT SPORT AIRCRAFT?

 

5.1 A light sport aircraft (LSA) is a small, simple to operate, low performance aircraft. With regard to the requirements of the CASRs, a light-sport aircraft is an aircraft, other than a helicopter that complies with the following criteria:

 

(1) A maximum takeoff weight of not more than 600 kilograms or 650 kilograms for an aircraft intended for operation on water or 560 kilograms for a lighter-than-air aircraft.

 

(2) A maximum stalling speed in the landing configuration (VS0) of not more than 45 knots CAS at the aircraft’s maximum certificated takeoff weight and most critical center of gravity.

 

(3) A maximum seating capacity of no more than two persons, including the pilot.

 

(4) If powered, a single, non-turbine engine fitted with a propeller.

 

(5) A non-pressurised cabin:

 

(i) For an aircraft operating over land, a fixed landing gear;

 

(ii) For an aircraft intended for operation on water, a fixed or repositionable

 

landing gear; and

 

(iii) For a glider a fixed or retractable landing gear.

 

(6) If the aircraft is a glider a maximum never exceed speed Vne of 135 knots CAS.

 

5.2 The types of aircraft that may satisfy these criteria are:

 

(1) Fixed wing aircraft;

 

(2) Powered parachutes;

 

(3) Weight shift aircraft;

 

(4) Gliders;

 

(5) Balloons;

 

(6) Airships; and

 

(7) Gyroplanes.

 

(In the US, the LSA rules are more restrictive and include fixed pitch prop, a lower stall speed and a 120kt max sea level speed limit). If you look at the list of aircraft that can satisfy LSA requirements, it includes those that most people would typically describe as `Ultralights'. eg weight-shift aircraft. No wonder it's confusing.

 

rgmwa

 

 

[Guest Crezzi]

WHAT IS A LIGHT SPORT AIRCRAFT?

5.1 A light sport aircraft (LSA) is a small, simple to operate, low performance aircraft. With regard to the requirements of the CASRs, a light-sport aircraft is an aircraft, other than a helicopter that complies with the following criteria:

 

(1) A maximum takeoff weight of not more than 600 kilograms or 650 kilograms for an aircraft intended for operation on water or 560 kilograms for a lighter-than-air aircraft.

 

(2) A maximum stalling speed in the landing configuration (VS0) of not more than 45 knots CAS at the aircraft’s maximum certificated takeoff weight and most critical center of gravity.

 

(3) A maximum seating capacity of no more than two persons, including the pilot.

 

(4) If powered, a single, non-turbine engine fitted with a propeller.

 

(5) A non-pressurised cabin:

 

(i) For an aircraft operating over land, a fixed landing gear;

 

(ii) For an aircraft intended for operation on water, a fixed or repositionable

 

landing gear; and

 

(iii) For a glider a fixed or retractable landing gear.

 

(6) If the aircraft is a glider a maximum never exceed speed Vne of 135 knots CAS.

The Australian ultralight regs don't prohibit variable pitch props or have a max speed limit so, when we adopted the LSA standard, it was varied to allow these. However there is no ASTM standard for VP props hence the current issues - they aren't prohibited but they can't be approved to standard which doesn't exist.

 

However, an SLSA will come with a certified engine eg 912S (and I assume certified instruments), whereas the engine you put in your ELSA will normally be an uncertified 912ULS and most instruments don't need to be certified (an exception would be a transponder).

IIRC the 912A is the certified version but there is no requirement for SLSA to use this (E.g. there are SLSA which use the Rotax 582.)

 

Cheers

 

John

 

 

[kgwilson]

WHAT IS A LIGHT SPORT AIRCRAFT?

5.1 A light sport aircraft (LSA) is a small, simple to operate, low performance aircraft. With regard to the requirements of the CASRs, a light-sport aircraft is an aircraft, other than a helicopter that complies with the following criteria:

 

(1) A maximum takeoff weight of not more than 600 kilograms or 650 kilograms for an aircraft intended for operation on water or 560 kilograms for a lighter-than-air aircraft.

 

(2) A maximum stalling speed in the landing configuration (VS0) of not more than 45 knots CAS at the aircraft’s maximum certificated takeoff weight and most critical center of gravity.

 

(3) A maximum seating capacity of no more than two persons, including the pilot.

 

(4) If powered, a single, non-turbine engine fitted with a propeller.

 

(5) A non-pressurised cabin:

 

(i) For an aircraft operating over land, a fixed landing gear;

 

(ii) For an aircraft intended for operation on water, a fixed or repositionable

 

landing gear; and

 

(iii) For a glider a fixed or retractable landing gear.

 

(6) If the aircraft is a glider a maximum never exceed speed Vne of 135 knots CAS.

 

5.2 The types of aircraft that may satisfy these criteria are:

 

(1) Fixed wing aircraft;

 

(2) Powered parachutes;

 

(3) Weight shift aircraft;

 

(4) Gliders;

 

(5) Balloons;

 

(6) Airships; and

 

(7) Gyroplanes.

So just about any RAAus aircraft can be classified as an LSA. We may as well start calling them LSAs. I have never liked the terms "Microlight" or "Ultralight" so I'll call my aircraft when it is finished an LSA. I don't really care what anyone says, it's just a name. If the RAAus debacle isn't resolved by then it may even be VH registered experimental but I'll still call it an LSA.

 

 

[Guest Crezzi]

We may as well start calling them LSAs.

That is pretty much what some manufacturers seem to be have been doing !

 

 

[rgmwa]

IIRC the 912A is the certified version but there is no requirement for SLSA to use this (E.g. there are SLSA which use the Rotax 582.)

Cheers

 

John

The 912S is the certified version of the 912ULS, but you are correct. Not all SLSA's will necessarily have this version.

rgmwa

 

 

[winsor68]

There seems to be 2 schools of thought within Ra-Aus on this subject in my experience... those that think they know... and those that don't know...I am sure there are those that actually do know... but they seem to be few and far between and I am yet to meet one.

There seems to be so much guess work involved on deciphering any of the regs Ra-Aus flies under... The real catch is that I reckon CASA just recently cottoned on to this fact recently too.

Told Ya.

 

 

[David Isaac]

So just about any RAAus aircraft can be classified as an LSA. We may as well start calling them LSAs. I have never liked the terms "Microlight" or "Ultralight" so I'll call my aircraft when it is finished an LSA. I don't really care what anyone says, it's just a name. If the RAAus debacle isn't resolved by then it may even be VH registered experimental but I'll still call it an LSA.

Wouldn't do that Kev, The description you quote is just a performance requirement overview. In order to be LSA the manufacturer has to be certified, it must be factory built 100% and it must have a Special Certificate of Airworthiness. Sorry the Morgans are NOT LSA.

 

 

[rgmwa]

Wouldn't do that Kev, The description you quote is just a performance requirement overview. In order to be LSA the manufacturer has to be certified, it must be factory built 100% and it must have a Special Certificate of Airworthiness. Sorry the Morgans are NOT LSA.

The Special Certificate of Airworthiness for LSA (SLSA) applies only to production LSA aircraft (100% factory built). A kit built LSA will get an Experimental Certificate for LSA (ELSA). In order to sell ELSA kits, a manufacturer has to produce at least one SLSA production aircraft. The kit-built ELSA aircraft has to be a faithful copy of the original SLSA version, and the usual 51% amateur built rule does not apply. However, if an aircraft meets the light sport requirements, it can be regarded as an LSA category aircraft.

rgmwa

 

 

[turboplanner]

So, this thread seems to be the opening of a can of worms.

 

A can so costly that some people could lose their houses, and others stay frustrated for months in pursuit of what should be a relaxed hobby.

 

If you don't know what it is, and if it is hurting RAA so severely, why aren't the LSAs being kicked out immediately?

 

 

[Doug Evans]

As far as I am concerned an ultralight aircraft is any aircraft that is below the 80 knot cruise

 

Anything above in my eyes is a light sports aircraft

 

That how I define the difference any way ,!!

 

 

[dazza 38]

So, this thread seems to be the opening of a can of worms.A can so costly that some people could lose their houses, and others stay frustrated for months in pursuit of what should be a relaxed hobby.

 

If you don't know what it is, and if it is hurting RAA so severely, why aren't the LSAs being kicked out immediately?

Maybe Tubs, but the question was asked in good faith.I sure Puddles didnt know it would turn into a can of worms. I do agree with your comments though.

 

 

[rgmwa]

As far as I am concerned an ultralight aircraft is any aircraft that is below the 80 knot cruiseAnything above in my eyes is a light sports aircraft

That how I define the difference any way ,!!

That's as good a definition as any.

 

rgmwa

 

 

[kgwilson]

Wouldn't do that Kev, The description you quote is just a performance requirement overview. In order to be LSA the manufacturer has to be certified, it must be factory built 100% and it must have a Special Certificate of Airworthiness. Sorry the Morgans are NOT LSA.

What it is registered as and what I like to call it are two different things. Some people give their aircraft names, like boats but I don't. It doesn't fit the category rules but it is light, and it is a sports aircraft just like an MX5 is a sports car.

 

 

[turboplanner]

Guys, it may have escaped you, but nothing about the four CASA audit failures was resolved at the recent General Meeting, just a mexican stand off with one group having collected more votes than another.

 

What is still hanging over our heads is the cost of the four audit results to date, and no guarantee, given the gentle and slow effort to meet compliance, that a fifth audit might not put a rocket into the scene which will affect pilots, owners and importers even more severely.

 

Under those circumstances making up your own version of what an LSA is, could do more harm than good.

 

What counts is what CASA thinks it is, and what the rules are, and it's obvious from this thread that CASA needs to tighten the reins even more, so let's not encourage that by posting more ambiguity.