Experimental LSA

[skeptic36]

So, I am currently in the process of registering a (near) new trike. It has a few hours put on it in the USA and is factory built.

 

The plan was to register it Experimental LSA. Importer who is handling the registration says he has done this before, and if we do it this way, I can do the maintenance.

 

Now Importer says HGFA are saying no we cannot have ELSA it must be LSA.

 

The only info I can find is on the RAAus website and the following seems to say I can go ELSA anytime in the future so why not initial Registration.

 

Copied from RAAus website:

 

• Be aware that every piece of your aircraft has to conform to the design standards it was built to and

 

which is acceptable for the LSA category, even the seat covers!

 

• It is easy to fall out of the SLSA (special LSA) and into the ELSA (Experimental) but very hard and time

 

consuming to get back to SLSA.

 

 

If the rules are put up by CASA wouldn't they be the same for HGFA as for RAAus as far as reg goes?

 

Importer has also said no worries I will just need to do the Weight shift microlight maintenance course run by Kevin MacNally and I will be able to do my own maintenance anyway.

 

What are the actual qualifications required to maintain an LSA?

 

Any info appreciated

 

Regards Bill

 

 

[fly_tornado]

why can't you have ELSA?

 

 

[skeptic36]

why can't you have ELSA?

That's what I'm wondering. I have asked the HGFA, but haven't received an answer yet.

 

 

[facthunter]

E is a contradiction of the concept of LSA.. Do you just keep the weight increase and throw away the conditions.? LSA is a disaster anyhow. Nev

 

 

[skeptic36]

E is a contradiction of the concept of LSA.. Do you just keep the weight increase and throw away the conditions.? LSA is a disaster anyhow. Nev

Hi Nev,

Not really, as I see it, it has the restrictions regarding flight over built up areas and training.

 

Regards Bill.

 

P.S not really interested in debating whether it is right or wrong ATM, just want to find out what I can do, so I can get it done as close to what I want legaly

 

 

[facthunter]

I'm more concerned about the maker staying around etc and servicing. .600 kgs is another artificial limit, sort of picked out of the air. Nev

 

 

[Downunder]

L1 for private ops. L2 for hire/reward and training as I understand it.

 

I also did the rotax training not long ago with Kev. Very informative and inexpensive for 2 full days.

 

I also believe there is an agreement (formal or otherwise) where both HGFA and RAA must run in a fairly parallel manner with regard to trike operations.

 

 

[bexrbetter]

.600 kgs is another artificial limit, sort of picked out of the air. Nev

Apparently it was chosen based on a European standard and extended from there(?), problem is that many Europeans are light in weight but when you fit 2 burly Oz or Yanks in one, suddenly weight becomes critical either leaving out some fuel or baggage.

 

They need to bump it to around 650 across the board I think (the seaplane LSA runs at that), 700 would be ideal as proven by a number of successful models flying. It's almost like the powers to be look at everything and set out to purposely make it difficult ignoring all the facts - imagine that from a Government Department ....

 

 

[Old Koreelah]

Apparently it was chosen based on a European standard and extended from there(?), problem is that many Europeans are light in weight but when you fit 2 burly Oz or Yanks in one, suddenly weight becomes critical either leaving out some fuel or baggage.They need to bump it to around 650 across the board I think (the seaplane LSA runs at that), 700 would be ideal as proven by a number of successful models flying. It's almost like the powers to be look at everything and set out to purposely make it difficult ignoring all the facts - imagine that from a Government Department ....

...why don't we just scrap the weight limit and let the junk food industry run Australia as well as USA?

 

 

[bexrbetter]

...why don't we just scrap the weight limit and let the junk food industry run Australia as well as USA?

Not sure what that means exactly but doesn't change the fact that Oz and Americans were generally larger and heavier people than European and Asian people before the Maccas factor ever came into it. And now the Maccas factor is there it needs to be catered for as it's a fact of life. I'm 6'1" and 80kgs and considered of slim build, many of my Mates tower over me in height and weight and they aren't Maccas type fat.

 

LSA will work very well in China btw, where men range generally between 50 to 70kgs.

 

 

[rgmwa]

My understanding of the LSA, E-LSA and S-LSA rules is this. To be classified as an LSA (nothing to do with how it is registered), the aircraft has to meet the following criteria: http://www.casa.gov.au/scripts/nc.dll?WCMS:OLDASSET::svPath=/rules/1998casr/021/,svFileName=021c42.pdf (The US rules are similar but a bit stricter). An LSA that is registered as an E-LSA is required to be an exact copy of the factory S-LSA version produced by the manufacturer. E-LSA's are normally built from kits supplied by the manufacturer, and you can't alter anything on the aircraft unless the manufacturer approves in writing whatever it is you want to do. Perversely, in the US they also have an odd rule that once your E-LSA homebuilt has received it's `pink slip' (CoA), you can make any alterations you like without asking the manufacturer's permission, but I don't think CASA allows you this freedom for an E-LSA built here. Either way, if it is registered as S-LSA or E-LSA, and you do something to take it outside the LSA performance parameters, you have just invalidated your certificate and turned the aircraft into un-flyable lawn ornament.

 

If you want to make changes to your LSA kit without asking the manufacturer's permission it is better to register it as a normal experimental aircraft. That's what I have done with mine - it's an Amateur-Built Experimental (AB(E)) aircraft that is also a Light Sport Aircraft because it meets the LSA performance parameters. However, because it isn't registered as an E-LSA, there's nothing to stop me legally (but probably unwisely) modifying it in ways that take it outside the LSA criteria. When it comes to maintenance, CASA recently added E-LSA to the Instrument that previously allowed only builders of AAB and AB(E) aircraft to maintain and legally sign off the annuals on their aircraft.

 

However, all the above applies to kit-built aircraft. If your aircraft was originally built by the factory, my understanding is that it should be an S-LSA (24 rego). and I'm not sure if you can simply choose to register it as an E-LSA (19 rego) when it lands on our shores. I think you can under some circumstances such as if the original manufacturer has gone bust and left you with an orphan aircraft, but otherwise I'm not sure what the rules are. For RAAus, my understanding is that for 24 reg aircraft, an L2 needs to sign off the annuals, but for 19 reg, an L1 can. However, I stand to be corrected there.

 

rgmwa

 

PS. I'll second Kev McNally's excellent Rotax course. He was here a few weeks ago and the course was attended by HGFA, RA-Aus and SAAA members It was a good opportunity to meet and compare notes on the different organisations.

 

 

[Happyflyer]

For RAAus, my understanding is that for 24 reg aircraft, an L2 needs to sign off the annuals, but for 19 reg, an L1 can. However, I stand to be corrected there.rgmwa

L1 can work on and sign off his own aircraft regardless of registration prefix provided it is used privately and not for training.

 

 

[Captaincoop]

So as an owner of LSA can I do my own 100 hourly, although I have no formal quals?

 

 

[jetjr]

Yes so long as it isnt used for training, must be done 100% to manufacturers requirements and docs.

 

This loop does make a mockery of CTA and transit over built up area restrictions on 19 experimentals though.

 

Maybe you dont have the choice of E- LSA upfront, only LSA or Experimental.

 

its designed as a place for "fallen" LSA afterall. ie manufacturer gone or modifications done etc

 

 

[cscotthendry]

So as an owner of LSA can I do my own 100 hourly, although I have no formal quals?

You have to have passed RA-Aus L1 maintainer's course. And this only applies if you don't use the aircraft for commercial purposes like hire or training.

 

 

[DrZoos]

Please take note L1 cannot do everything...there is a list of what can be done by L1 and L2

 

L1 can do the basic maintenance tasks, L2 can do most things including approved modifications or changes.

 

See : http://www.recreationalflying.com/tutorials/students/maintenance.html

 

 

[Happyflyer]

Please take note L1 cannot do everything...there is a list of what can be done by L1 and L2L1 can do the basic maintenance tasks, L2 can do most things including approved modifications or changes.

 

See : http://www.recreationalflying.com/tutorials/students/maintenance.html

It is my understanding that pilots who hold an L1 endorsement do not have to do the online test. I have held an L1 approval for years and have not been told I can't work on my aircraft. I believe new pilots certificates do not include L1 unless the on line exam is passed. Can any one confirm this is correct?

 

 

[dazza 38]

It is my understanding that pilots who hold an L1 endorsement do not have to do the online test. I have held an L1 approval for years and have not been told I can't work on my aircraft. I believe new pilots certificates do not include L1 unless the on line exam is passed. Can any one confirm this is correct?

Correct

 

 

[DrZoos]

correct

 

what you can do with an L1 or L2 varies with aircraft type.. If its LSA or 24 rego the rules are stricter. Mainly in relation to use in CTA or when used for hire , reward or any training (including BFR)

 

At present if anyone that had L1 prior to some date in Nov 2013 still has it, although i would suggest they may be required to sit the test at some point in the future... But thats mainly speculation or intuition or lack of intuition

 

 

[spacesailor]

"Maintenance to owner-operated RA-Aus aircraft is the sole responsibility of the owner(s).

 

"The selection of appropriate maintenance schedules and the qualifications and experience of persons to complete the maintenance on the non-LSA privately-built and amateur-built categories in CAO 95.10 and CAO 95.55, is the responsibility of the owner. "

 

I need a lawer to rewrite this into English, as it makes no sence to me at all.

 

(very small education )

 

spacesailor

 

 

[DrZoos]

I am no lawyer but it basically means if you have owner built or kit built aircraft then the owner chooses who maintains it...and you live or die based on that decision.

 

 

[Litespeed]

You have to have passed RA-Aus L1 maintainer's course. And this only applies if you don't use the aircraft for commercial purposes like hire or training.

Scott,

 

I am shocked so much I am off topic.

 

You Sir have been been replaced with a impostor in your avatar.

 

Some lanky greying git has stolen your big smily likeness.

 

Oh lord where art thou noble ape?

 

 

[Downunder]

PETA was after people displaying that pic........They claimed copyright over the picture on behalf of the monkey as it was the monkey and not the photographer who took the picture.

 

It's a funny funny world...

 

 

[Kiwi303]

They are pretty far out there.... Remember their "Sea Kitten" attempt to make "fish" sound too cute to eat?

 

 

[kasper]

Correct

Dazza,

Please point to the RAA Tech where 4.1(3) has been removed ... ALL pilot cert holders are entitled to L1 on gaining the pilot certificate and UNLESS tech have removed it its there as long as you hold a pilot certificate.

 

My understanding of the L1 trial was to get in place a set of certification tests and trial them BEFORE switching off the automatic L1 for Pilot Certificate holders ... and that would be in teh new Tech Manual waiting in the wings