Light Sport vs. Experimental

[Maverick]

:cool:Does anyone know if there is an advantage to registering a KF as an experimental that meets all the requirements of Light Sport Airplane? Many years ago someone from the EAA told me to register my first KF as an experimental that meets LSA parameters (as in the J3). However, I had an 0200 on it with 1550 spars so I didn't make it LSA compliant.

Is there any advantage one way or another. Reading about the insurance in that thread got me to thinking about this again since I do have a PP license, I believe that I can fly it as a LSA without having to get a medical again but I wonder about the advantages versus disadvantages either way.

[WWhunter]

If the plane EVER registered above 1320 GW it can NEVER be lowered to comply with LSA. If your initial registration list it at 1550, unfortunately, you are out of luck.

Having said that, I have heard rumors from factory people that there is talk of eventually raising the GW of LSA. Is it true? No idea...to me it is just a tumor.

[Maverick]

Thank you but, I am not seeking to lower the GW of my first KF5. I am asking if it would be advantages to apply for registration as experimental over experimental LSA.

[jrthomas]

I believe EAB is the way to go. ELSA must be built exactly per plans. Kitfox is the builder. You or future owner may take a 16 hour class for a repairmans certificate. Under EAB, you are the builder. You are the only person eligible for the repairmans certificate. You may make any mods you like as long as they don't take it outside LSA limits. James Thomas

[WWhunter]

Thank you but, I am not seeking to lower the GW of my first KF5. I am asking if it would be advantages to apply for registration as experimental over experimental LSA.

Apologies!! After rereading your post I understand this is for another build.
In this case, jrthomas gave a great answer. The caveat from my understanding on building it as ELSA is that an mod must be factory approved and possibly need associated signage (paperwork). I was recently at a competitors factory posing nearly identical questions on the hopes of a future purchase. Really not sure what the market will be for a plane that meets the ESLA vs. EAB yet still be LSA compliant. The Basic Meds has seemed to allowed many Light SPort guys (gals) head back to the old standards....172's etc.

[mr bill]

Over a year ago EAA President Jack Pelton told our Chapter 18 group that EAA and FAA were discussing extending the LSA weight limit to 1700 pounds. I asked him how likely it is that it would pass and what the time frame was. He said flatly that it will pass and expected it to happen in a year and a half. So far we have heard nothing. Maybe the FAA privatization has them side tracked.

[aviator79]

I believe EAB is the way to go. ELSA must be built exactly per plans. Kitfox is the builder. You or future owner may take a 16 hour class for a repairmans certificate. Under EAB, you are the builder. You are the only person eligible for the repairmans certificate. You may make any mods you like as long as they don't take it outside LSA limits. James Thomas

jrthomas is correct that the ELSA must be build exactly per the plans. It can, however, be modified after original certification without the manufacturer's approval.

One thing to note is that Kitfox has chosen not to market an ELSA kit. To certify yours as ELSA, you would need for them to provide you with a statement of compliance for your kit. (21.193(e)(4)). I don't know if that's something that they do.

ELSA advantage: Future owners can take a repairman course to do the annual condition inspection.

E-AB advantages: Possibly easier certification. Can be modified outside of LSA restrictions. (although, as WWHunter points out, once this is done, it can never be an LSA again.)

Basically, the differences are so minor, that the path of least resistance is probably your best bet. (E-AB)

[Av8r3400]

Over a year ago EAA President Jack Pelton told our Chapter 18 group that EAA and FAA were discussing extending the LSA weight limit to 1700 pounds. I asked him how likely it is that it would pass and what the time frame was. He said flatly that it will pass and expected it to happen in a year and a half. So far we have heard nothing. Maybe the FAA privatization has them side tracked.




I wouldn't hold your breath for this to happen. Especially now with basic med having been passed, the FAA has no reason to go through the hassle and expense to change LSA.

[Maverick]

Thanks for all the responses. I agree with the notion that the GW for LSA should be higher and always felt that take of and landing speeds should have a greater consideration than GW but, what the FAA thinks is... oh, I forgot, thinking logically has never been their strong suit.

EAB it is.