Forward This E-mail | Edit Email Preferences | Advertise | Contact | Privacy | Help

  • Text size:

    • A
    • A
    • A

The private-jet market overall has been slumping so far this year, as reported in the latest GAMA tally, but a closer look at the data shows that small private jets are in growth mode, according to a recent analysis by the Wichita Eagle. The Eagle found that shipments of small and midsize jets grew by nearly 11 percent in the first half of this year, compared to the same period last year. Included in that category are jets built by Cessna, Embraer, Gulfstream, Honda Aircraft and One Aviation.

Business jet sales were down 4.3 percent overall in the GAMA analysis. One factor cited for the fall in larger jet sales was declining demand in Russia, the Middle East and China. GAMA President Pete Bunce also said the U.S. Congress “has not done its part” to support aircraft manufacturers. North America continues to be strong in jet sales, and the small to midsize jets tend to be popular for those operators, according to the Eagle.

Sponsor Announcement
AEA Pilots Guide to Avionics 2016-17 Edition || Aircraft Electronics Association
Request Your 2016-17 Pilot's Guide to Avionics
The 2016-17 edition of the Aircraft Electronics Association's Pilot's Guide to Avionics is now available. The publication is a consumer's directory loaded with educational articles about the avionics industry, its products, and its people, which helps pilots and aircraft owners make better buying decisions and locate nearly 1,300 AEA member companies, including government-certified repair stations around the world. To request a complimentary copy, visit AEAPilotsGuide.net.

With new FAA rules now in place, as of Monday, for operators to secure a commercial drone certificate, it’s been projected that their numbers will quickly outnumber manned-aircraft pilots. The FAA has estimated the number of certified commercial drone operators could exceed 600,000 within a year, equal to the total number of pilots from student to ATP. More than 3,300 people signed up to take the FAA drone knowledge test on Monday, the first day it was available, according to Bloomberg News. “The sky is going to open up at the end of August for a lot of opportunities,” said Randy Yates, of Omaha, Nebraska, who plans to use drones in his property-inspection business. “It’s going to be a whole new world.” The Air Line Pilots Association issued a statement on Monday, raising concerns about the safety of FAA’s new venture.

The new rules are “missing a key component,” according to ALPA. Commercial drone operators should be required to pass a flight test, ALPA said, as well as the FAA’s knowledge test. The FAA also should do more to regulate recreational drone flyers, ALPA said. Brian Wynne, president of the Association for Unmanned Vehicle Systems International, said the new rules will enable businesses and innovators “to harness the tremendous potential of UAS and unlock the many economic and societal benefits the technology offers.” Prior to this week, the FAA already had approved more than 5,000 exemptions to allow for commercial drone use.

Sponsor Announcement
Be Seen. Be Safe. || Reduce Bird Strikes Up to 66% with Pulselite from Precise Flight

Police said a first officer’s blood alcohol content was 0.3, or seven times the legal limit, when he was tested at Cherry Capital Airport in Traverse City, Michigan, last Thursday and removed from the cockpit of a Talon Air Challenger 604 charter flight. The captain of the flight, Manny Ramirez, reportedly noticed that the first officer “smelled of alcohol and slurred his speech,” according to the Traverse City Record-Eagle. Ramirez called the dispatch office, and police were called to the cockpit. The first officer told police he’d had nothing to drink since two beers at lunch the day before. He was arraigned on Friday and entered a not-guilty plea.

"We are very proud of Captain Manny Ramirez' immediate action in detecting the co-pilot's condition and removing him from his position," Talon Air said in a statement to local news media. Talon Air said the first officer, who was identified in local news reports as Sean Fitzgerald, 35, of Boca Raton, Florida, was “immediately terminated” after the incident. Fitzgerald could face up to 93 days in jail or a minimum fine of $100 under local laws. He was released on personal recognizance but is prohibited from flying until the case is settled. A hearing is set for Sept. 8.

Sponsor Announcement
What Fuels You? || Cessna Turbo Skyhawk JT-A

Authorities in Scotland removed two United Airlines pilots from a Newark-bound flight Saturday and charged them with being intoxicated. According to news reports, police charged Carlos Licona, 45, and Paul Grebnc, 35, with violation of the U.K.’s transport safety laws. The pilots were about to depart Glasgow en route to Newark’s Liberty International Airport. There were 141 passengers aboard the westbound flight who were delayed about 10 hours while a new crew was rounded up.

“We can confirm that two men aged 35 and 45 have been arrested and are presently detained in police custody in connection with alleged offences under the Railways and Transport Safety Act,” a police report said. They were expected to appear in court Monday morning.

"The two pilots have been removed from service and their flying duties," United spokeswoman Erin Benson told ABC News on Sunday. "We are cooperating with the authorities and will conduct our own investigation as well. The safety of our customers and crew is our highest priority." Earlier this month, two Canadian pilots of an Air Transat flight were arrested at Glasgow Airport and charged with attempting to fly while intoxicated.

Sponsor Announcement
Flight Testing Homebuilt Aircraft || Available at AVwebBooks.com
Flight Testing Homebuilt Aircraft
The discipline of flight testing is new and mysterious to most pilots and amateur aircraft builders. This book gives the tools and techniques to understand that challenge in an efficient and safe manner. It will help you learn and develop the usable envelope of your aircraft; identify and fix problems that come up even in well-proven factory aircraft; and become a safer and more knowledgeable pilot.
Flight Testing Homebuilt Aircraft
book $ 26.95
e-book $ 22.95
book/e-book bundle $ 32.95

For more information, call (970) 726-5111 or click here.
Sponsor Announcement
Subscribe to 'Aviation Consumer' and Take the Guesswork Out of Your Aviation Purchases
Take the Guesswork Out of Your Aviation Purchases with Aviation Consumer!
From new or used aircraft — in the market for a Diamond DA40 or Cirrus SR20? — to spark plugs and tip-tanks, Aviation Consumer will have you buying safer and smarter. Do you need a high-end GPS, or will a low-cost brand do? Premium tires: Are they a waste of money if you fly less than an hour a week? Polarized sunglasses: Not a wise decision? And you can trust Aviation Consumer for unbiased product reviews because they accept no advertising! Subscribe to Aviation Consumer today and start buying smarter! Click here for details.

A veterans group in San Diego is asking the public to boycott the Miramar Air Show, saying the show is dangerous and “glorifies war.” The annual show, which is held during Fleet Week, Sept. 23 to 25, is a popular free event hosted by the Marine Corps. The show draws up to 500,000 visitors. The airshow includes demos by the U.S. Army Golden Knights parachute team, the U.S. Navy Blue Angels, the Harrier and Osprey aircraft, and more. The San Diego Veterans for Peace say they are embarking on a five-year effort to “change public understanding of what the Miramar Air Show is actually all about.” The show “celebrates the skills and machinery that exist to kill, maim and destroy … [and] serves as a misleading recruiting tool for our unsuspecting youth,” the veterans say.

The veterans have taken their campaign to the public, posting banners across local roads to spread the message and talking to the media. They said they hope to continue their work to encourage area residents to recognize the “skillful propaganda” that promotes the show and “eventually lose interest” in attending. “Our goal is to effectively shut down the Miramar Air Show due to non-participation,” the group says at their website. In an op-ed in the San Diego Tribune, Marine Corps spokesman Gabriel Adibe said the annual airshow aims to spread goodwill, allowing the military to strengthen its bonds with the community and to show appreciation for those who serve.

Forward this email to a friend
Tailor your alerts!
Click here to update alerts preferences.
AVweb Insider

From the unintended consequences file comes this: The Third Class medical exemption rips away the last vestiges of logic—if there ever was any—for retaining the weight limit for light sport aircraft. If you can fly a 6000-pound airplane without a medical, why are you limited to 1320 pounds under essentially the same conditions? The whole thing has a Monty Python sort of silliness to it.

Against a mountain of data that shows medical certification has zero measureable impact on flight safety and that limiting weight probably doesn’t do much either, it’s time to re-examine and eliminate or change the weight restrictions on the light sport segment.

To be fair, the weight limit wasn’t really about safety, but economics. The idea was that the LSA weight limit could be set in such a way as to include some legacy airframes like Cubs and Taylorcraft, but not so many that it would stifle development of new, innovative light sport airframes. I would call this notion a noble failure. It honestly may have made sense at the time, but in retrospect, the idea of ASTM committees and the FAA attempting consensus decision-making on what will sell and how markets behave is dubious at best. Of course, it wasn’t all about that. When this was being discussed at the turn of the last century, the people developing it had to divine not just what would make sense, but also what the FAA would buy off on. Segueing back to Python, you’ll recall the demand to find a shrubbery. It was like that.

The weight limit had another effect. It would presumably result in airframes that cost less to manufacture. People who should know better often say the fact that the typical LSA retails for about $135,000 shows that light sport has been a failure. I continue to believe this is wrong. A two-place light sport costs about a third what a certified four-place light aircraft costs and the way things are trending, that will be soon be a quarter. Light sport prices have not escalated much.

True, airplanes like the Icon A5 have blown through the typical price points, but the fact remains, light sport airplanes are, on the whole, much cheaper than new certified airplanes. They generally deliver respectable performance, and are easy to fly and cheap to operate. And yeah, I know all about the comparison to used certified aircraft and I’ve made the argument. But the point was, is and always will be new airplanes. And new airplanes that are accessible and in tune with the easier-to-achieve light sport pilot certificate. 

I think it's a common misconception that the facilitators of light sport airplanes promised cheap airframes. I've searched my archives and never found such promises, although people in the industry did promise airplanes that were cheaper than certified examples. And that is, indeed, what we have. What we don't have is a burgeoning market; we have a lukewarm market well in keeping with aviation in general. Hotcakes, we ain't.

But consider this: Last year, 946 piston aircraft were manufactured worldwide, according to GAMA data. Just over 200 of those--22 percent--were light sport aircraft. The actual number of airplanes is actually not accurate because GAMA's data sweep doesn't include many European manufacturers like Pipistrel, Aeropro and Czech Sport Aircraft. If all of those were totaled, I suspect the light end of the market would be closer to 50 percent. I don't know about you, but I'd rather have those sales than not, even if dreams of mosquito swarms of LSAs have been long since dashed.

Back to the weight question: If you were king and could raise the light sport weight limit, what would you set as the higher weight? Would you even change it all? And do you think it would make any difference?

Let’s unpack this a little. Under the current rule, a light sport airplane is limited to two seats, limited to a single reciprocating engine, has a 1320-pound max gross (1430 pounds if float equipped) and an 890-pound max empty weight. Speed in level flight is limited to 120 knots indicated.

In practice, there are some problems with all this. The 1320-pound limit must be among the top five most operationally ignored limitations in aviation, with cloud clearance and currency right up there with it. The speed restriction is also a mere guideline for the unimaginative. I’ve seen 130 indicated in more than one LSA I’ve flown. The reciprocating engine requirement was presumably meant to simplify things and/or keep some bright bulb from stuffing a turbine into an LSA, but all it has done is complicate gaining approval for electric-powered aircraft. All it needs is a language fix. No one knows when that will happen, if ever. 

So how to approach this? I wouldn’t leave it as it is. The rule is just illogical as it exists now. You could eliminate “light” and just call it sport aircraft; still two seats, but say a weight limit under 6000 pounds, no speed limit. Let the market and insurers sort it out. This is sort of where the Part 23 revision was supposed to go but probably won’t in its final form. This level of hands-off regulation is likely to cause fatal clutching of pearls in the FAA and Congress, so it’s unrealistic.

How about an incremental approach? Here’s one of the ridiculous things about light sport aircraft. CubCrafters’ Carbon Cub and American Legend’s Super Legend are both essentially Super Cubs, which in the certified form have a max gross weight of 1750 pounds and no restrictions on max empty weight. So it takes some pretty serious heroics to keep these airplanes within weight limits that are, in the end, now arbitrary, since it’s quite clear the market is awash with new, innovative airframe designs and legacy airplanes haven’t stilted this development.

Second, when I was at Diamond Aircraft a few years ago, Peter Maurer said the company had discussed offering the DA20 or something like it as an LSA. But it demurred when an analysis showed that to achieve the empty weight, it would have to trim nearly 300 pounds of weight out of the airframe, all of it structure. While that would make the airplane structurally more efficient, structural efficiency is antagonistic to durability and possibly safety and crashworthiness. Icon found this to be true when it petitioned the FAA for a higher weight limit to build in spin resistance. Similarly, LSAs are sometimes too weight restricted to accommodate full-aircraft parachute systems and crashworthy seats.

With all this in mind, I’d peg the maximum LSA weight 500 pounds higher than it is now—say 1800 pounds--and let the market chew on it for a while. I’d also let whatever legacy airplanes fit that guideline—that would include Cessna 150s—to be flown under the light sport rule. I just don’t see an economic or safety downside. The upside is that higher weights will add value to light sport airplanes and at least one manufacturer told me the company would enjoy a few more sales as a result.

As far as I can tell, there’s no active proposal to raise the limit circulating in ASTM or the FAA. EAA was rumored to be pursuing it, but the association says its not an active proposal. But I think this should go on the to-do list.  Even though it’s rarely been so, we should keep trying to pursue regulation supported by logic and data rather than emotion and politics. Yeah, I know. That sounds like the rantings of a crackhead, but sometimes even I have moments of lucidity.

 

The foregoing is opinion and commentary based on disclosed facts. AVweb welcomes other points of view, including guest blogs. 

What Everybody Ought to Know About the CGR-30P from Electronics International

AirVenture is about airplanes, but it's also about people and in this video commentary, AVweb's Jeff Van West reveals that to attract young people to aviation, we need to show them what they're interested in.

Mike Busch, the Savvy Aviator and one of the U.S.'s best known aircraft technicians, has been fighting the FAA on what he terms an unnecessary and seriously flawed airworthiness directive regarding barrel-head separations on ECi cylinders for big-bore Continental engines. We've given you two options to learn more from Busch about this controversial move by the FAA. We edited a short-form podcast of the basics of the history and impact of the AD. We've also included an essentially unedited version of the interview where Busch gives the history and context of what he says is a terrible example of rulemaking.

Legendary Ram Overhauled Engines || $2,000 Loyalty Reward and $2,000 In-Stock Discount || (254) 752-8381
Picture of the Week
Picture of the Week

Chris Haile of Marysville, CA flies off into the dawn, kicking off our latest installment of reader-submitted photos. Click through to see more images from AVweb readers.

AVweb is the world's premier independent aviation news resource, online since 1995. Our reporting, features, and newsletters are brought to you by:

Publisher
Tom Bliss

Editorial Director, Aviation Publications
Paul Bertorelli

Editor-in-Chief
Russ Niles

Webmaster
Scott Simmons

Contributing Editors
Mary Grady
Elaine Kauh

Contributors
Rick Durden
Kevin Lane-Cummings
Paul Berge
Larry Anglisano

Ad Coordinator
Karen Lund

Click here to send a letter to the editor. (Please let us know if your letter is not intended for publication.)

Comments or questions about the news should be sent here.

Have a product or service to advertise on AVweb? Your advertising can reach over 225,000 loyal AVwebFlash, AVwebBiz, and AVweb web site readers every week. Over 80% of our readers are active pilots and aircraft owners. That's why our advertisers grow with us, year after year. For ad rates and scheduling, click here or contact Tom Bliss: