Jump to content

DavePilot

Administrators
  • Content Count

    1,602
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About DavePilot

  • Rank
    Senior Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

1,530 profile views
  1. From Mewp, in Australia, 12/24/2017 ” i, I also moved from GA to LSA for much the same reasons as you are considering. I owned a c172 and found moving to the SC has many similar characteristics, flap ext, cruise speed, approach etc but do test fly one on a hot day. With low weight and inertia you do get bounced around a lot and with the low xwind component and castering nose wheel landings on gusty days can be fun. CSA have improved a lot and respond quickly to any contact I have made. Being in Australia I deal directly with the European agent and they refer me directly to CSA if needed. I do feel it was a good decision and if I need to carry more load or passengers I can hire. My A/C can carry me 85kg my wife 60kg, 20kg baggage and full fuel ”
  2. From NetSurfr, 12/24/2017 ” Hi everyone. I recently joined this forum as I'm trying to learn about the sport cruiser. I'm 50 years old married with an 8 year old and am a instrument rated PP with 450 hours. I own a very well equipped 1979 Piper Dakota that is a phenomenal plane. Although as a family we have used our Dakota for travel wince I bought it in 2014, the reality is that 95% of my flying is just me flying around the local area for fun. I fly out of a city/urban airport with zero good options to land should the engine quit shortly after takeoff or during the approach. Although I know the odds are low of this happening it still bothers me to the point that I don't take my plane out for night flights and I'm increasingly feeling uncomfortable flying my wife and/or kid in the plane for the same reason. A plane w/ a BRS chute would be a solution that would solve my problems so given that my options are to look into used Cirrus aircraft BUT I really don't have the $ to move into a Cirrus especially when most of my flying is local flights for fun. So I started considering the idea of getting an LSA like the sport cruiser and renting a SR22 for the 2 - 3 family plane trips we do in a year. So all that background brings me to this post. Last week I had the chance to fly a 2016 sport cruiser and enjoyed it so I'm planning on getting checked out in it to continue to test it but in the meantime I'd love to get feedback from owners as to your opinions of this plane and the manufacturer (strength/weaknesses and things a potential owner should know). From reading through the threads here I got the impression that CSA doesn't seem to be paying much attention to existing owners when it comes to LOA and I also got the impression the distribution channel is under flux so I'm a bit concerned about those aspects. So again I'd love to hear the good, bad, and the ugly from those of you with experience owning a sport cruiser. Thanks,  Jose  ”
  3. WELCOME to all the Newest SCFLIER SportCruiser Forum Members!! New Members can post an "Introduction" of themselves to All the SCFLIER Forum Members here. Totally Voluntary. If a New Member wishes, they can simply "Say Hello" here, post a picture of their SportCruiser/PS-28/PiperSport Aircraft, or share pictures and unique characteristics of where in the World they are based and fly. Thanks to all the new Members for Participating in the SCFLIER Forum ! Dave SCFLIER Admin PS. Some SCFLIER Members have already posted their “Introductions” earlier, in other various areas of the SCFLIER Forum. I will be moving/copying these posts over here as I can find them and get to them...
  4. I like the “shared Google Map Dropped Pin” idea from Shawn above. Worth a try but only if it includes maps for where our SCFLIER Forum members live: Europe Australia North America South America As a data point, Some Pre-Filtered, based on Participation, “SCFLIER Member home country location” data of PARTICIPATING * SCFLIER Members from August of 2017 Some data on where the current " Participating* " SCFLIER Members are from: Texas, USA: 16, 27 % Not Publicly Telling: 13, 22 % Florida, USA: 7, 12 % California, USA: 4, 7 % United Kingdom: 3, 5 % Arizona, USA: 2, 3.4 % Australia: 2 Georgia, USA: 2 Ohio, USA: 2 New Jersey, USA: 2 Connecticut, USA: 1, 1.7 % Massachusetts, USA: 1 "East Coast", USA: 1 New Hampshire, USA: 1 The Netherlands: 1 Canada: 1 59 SCFLIER Members are "Participating" out of a total of 274 Active Members as of 7/31/2017  * A SCFLIER Forum Member is "Participating" if they have entered at least 4 total Posts on SCFLIER as of 7/31/2017.
  5. Ryan great question and idea. my answers: 1) for the SCFLIER Members added in the last two years or so since I have been Admin, I have some information on where these SCFLIER Forum Members are located - and our SCFLIER Members are NOT just located in the USA. While we do have many SCFLIER Members in the USA, we also have Forum Members who are from Brazil, Australia, the UK, Ireland, France, Switzerland, Austria, ... and several other countries worldwide. 2) for the SCFLIER Members that joined from “the Forum beginning” ~ 2014 to 2016, no records were kept of their home location by the prior Admin. 3) My Policy is to NOT release an individual SCFLIER Member’s Personal Information, such as full name, home address, email address, aircraft tail number, based Airport, etc., without their specific permission to do so. Many Members of a NOT-Secure, Easily Accessible Internet Forum wish to remain anonymous. Other Members choose to Post very detailed information about themselves including their full name, home address, home airport, phone number, email address, aircraft tail number, etc., directly on the forum, for anyone Worldwide to see. That’s OK, but it is up to each SCFLIER Forum member to decide how much and which information to post on the SCFLIER forum. Ultimately, I take SCFLIER Members’ Privacy very seriously, and it is a CHOICE of individual SCFLIER Members on how much Personal Information they may choose to reveal by posting this information on the forum. Perhaps a “Where are you located?” SCFLIER Topic Posting would allow those that are willing to share their home airport location to do so, and this could be useful for your intent of Fly-In’s or group gatherings ....this would allow participating SCFLIER Members the choice to share whatever personal information that they want to...but a high percentage participation is not expected. Out of the 367 total SCFLIER Members, well less than 10% participate regularly ... Dave
  6. Update ! as of today, 10/31/2018, the number of Active, Validated SCFLIER SportCruiser Members with Log-In Privileges is now 367 SCFLIER Forum Members ! THANK YOU to many of our new SCFLIER Members who are participating with interesting posts, awesome airplane and new Avionics pictures, and great details about their SportCruiser adventures on the forum !
  7. SCFLIER SportCruiser Forum Activated Members Update as of 9/26/2018 the number of Activated, Validated SCFLIER SportCruiser Forum Members with Log-In Privileges is now 358 SCFLIER MEMBERS
  8. Shawn yes, "misplaced discussion topics" can be moved by the Admin, but this is time consuming.... My intent is to help folks on the SCFLIER Forum "self organize" the forum, and take a little time searching for an existing topic already covering their questions, or place their new topic into an existing "best match" area of the forum so that it is easier to find information on topics, and also to minimize my time spent doing chores as your friendly SCFLIER Admin (currently about 10-15 hours spent by me each week). Today's work by your friendly Admin on the SCFLIER Forum is going to be spent updating the Website Software to the latest version just announced by our Website Software Supplier... I am always glad to help, and of course I love the SCFLIER Forum, but I would rather be flying my airplane than moving “misplaced” topics around on the forum... TIME is a limited asset. Perhaps I will have more TIME for “Admin-ing” the SCFLIER Forum another day... Dave Your Friendly SCFLIER Admin
  9. Wayne/ShawnM Great discussion. Very useful. Glad the question has been answered and ideas suggested. However ( -- Wayne) “Forum Information and News” is NOT the best location for this type of discussion. “Forum Information and News” is intended for new SCFLIER Forum software notices and new Forum features from our SCFLIER website provider, NEWS about the SCFLIER Forum, Updated SCFLIER Monthly Activated Member counts, etc., provided by me, the SCFLIER Admin. I have changed the title of this particular Forum Topic to "Forum Information and News from the Admin" in an attempt to help other SCFLIER Forum Members understand what this topic area is intended for. Definitely not the first time that a "Random Thought" got posted here... I am Very glad that Wayne's question has been answered, but in the future for all SCFLIER Forum members, please First use the SEARCH function (magnifying glass icon at the top right ), a good way to find EXISTING discussion on a topic “already out there” on the SCFLIER Forum and help prevent us from having a constantly expanding, overlapping topic discussion outline that may make it difficult to find information quickly.... If an Existing SCFLIER Topic discussion can not be found for your question or idea with SEARCH, then please place requests for answers on new items like this in the “Random Thoughts” forum area, or, for example, if one has a Rotax carburetor question, please post your question under the “Rotax Engine” area, ... or perhaps in this particular example, a new topic could be started, called “ProPackage / ProPlus Package Questions” and this might work well if created under the “General Avionics” topic outline area or the “Dynon SOFTWARE” topic outline area ... Staying ORGANIZED in the SCFLIER forum will help other folks find and see interesting topics quickly. Efficient, quick, effective information exchange about the awesome SportCruiser/PiperSport/PS-28 LSA Aircraft is our SCFLIER Forum objective. Thanks to all and enjoy the forum Dave SCFLIER Admin See below for results of an SCFLIER Search function on "SVAP"
  10. SCFLIER SportCruiser Forum Activated Members Update as of 8/30/2018 the number of Activated, Validated SCFLIER SportCruiser Members with Log-In Privileges is now 355 SCFLIER Forum Members !!!
  11. SCFLIER SportCruiser Forum Activated Members Update ! as of 7/26/2018, the number of Active, Validated SCFLIER SportCruiser Members with Log-In Privileges is now 349 SCFLIER Forum Members !!! The SCFLIER SportCruiser Forum continues to grow in Members each month, with 2018 seeing several new SCFLIER Members from the United Kingdom, the United States, and Australia. See the New Member Statistics per month from our Website Provider in the picture Below. Note that the Website Provider counts "New Members" as those that have only "Signed Up". My count includes those that actually have been Activated by Me, the Admin, and are at this point in time able to Log In to SCFLIER with a valid Display Name and Password. There is some lag between "Sign Up" and Admin "Activation". There also have been 6 Software Updates to the Website software so far in 2018, with two being installed in July. These SCFLIER Website SW Updates are not automatic - they are reviewed by me and activated manually Step by Step with my Admin log in. Typical reasons for a SCFLIER Website SW Update are bug fixes and security updates. Occasionally new features are added.
  12. Oshkosh 2018 Videos Saturday arrivals including the new (2nd flying) B-29 called “Doc” https://youtu.be/zBivSJvRXQ4 EAA AirVenture Monday Update https://youtu.be/rrpEqmN7CzU https://youtu.be/KwAD9hGl-xg Tuesday 7/24/18 https://youtu.be/aiHE7rY0d0M
  13. Update ! as of 6/27/52018, the number of Active, Validated SCFLIER SportCruiser Members with Log-In Privileges is now 345 SCFLIER Forum Members !!!
  14. Conversion of factory built S-LSA to Experimental E-LSA: THANK YOU !!! to the Experimental Aircraft Association (EAA) and the USA Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) for including “THE GREAT ESCAPE CLAUSE” into the USA S-LSA Regulations. explained by Mike Busch in an April 5, 2016 AOPA magazine article copied below “ P&E: SAVVY MAINTENANCE LSAS: WHO’S GUARDING THE HENHOUSE? April 5, 2016 The new crop of factory-built LSAs is impressive and exciting, but the maintenance rules are—different Opinion | This year for the first time I attended the U.S. Sport Aviation Expo in Sebring, Florida, the foremost aviation event devoted to Light Sport and ultralight aircraft. I accepted an invitation to speak not because I had any expertise in this lightweight corner of the general aviation envelope, but because I sensed this would be a great opportunity to learn about an exciting and rapidly growing segment of GA. In 2004, the FAA approved new regulations that created sport pilots and Light Sport aircraft. I recall wondering whether this would amount to much. I needn’t have worried. There are now more than 6,000 sport pilots and nearly 4,000 registered LSAs, making this the fastest-growing segment of GA. Ten years ago, the term “LSA” conjured up images of small, tube-and-fabric designs that always struck me as a lot more “sport” than “airplane.” But progress over the past decade has been astonishing—especially compared to the glacial pace we’re used to in the certified world. Today’s top-selling factory-built LSAs, called Special Light Sport aircraft (SLSAs), are sleek, sexy, high-tech designs with sophisticated powerplants and glass cockpits. A lot of this progress in the LSA world has been spurred by two component suppliers: Dynon Avionics and Rotax Aircraft Engines. The Dynon Skyview seems to be the de facto standard avionics suite for the current crop of SLSAs, and it has capabilities that put to shame most of the TSOed glass cockpit suites I’ve seen. The 100-horsepower Rotax 912ULS powers about 80 percent of new SLSAs. Rotax started out building two-stroke engines used in snowmobiles, personal watercraft, ATVs, and outboard motors, as well as in go-karts and ultralights. Those engines were famous for being cheap and light, but in aviation applications a bit cantankerous and dismally short-lived (three-digit TBOs). Rotax created its four-stroke 900 series as a clean-sheet design specifically for the aviation market, employing Nikasil nickel-carbide cylinder barrels, liquid-cooled heads, and electronic ignition. The original 500-hour TBO has been increased to 2,000 hours, accompanied by a record of impressive durability and reliability. Who’s guarding the henhouse? The FARs treats LSAs very differently from either certificated or amateur-built aircraft in ways that are sometimes good, sometimes bad, and sometimes bizarre. LSAs are not certified by the FAA in the traditional sense: They don’t have a type certificate and don’t need to meet FAA certification standards the way Normal-category airplanes do. Instead, LSAs are required to conform to something called “FAA-accepted ASTM Consensus Standards.” Members of nonprofit ASTM International, a voluntary standards development organization, create and maintain 12,000 consensus industry standards in such diverse areas as metals, textiles, petroleum, construction, energy, consumer products, medical services, and electronic devices. ASTM Committee F37 on Light Sport aircraft develops standards for LSAs. About 200 members represent manufacturers, suppliers, distributors, and industry alphabet groups. Seven technical subcommittees have jurisdiction over 24 consensus standards, ranging from minimum safety and performance requirements to quality assurance, flight testing, and maintenance. In essence, the FAA has stepped back from its traditional regulatory role and allowed LSA manufacturers and ASTM F37 to run the show. This strikes me as a mixed blessing. It has clearly been a boon to the LSA industry, facilitating technical progress that I doubt would have been possible in a conventional, FAA-regulated certification environment. It also has put LSA owners in a situation in which everything the manufacturers do or say has the force of law, and that seems a bit like having the fox guard the henhouse. FAR 91.327 imposes a laundry list of operating limitations on SLSAs, many of which sound reasonable. For example, it prohibits the use of SLSAs for compensation or hire except to conduct flight training or tow gliders. It requires condition inspections every 12 calendar months (every 100 hours if the SLSA is used for hire). It requires owners to comply with applicable airworthiness directives—all commonsense stuff. But 91.327 also requires SLSA owners to comply with “each safety directive applicable to the aircraft that corrects an existing unsafe condition.” These safety directives are issued by the manufacturer, so in effect they’re mandatory service bulletins—owners of certificated aircraft operating under Part 91 must comply with service bulletins only if the FAA issues an AD compelling compliance. In essence, LSA manufacturers can issue their own “ADs” without having to jump through the statutory hoops that protect owners from unreasonable action by the FAA. It gets worse. FAR 91.327(d) requires that SLSA pilots “must operate the aircraft in accordance with the aircraft’s operating instructions.” If this rule applied to Normal category aircraft, it would be an FAR violation for me to operate my engines lean of peak, because that’s not what the pilot’s operating handbook says to do. Nor could I purchase GAMIjectors to make lean-of-peak operation practical, because FAR 91.327 says that any major alteration to an SLSA must be approved by the manufacturer. The absurdity of this situation really hit home when I learned that SLSAs are prohibited from flying in IMC. I’m instrument-rated and current. My new quarter-million-dollar SLSA is equipped with wall-to-wall glass, synthetic vision, highway-in-the-sky graphics, and a fancy autopilot—and you’re telling me I can’t fly through clouds? I looked for the regulation that prohibits SLSAs from operating in IMC, and discovered something interesting: There is no such regulation. It’s actually the LSA manufacturers that have decided not to allow their airplanes to be used this way. Originally, it was perfectly legal for an appropriately rated pilot to fly an appropriately equipped SLSA in IMC. The original ASTM consensus standards were silent on the subject of IFR. Then, in 2010, the ASTM F37 Committee voted to amend the consensus standards to prohibit flight in IMC. Every SLSA manufactured since then has had operating limitations prohibiting IFR operations. At the time, the committee said this was intended to remain in effect only until it could develop an appropriate set of safety, performance, and equipment standards for IFR operation. That was six years ago, and according to folks who serve on the committee, the prohibition is unlikely to be lifted anytime soon. Regulation by Rotax? Why do you suppose LSA manufacturers, distributors, and suppliers voted to prohibit these aircraft from flying in IMC? The odd tale of the Rotax 912ULS engine may offer some insight. Earlier versions of the Rotax 912-series operator’s manual stated that the 912ULS was prohibited from being used under IFR, but the current manual is silent on the subject, probably because it no longer needs to say anything. You don’t suppose Rotax had any influence on the ASTM F37 Committee’s decision in 2010 to prohibit operations of SLSAs in IMC? Here’s another oddity. Rotax also builds a certified 912S version for use in Normal-category airplanes such as the Liberty XL. When your certificated Rotax 912S reaches its 2,000-hour TBO, you can keep flying as long as the engine remains in airworthy condition, because TBOs are not compulsory for noncommercial operators of certificated aircraft. However, if you own a Van’s RV–12 SLSA powered by a Rotax 912ULS, you are required by regulation to overhaul it at the 2,000-hour mark—because that’s what Rotax says to do. The fact that SLSAs must be maintained strictly in accordance with the manufacturer’s instructions, and on the manufacturer’s timetable, makes me profoundly uncomfortable—in my experience, manufacturers’ maintenance guidance almost always involves gross overkill, and I’m a maintenance minimalist. In contrast, FAR 91.327 is very lenient about who is allowed to maintain and inspect SLSAs. All it takes is an FAA repairman certificate with a Light Sport aircraft maintenance rating, which anyone can obtain simply by passing an FAA-approved three-week course. So an SLSA owner who wants to perform his own maintenance, and even his own annual condition inspections, can do so with only a modest investment of time and effort. And if he wants to swing wrenches on his buddies’ SLSAs, he can do that, too. The great escape clause As an aircraft owner for nearly 50 years and an active combatant in numerous struggles over ADs and maintenance requirements, if I have to be regulated, I’d much rather it be by the FAA than by the manufacturer of my aircraft or engine. We all love to complain about the FAA, but at least it is primarily motivated by a concern for safety, and is subject to numerous laws intended to protect us from overzealous regulation. In contrast, my experience with aircraft and engine manufacturers is that they primarily are motivated by concerns about being sued, and frequently act in ways that are harmful to those of us who own their products. One evening over dinner in Sebring, I was talking to a staff member of the Experimental Aircraft Association about my concerns over the seemingly unfettered powers of coercion granted to LSA manufacturers. With a twinkle in his eye, he said, “Mike, that’s why we got the FAA to include the great escape clause.” He explained that the owner of an SLSA who doesn’t care for how he’s being treated by the manufacturer of his aircraft has the ability to “opt out” by surrendering the aircraft’s SLSA airworthiness certificate and applying for an Experimental Light Sport airworthiness certificate to replace it. Then, he can basically ignore the manufacturer’s instructions and operate and maintain his factory-built LSA as he sees fit, almost as if it were an amateur-built Experimental. By doing this, he probably gives up any remaining warranty and factory support to which he might have been entitled. He also gives up the ability to use his aircraft for compensation to give flight instruction or tow gliders. But what he gets in return is the ability to operate and maintain his LSA pretty much as he sees fit. Engine and propeller TBOs would become mere suggestions, the way they are for certificated aircraft. If the LSA is appropriately equipped, it probably can become legal to fly in IMC, assuming the designated airworthiness representative who approves its new operating limitations allows it. Seems to me that if I bought an LSA, this might be one of the first things I’d do. Mike Busch is an A&P/IA. “ Article copied above from AOPA discussing the "Escape clause" that allows an S-LSA owner to change his SLSA to an EXPERIMENTAL ELSA if an aircraft manufacturer is reluctant (or in Czech Sport Aircraft’s case, REFUSES) to authorize LOAs https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/all-news/2016/april/pilot/pe_savvy
  15. Update ! as of 5/28/2018, the number of Active, Validated SCFLIER SportCruiser Members with Log-In Privileges is now 339 SCFLIER Forum Members !!!
×