May 6, 2002
Docket Management System
U.S. Department of Transportation
Room Plaza 401
400 Seventh St., SW
Washington, DC 20590-0001
Re: Certification of Aircraft and Airmen for the Operation of Light-Sport Aircraft; Proposed Rule
Docket No. FAA-2001-11133; Notice no. 02-03
BACKGROUND
The United States Ultralight Association, Inc. (USUA) is the U.S. membership
organization whose members seek to promote, protect, and represent the sport
of aviation through the development of powered ultralight and microlights.
USUA's membership is currently more than 11,000 individuals worldwide. USUA
provides safety information to members on a regular basis through seminars
and forums and in the monthly publication, Ultralight Flying! magazine. In
addition, USUA has a national network of over 500 clubs and ultralight flight instructors that enhance the dissemination and feedback of information of concern to our sport.
USUA is the authority for national and international activities including competition sanctions, issuance of Colibri badges, and the selection of the U.S. Team for the World Microlight Championships. USUA is an affiliate member of the National Aeronautic Association (NAA) and represents the United States on the FAI International Microlight Commission whose 54 member countries represent 75,000 ultralight and microlight pilots around the globe.
USUA is a not-for-profit corporation that receives no advertising money and is in debt to no one. No other organization controls or directs its activities.
USUA personnel have contributed to every significant FAA action affecting the sport and industry since the mid-seventies. Examples include:
§ FAA Advisory Circular Circa 1978 Defining foot launch powered hang gliders
§ FAR Part 103, Advisory Circulars 103-6 and 103-7
§ Powered Ultralight Manufacturers Association and Light Aircraft
Manufacturers Association industry airworthiness programs
§ FAA Advisory Circular 90-66 (Operations at Non-towered Airports) when
ultralight operations were added
USUA developed, implemented and continues to operate the original ultralight airmen and vehicle registration safety program per FAA's mandate in the preamble to Part 103. The program has served owners, pilots, instructors and examiners for 20 years. In that time, more than 15,000 pilot and vehicle registrations have been processed. Over 3,000 USUA-registered ultralight examiners and flight instructors have provided dual flight instruction and testing to over 150,000 participants.
Most recently, USUA chaired the ARAC Part 103 Working Group through its complete cycle beginning August 17, 1993. An ARAC recommendation was sent to FAA December 21, 1999. USUA also participated as a voting member.
USUA is the organization that was born with, and remains steadfastly dedicated to, powered ultralight (and microlight) aviation in America. USUA leadership includes many of those who invented and pioneered powered ultralight aviation. USUA has been reporting the need for assistance from FAA concerning ultralight regulatory issues for over 15 years.
INTRODUCTION
Summary of Recommendations
USUA believes there is one major area in this NPRM that merits special
attention as it could have a great impact on the ultralight sport and
industry in the future.
1. The main thrust of this comment is for FAA to establish a second Special Federal Regulation (SFAR) to codify the long-standing FAA exemptions for two-place ultralight training (and towing of hang gliders). This SFAR should be embodied by establishing a second tier as shown here:
Two Tiered Concept
This two-tiered approach encourages the FAA "Sport Pilot" to be finalized while permitting ultralighters to gain the authority for two-seat recreation use under the more restrictive ultralight regulation. This second option is critical for those who want to fly today's ultralights and who do not mind being relegated to rural areas.
In addition to the two-tiered concept, following are comments pertaining to the NPRM without specific consideration for the two-tier concept.
2. Medical Certification
USUA has no objection to FAA's heavy emphasis on driver license medicals for
pilots. USUA continues to believe that operation of balloons and gliders
represent very similar air sport groups, and that the medical requirements to
operate those craft should be identical to fat single and two-place
"ultralights" as described in the history section. In any case USUA
believes that this single factor should not be the go-or-no-go point for the
whole rule proposal, NPRM 11133
3. FAA Private Pilot to Sport Pilot USUA agrees with the FAA proposal to allow private pilots to add sport pilot privileges.
4. FAA CFI to Sport Pilot CFI USUA agrees with the FAA proposal to allow FAA CFIs to add sport pilot CFI privileges.
5. Private Pilot: Powered Parachute & Trikes The creation of private pilot levels for trike and powered parachute may end up being the most significant part of this proposal although not much attention is directed this way now. This would be good for those private-and-higher FAA certificated pilots who want to transition to powered parachutes, and weight-shift-control aircraft.
6. Overflights of Cities USUA likes the FAA proposal to allow sport pilots to fly over cities and into downtown airports. Additionally, USUA recommends the Ultralight Aircraft SFAR, which would continue the prohibition from flights over congested areas (per FAR 103) for those choosing to fly single and two-place ultralight aircraft,
7. Ultralight pilot to Sport pilot USUA supports the proposed sport pilot option for those ultralight pilots who want to fly two-seat aircraft for fun and recreation in as much as 130 mph aircraft. Again, USUA also recommends a two-tiered approach in which there is the additional option of having (existing ultralight pilot and instructor) programs for pilots of single place craft that modestly exceed the limitations of ultralight vehicle definition, and two-seaters as defined by FAA training exemptions.
8. Notarized Training
USUA recommends that FAA not require notarization of an association record of
ultralight pilot/instructor registration. Instead, the registration card
received by each registrant should be satisfactory evidence of compliance.
9. Examiners & Inspectors
USUA agrees with developing/encouraging FAA Pilot Examiners and Airworthiness
inspectors to administer sport pilot and light sport aircraft certificate
programs. However, USUA believes that the specific nature of ultralight-type
aircraft justifies the two-tiered approach wherein existing ultralight
examiners (AFI) are simply allowed to continue to operate as they presently
do under FAA exemptions. Ultralight Aircraft airworthiness should also be
left exactly as it is under today's FAA training exemptions.
10. Ultralight Instructor to Sport pilot Instructor USUA believes there will be a significant negative impact on the sport and industry if the proposal is adopted since we believe that many experienced instructors with specific knowledge in ultralight-type aircraft operations will cease providing flight instruction. Again, the solution is to create a second option which is the SFAR (Ultralight Aircraft) in which today's ultralight instructor programs are codified without substantial change in program content or in the definition of the ultralight aircraft described by today's training exemptions.
11. Logbook Endorsements
USUA agrees with the FAA concept of separate logbook endorsements by CFI's
for faster aircraft and access into ATC controlled airspace. However, FAA
should not stop there. This logbook endorsement, or "building block"
concept (allowed by Sport pilot CFI's via logbook endorsement) should
include
but not be limited to: Constant speed propeller, Multi-engine, Retractable
landing gear, Towing of gliders/hang gliders, Tail wheel, Turbine engine,
Elimination of 10,000-foot altitude restriction, and New category, class or
type.
12. Category & Class
USUA recommends only a category and class endorsement requirement, not
make/model specific. Also, 5 hours experience in make/model is not necessary
on the basis of safety based on past experience with 19 years of two-place
ultralight trainer exemption experience. USUA recommends that FAA simply
drop make/model endorsement requirements because category and class
endorsements adequately satisfy the safety issues associated with changing
from one aircraft to another.
13. Light sport aircraft
§ FAA should consider increasing the definition of Light sport aircraft to
include well-understood and time-proven aircraft such as Cessna 150, 152, and
Piper Tomahawk. These common training aircraft, and those like them, are even
less difficult to fly than the "Cubs, Champs and Taylorcraft" for which
FAA
has modeled this definition
§ FAA should include powered paragliders along with powered parachutes. FAA has a good definition and category for powered parachutes, and it makes sense to include powered paragliders as they, too, involve two-place operation for instruction and for recreation
§ FAA should include an option for gyroplanes to be light sport aircraft. They represent some of the most uncomplicated designs with only a freewheeling overhead rotor and pusher engine.
§ It is not possible to evaluate the contents of the "consensus standards" airworthiness programs until such standards exist. These standards will determine the cost of compliance for a manufacturer and determine the resultant cost to the consumer.
14. Split Airman and Aircraft portions
USUA recommends that FAA split the pilot certification portion of NPRM 11133
from the aircraft airworthiness portion. Separate final rules, one for each
of the two portions, would prevent a hang-up of some kind on the
airworthiness side from holding up the pilot certification side or vice
versa.
RATIONALE FOR TWO-TIER CONCEPT
Original USUA Issues Not Addressed
USUA agrees, generally, with the pilot, instructor and aircraft options
proposed in NPRM 11133. However, FAA's NPRM 11133 disregards the
fundamental
simplicities embodied in Part 103 and has gone far beyond the original USUA
requests related to ultralight aviation. USUA is concerned that the NPRM
will not resolve the original issues that USUA has presented again and again.
What USUA continues to seek is reflected in the operational activities we
are now involved with, as found in FAR Part 103 (Ultralight Vehicles), FAA
exemptions for operation of two-seaters and associated flight activities.
USUA has repeated many times in national publications and in petitions to FAA, that in over 19 years of two-place ultralight instruction authorized by FAA exemptions, one thing is very clear: those who learn to fly ultralights with an ultralight instructor in two-place ultralights, learn to fly two place ultralights.
Naturally defined scope of aircraft and operations Ultralight Aviation, as a sport and industry, has matured over the past 20 years to be recognized as distinctly unique in Civil Aviation through separate rules (FAR Part 103) and cultural aspects.
As compared to General Aviation, Ultralight Aviation's primary attributes
include:
1. Simplicity of flight
2. Low cost of acquisition
3. Less regulatory need
4. Highly accessible
5. Operations mainly away from population centers and air traffic routes
Those who participate in ultralight aviation are defined as a group that tends to fly together, are given separate areas at airshows. Several national advocacy organizations have been formed expressly to serve them. Unpowered ultralights are towed by powered ultralights.
Ultralighting as recreation
Many who participate in ultralighting do so as they see it similar in scope
to riding personal watercraft, snowmobiles, motorcycles and similar machines.
They are drawn to aviation through ultralighting, compared to traditional
general aviation, because they find requirements to own and operate an
ultralight reasonable and acceptable for the associated privileges.
In the early 1980's, it was demonstrated that ultralighting has a unique culture. Two major General Aviation organizations created ultralight di visions, only to close them several years later when many ultralight division members did not assimilate into the main organization.
Ultralight instruction as a part time business In a USUA poll taken in July 2001, only 9% of all ultralight instructors said they provide training full time. The vast majority of instructors responded saying they provide training part-time, usually just on the weekends. Their aim is to help local ultralight owners safely fly their own equipment. Income generated from this training is often used to supplement the cost of operating the ultralight trainer, nothing more.
FAA has proposed a requirement that all ultralight instructors who wish to continue offering training become FAA-authorized instructors. In an April 2002 USUA-sponsored seminar, full-time instructors indicated they would accept the additional burden and expense to do so as their business depended on having qualified instructors on staff. The July 2001 poll indicated roughly 40%, of the part-time instructors indicated they could justify the additional burden and expense to become FAA-authorized instructors based on what they understood FAA was going to propose. Many admitted they would discon tinue training in their area. They are also the only instructors within a large geographical region.
USUA believes there will be a significant negative safety impact on the sport and industry if the proposal is adopted. Many experienced instructors with specific knowledge in ultralight-type aircraft operations have said that they will discontinue providing flight instruction. Manufacturers will lose aircraft sales as these instructors flood the market with their used trainers when either they are required to stop flying or keep them for recreational use. With an expected decrease in the number of flight instructors, access to flight training for ultralight-type aircraft will be unreasonably burdensome for many. This could lead back to the days of self-training when many well-intentioned enthusiasts died through lack of proper flight instruction.
Embody the training exemption programs in the FAA rules
USUA believes safety is best served by continuing to support a method for
those ultralight instructors who like slow, rural operation. FAA should write
the exemptions into a permanent Special FAR that relates to FAR Part 103
(Ultralight Regulation), just as sport pilot is a Special FAR related to
parts 61 & 91 (traditional, general aviation).
USUA sees no reason to penalize existing ultralight pilots and instructors who want to simply continue doing what they have done for years, which, according to FAA, they have done well and safely.
More privileges with more responsibility
Ultralighters have expressed willingness to accept additional Federal
requirements in exchange for a modest increase in privileges. This is
evidenced by the numerous requests to FAA, including a petition for
rulemaking in 1988 and a petition for exemption in 1994. USUA believes NPRM
11133 is asking too much of those who wish to operate just slightly outside
the basic parameters contained in Part 103. USUA also believes there are a
number of issues that could be resolved for those who wish to own and operate
larger, faster aircraft.
Two Tier basic premise
FAA is proposing to encompass a very wide spectrum of aircraft in a single
rule. Standards for the manufacture and operation of Light Sport Aircraft are
being developed that will apply to all aircraft and airmen regardless of
performance or intended use. It has been noted numerous times by aviation
industry leaders that standards are always developed for the highest level
within a category. In this case, FAA's proposal is appropriate for the
manufacture and operation of a 100-130 mph fixed wing aircraft easily capable
of long cross country trips for which flight over congested areas and landing
access to downtown airports is convenient. Yet, by design, aircraft such as
powered parachutes and trikes are not capable of speeds much beyond what is
currently allowed under Part 103. Many pilots of these and similar open
cockpit-type aircraft have reported they are willing to accept Part 103
operating restrictions, such as no flight over congested areas, if there were
aircraft and airmen standards specifically related to this level.
International precedent
The global ultralight, sometimes called microlight, sport and industry, has
developed over the past 20 years to a point where it is an accepted and
defined category with aviation. The most visible source to show the
homogenization of ultralight standards is the Federation Aeronautique
Internationale (FAI);the world governing body of air sports activities
representing over 90 countries. For the past 15 years, FAI has defined
microlights as weighing up to 450 kg (992 lbs) gross weight with a stall
speed no greater that 65 kph (35 kts). The European Joint Aviation
Authorities have also accepted this definition. That definition mirrors the
two place ultralight trainers allowed in the US by FAA exemption. Many
European countries, (where ultralighting is more popular than any other form
of aviation) have adopted this definition as well. It is by far the most used
definition worldwide.
Most countries have developed ultralight-specific standards for aircraft and airmen, often delegating administration of programs where the standards are applied to national aero clubs or similar representative groups.
Safety through risk management
Ultralighters have accepted responsibility for managing the inherent risks
associated with operations that do not require formalized FAA aircraft and
airmen standards. As an example, ultralighters learn to fly over landable
areas at all times as there is no assumption that a powerplant will continue
running.
The chart below depicts the Kinetic Energy of various two-place aircraft operated under current Part 103 training programs compared to the proposed Light Sport Aircraft. Light Sport Aircraft kinetic energy at gross weight and minimum speed is 96% more than the heaviest and fastest ultralight trainer. The limited performance scope of ultralight aircraft has assured that the number of injuries in accidents compared to the number of known accidents is low.
Create Special FAR: Ultralight Aircraft
This brings USUA's most important recommendation to FAA.
FAA should accommodate the fat single and two-place ultralight aircraft in a dedicated special regulation (Ultralight Aircraft S-FAR), which is associated with Part 103 (Ultralight Vehicles). In this S-FAR FAA could require registration of these aircraft in order to provide safety information to the owners, and otherwise allow flight operations, including training for compensation to continue as it has during 20 years of the FAA exemptions for flight training with two-seaters. These ultralight aircraft would have more restrictions than light sport aircraft such as no flight over congested areas and into ATC controlled airspace only with prior permission.
This allows those who wish to fly simply, to do so without the economic and regulatory burden of General Aviation rules. Ultralighting has proven to be a popular recreational pursuit as the requirements to participate are low enough to be attractive to the general public and consistent with similar land and water-based recreational activities.
COMMENTS INCORPORATING TWO TIER CONCEPT
The following comments are specific to airmen and aircraft under the first
tier of the proposed two-tier approach. This is limited to single place
aircraft often called "fat" ultralights and two-seat aircraft meeting the
FAR Part 103 ultralight training exemption definition, as shown below.
TIER 1 - Ultralight Aircraft (UA)
SINGLE PLACE
- Single occupant,
- 360 pounds empty weight (662 lbs maximum gross weight),
- Ten gallons maximum fuel capacity,
- 32 knots maximum power-off stall speed, and
- 72 knots maximum speed in level flight with maximum continuous power (VH).
TWO PLACE
- One or two occupants
- 496 pounds empty weight (992 lbs maximum gross weight),
- Ten gallons maximum fuel capacity,
- 35 knots (65 kph) maximum power-off stall speed, and
- 75 knots maximum speed in level flight with maximum continuous power (VH).
This limits the commanded kinetic energy of an ultralight aircraft flown by a pilot holding an ultralight pilot certificate.
TIER 2 - Light Sport Aircraft (LSA)
LSA would remain as proposed allowing an owner or operator the choice of UA
or LSA for slower, lighter aircraft.
Ultralight Aircraft (UA) Pilot Eligibility and Requirements USUA proposes FAA adopt the current recognized ultralight vehicle training programs for single place and instructor certificates. USUA proposes FAA adopt the current recognized ultralight vehicle training programs for instructor, minus the instructor specific requirements for two-place privileges. This includes minimum ages for student 14, pilot 16, instructor 18.
UA Pilot Privileges and Limitations
An ultralight aircraft pilot could fly any category, class or type aircraft
that meets the Ultralight Aircraft definition. Empty weight given is
consistent with previous proposals and the current ultralight training
exemptions. USUA believes gross weight is a better way to define maximum
limits and gives designs more freedom. It also mirrors the globally accepted
FAI Microlight definition. This would help boost export sales of US
ultralight aircraft.
Operating limitations A UA pilot would be limited to the operating rules contained in FAR Part 103.
Grandfathering The aeronautical knowledge, aeronautical experience and flight proficiency for those successfully completing an FAA-recognized ultralight training program under FAR Part 103 would be credited toward a UA pilot certificate.
36 Month Transition Period USUA recommends that FAA place the two-place ultralight training exemptions in a new S-FAR. This would allow the existing ultralight instructors to continue teaching without interruption. FAA should allow continued operation by ultralight instructors without forcing them to learn to fly and teach in 130 mph aircraft. A new S-FAR associated with FAR Part 103 (Ultralights) could adopt the existing pilot and instructor training programs and codify them to enable FAA oversight and enforcement. An option for program administration by advocate associations should be considered, but is not a requirement of this recommendation. Such organizational delegation would be limited to the application process, if any involvement were necessary at all. Program standards, testing and enforcement should be the responsibility of FAA.
By retaining the existing definition of ultralight two-place trainers in the USUA proposed S-FAR, there is no need to push ultralight instructors into parts 61 & 91 or to force them to become pilots and instructors competent to fly 130 mph aircraft. Those instructors, who do want the increased privileges proposed by FAA for sport pilot instructors, would have that option in the system proposed in NPRM 11133.
Recreational Use
USUA recommends that FAA place a new option for recreational use of two-place
ultralights (defined currently as training planes) in a new S-FAR. Those who
have advanced to the instructor level have carried "passengers" in the
broad
sense, with a good safety record and have been FAA sanctioned over all those
years.
USUA recommends two place pilot applicants obtain at least 20 hours of experience under an instructor's guidance, pass FAA tests (copied from existing ultralight instructor tests) for knowledge (associated with ultralight regulation Part 103), and pass a practical test exactly like the existing ultralight instructor practical, without the teaching portions. Upon successful completion, the new pilot could fly these very limited craft (defined exactly like ultralight trainers today) for fun and recreation with one passenger.
Recognize existing fat single and two-place Ultralight Aircraft maintenance programs While FAA is to be commended in their inventive approach to the light sport aircraft airworthiness program, there is no acknowledgment of the practical lessons learned in decades of ultralight operation. For example two-place ultralight trainers have had industry requirements for inspections in accordance with manufacturers Recommendations and repair/alterations in the manner prescribed by FAA in well-established guidance to mechanics. In over 19 years of experience, USUA is not aware of any failure of a two-place trainer that had been maintained accordingly. Also, airworthiness of single-place aircraft that modestly exceed the definition of ultralight vehicles has not been a problem. These efforts of successful operation in an environment not regulated or enforced by FAA should be rewarded.
GENERAL COMMENTS
The following comments pertain to the NPRM without specific consideration for
the two-tier concept.
Medical Certification
USUA has no objection to FAA's emphasis on driver license medicals for sport
pilots. This can benefit those who cannot pass an FAA physical examination
for whatever reason, although USUA points out that a certain level of
physical ability is required for safe flight. Consistent with our original
1988 petition to FAA, USUA continues to believe that operation of balloons
and gliders represent very similar air sport groups, and that the medical
requirements to operate those craft should be identical to fat single and
two-place "ultralights." In any case, USUA believes that this single
factor
should not be the go-or-no-go point for NPRM 11133.
USUA has compiled data indicating a lack of pilot medical problems as the cause of accidents with ultralight pilots and instructors. There is virtually no problem, when considering ultralight flight, and therefore USUA strongly objects to a medical physical requirement for those pilots and instructors. However, pilot medical data specifically relating to the operation of the significantly heavier and faster aircraft (up to 130 mph), as now proposed by FAA, is not so clear to USUA. Therefore, we cannot comment on the safety of allowing pilots of heavier, faster aircraft which fly over congested areas and into controlled airspace to fly without a medical. USUA has repeatedly stated since 1988 that there is a need for more reasonable regulation provided for trikes and powered parachutes. USUA has also pointed out the same need for the use of fat and two-seat ultralights for personal recreation by qualified pilots;"qualified" as in use of existing ultralight pilot and instructor programs. Whether the proposed medical is successful or not, FAA should pursue regulatory improvement for fat and two-seat ultralights for personal recreation by qualified pilots as well.
FAA Pilot Requirements To Add Sport Pilot Privileges
NPRM 11133 proposes that an FAA certificated private (or better) pilot would
have sport pilot privileges. However, the pilot must receive and log specific
training for any make and model of light-sport aircraft for which the pilot
holds a category and class rating and that the pilot hasn't piloted. The
pilot also has to get a logbook endorsement from the authorized instructor
who trained the pilot certifying proficiency in that make/model.
If a private pilot wants to add category and class privileges for which they do not have an aircraft category or class rating on a private pilot certificate (i.e. powered parachute), they would have to meet the requirements for the addition of those privileges established in an FAA Practical Test Standards or Advisory Circular for each category and class of aircraft. The exact standards do not yet exist.
FAA proposes to establish two new aircraft category and class ratings. They are weight-shift-control [why FAA does not call them trikes, the popular term used worldwide, is unknown] with land and sea class ratings, and powered parachute [no land and sea distinction]. In addition, FAA will develop new training and certification requirements while "seeking industry input "for these new aircraft ratings at the sport pilot and private pilot levels.
Recommendation
USUA has no objection to FAA pilot requirements to add sport pilot
privileges. For years USUA has expressed concern, however, requesting such
broad privileges could necessitate substantial pilot training and aircraft
certification standards;more than is actually necessary for safe operation
of
two-seaters flown only day, VFR, and away from congested areas. USUA's 1988
petition requested the more limited operating privileges in trade for fewer
training requirements.
FAA Flight Instructor To Sport Pilot Instructor
If already holding a current and valid FAA flight instructor certificate
(CFI) issued under 14 CFR part 61, that CFI could provide flight training
toward a sport pilot certificate without further evidence of proficiency.
The FAA CFI would be limited to providing instruction in the same aircraft category and class listed on his/her existing pilot certificate and flight instructor certificate. The instructor must have at least an FAA 3rd class medical certificate or a valid drivers license.
FAA instructors would have to receive training on any specific make and model of light-sport aircraft in which they had not acted as pilot-in-command. This means they would need a logbook endorsement from the authorized instructor [another sport pilot instructor] who conducted their training certifying proficiency in that make and model of light-sport aircraft. For example, to step up from a Rotax 503-powered Quicksilver Sport into a Rotax 582-powered Quicksilver Sport would require a check-out and whatever training the examining CFI dictated.
The CFI would also be required to have at least 5 hours of pilot-in-command time in the specific make and model light-sport aircraft before providing instruction in that aircraft.
FAA excludes ultralight instructors from this "simple grandfathering" because they are issued instructor authority under exemptions to Part 103 (Ultralight Vehicles, not part 61, Traditional general aviation).
The FAA proposal works great for existing FAA CFI's. Some FAA CFI's who are teaching in ultralights are USUA members. However, generally very few FAA CFI's have chosen to teach in ultralights even though for many years they could simply apply with one of the associations and be granted that authority with no make/model checkout or minimum flight time.
History reveals problems when CFIs checked themselves out in ultralights. This is because ultralights have different flight characteristics than traditional aircraft for which the CFI was trained and tested by FAA. Now all ultralight training programs require a CFI checkout because it is essential.
USUA has always required a flight check of FAA CFIs who requested BFI registration. Yet in 20 years of program operation, less than 20% of registered instructors are also CFIs. Those CFIs are USUA members and they are allowed to instruct in any make model of light sport aircraft in which he/she has already logged at least 5 hours.
Recommendation
Because FAA is requiring that CFI's pass a flight check before instructing,
USUA believes this is a good proposal for existing FAA CFIs. It is
recommended that this portion of the proposal be adopted in the final rule.
USUA recommends that only a category checkout is warranted for instructors with one and two-place craft weighing less than 992 pounds gross weight. Simply changing make and model within the same category has not proven to be a significant safety hazard. So, USUA can see no reason for FAA to require a specific make/model checkout within a category. A category change (airplane to powered parachute to trike) does bring the need for a checkout (with appropriate training to precede the test).
Private Pilot certificates;Trikes and Powered Parachutes
If the practical requirements of sport pilot get too close to the
requirements for private pilot, students may go right to private pilot (as is
the case now with the Recreational Pilot certificate).
Those who might choose to go to the private certificate, or simply add trike or powered parachute to their existing private certificate, may fly with more than one passenger on a cross-country at night, higher than 10,000 feet ending at a downtown airport. Imagine the 4-place trike or powered parachute being sequenced between traditional airplanes by the air traffic control tower at your downtown airport around 10:00 in the evening. FAA can limit this through the aircraft operating limitations of individual aircraft. But such potential is definitely what FAA is proposing to the public in NPRM 11133.
This might appeal to those private-and-higher FAA certificated pilots who want to transition to two-seat airplanes, gliders, balloons, powered parachutes, and weight-shift-control aircraft. Remember that sport pilot privileges would not require a 3rd class medical, but only a valid drivers license. Many USUA members are in this position.
Of course the content of the pilot testing standard;the required knowledge and skill for the specific category;is an important issue. These standards do not yet exist and therefore may not be evaluated. The mechanism is simple enough, however, basically some training in the aircraft and a CFI logbook endorsement.
Over flights of cities
FAA is proposing that sport pilots be allowed to fly over towns and into
downtown airports. For years USUA has expressed concern, that requesting such
broad privileges could necessitate substantial pilot training and aircraft
certification standards;more than what is actually necessary for safe
operation of two-seaters flown only day, VFR, and away from congested areas.
USUA's 1988 petition requested more limited operating privileges in trade for fewer training requirements. USUA policy continues promote the successful operational practices related to pilots of aircraft which have gross weights below 450 kg (992 lb, which is similar to the training exemption's 496 lb empty weight plus fuel and occupants) for two-place and 300kg (662 lb) for single place, with no more than a 35 knot clean stall speed.
Surely FAA has a challenge to sell the public and especially downtown airports on the operation of these craft;commonly called ultralights;flying over cities and into urban airports.
Ground Training
USUA believes that the authority to fly over cities has made the numerous
ground training topics relevant for sport pilot applicants. However, for
those who operate "fat" ultralights, especially single-seaters, and who
are
willing to remain limited to operating in rural settings as ultralights are
required to do, the proposed ground training requirements are excessive and
not warranted on the basis of safety. The ground training items listed in FAR
Part 103 (Ultralight Regulation) have proven adequate for those who operate
"ultralights" in rural areas.
Therefore USUA objects to requiring extensive training for those pilots who fly the more limited "fat" ultralights and recommends continuing to use the existing ultralight programs for those pilots. Such operating authority could be included in the Special FAR related to FAR 103 (Ultralight Regulation) as recommended above.
Recommendation
USUA recommends caution of supporting the proposal to allow flights over
urban areas. It will require unnecessary pilot training and aircraft
certification standards of those who are willing to remain clear of cities
and downtown airports.
Ultralight pilot-to-Sport pilot
This addresses the steps proposed by FAA in NPRM 11133 that an ultralight
pilot, who is registered in an FAA-recognized ultralight registration program
within 24 months after the effective date of the rule, would go through to
obtain a sport pilot certificate from FAA.
Pilots would have to meet minimum age, language, and medical requirements. Pilots also would have to pass the appropriate knowledge and practical tests for the certificate.
Pilots would not have to meet the aeronautical experience requirements in the FAA proposal if they have logged evidence of more than minimum time.
The proposal would require pilots to obtain a notarized copy of their ultralight pilot records from the FAA-recognized ultralight organization. Those records would document that the pilot is a registered ultralight pilot with that FAA-recognized ultralight organization. The records would list each category and class of ultralight vehicle the organization recognizes the pilot is qualified to operate.
Pilots would still have to pass the knowledge (written) test and practical test (oral and flight) for a sport pilot certificate. An FAA Designated Pilot Examiner (DPE) would administer the practical examination. After the pilot successfully completes the examinations, the designated pilot examiner or FAA inspector would review these records and document the appropriate endorsements for each category and class of ultralight vehicle that the pilot is qualified to operate in the applicant's logbook.
A sport pilot certificate would authorize (assuming two logbook endorsements:
ATC airspace and faster light sport aircraft) pilots to fly with another
person in aircraft that could sustain more than 130 mph (115 kts), flight
over cities and into airports that require ATC communications. This is much
more authority than the present-day ultralight pilot, or even ultralight
instructor, is granted.
Recommendation
USUA supports the proposed sport pilot option for those ultralight pilots who
want to fly two-seat aircraft for fun and recreation in aircraft that fly as
fast as 130 mph. Many USUA members will benefit from this portion of the
proposal.
However, USUA has not found safety data that indicates so dramatically an increase in the requirements for those who prefer slower, more open cockpit flying over rural areas, in aircraft similar to those currently operated under Part 103. FAA apparently agrees with this by stating in NPRM 11133 that the success of existing ultralight pilot registration programs [single and two-place ultralight] "exemplifies the ability of the aviation industry to take responsibility for the safety of its flight operations."
Why can't FAA just add similar programs for pilots of single place craft that modestly exceed the limitations of the ultralight vehicle definition?
Notarized training record
USUA recommends that FAA not require notarization of an instructor's
association records when applying to become a sport pilot instructor.
Instead, the registration card received by each registrant should be
satisfactory evidence for FAA's purpose because that is what FAA asked the
associations to produce for "satisfactory evidence of compliance" in the
past.
FAA Pilot Examiners and FAA Aviation Safety Inspectors
USUA experience indicates that few existing FAA ASIs or DPEs will cross over
into "ultralight" type aircraft for flight tests. In particular, very few
existing ASIs or DPEs will choose to do weight-shift (trikes) and powered
parachutes.
This is another reason to continue the existing ultralight training exemptions (written into the FARs). FAA should allow ultralight instructors (potentially future DPEs) to continue to fly without being forced to expand into 130 mph aircraft. These ultralight instructors, and future incoming ultralight instructors, are the pool of potential sport pilot instructors and DPEs.
Ultralight Instructor to Sport Pilot Instructor
The first thing an existing ultralight instructor would have to do is to
apply for, and complete all of, the requirements for sport pilot. Only then,
may he/she apply for sport pilot instructor (CFI). He/she would then have to
satisfactorily meet the following FAA requirements (according to FAA NPRM
11133).
An applicant would be required to pass the FAA knowledge (written) test on the required aeronautical knowledge areas to the FAA CFI level. All knowledge areas are also subject to discussion/questioning during the oral portion of the practical examination.
An existing ultralight instructor would not need to retake the Fundamentals of Instruction knowledge test. However, the FAA pilot examiner would be empowered to question each applicant about his/her knowledge of fundamentals of instruction.
An applicant would be required to pass the FAA practical test in a light-sport aircraft that is representative of the category and class of aircraft for the privilege the applicant seeks. During the test the applicant must demonstrate the ability to teach all areas in the pilot test standards including stall awareness, spin entry, spins, and spin recovery procedures in an airplane, glider, or weight-shift-control aircraft, as appropriate.
The proposal would require the applicant to present these records, as well as the results from a knowledge test, to a designated pilot examiner or FAA inspector when applying for a flight instructor certificate with a sport pilot rating.
After passing all those examinations, the FAA designated examiner or FAA inspector would review the applicant's records and endorse his/her logbook for each category and class, make and model of light sport aircraft in which the applicant is authorized to fly and provide flight training.
At least 5 hours of flight experience by the instructor would be required in each make/model of light sport aircraft before the instructor could instruct with it.
Exemptions Terminated
At the end of the 36 months of any final rule, the existing ultralight
training exemptions would expire and would not be renewed. FAA proposes that
all two-place training vehicles would be required to become certificated
light-sport aircraft and there would no longer be a need for exempted
two-seat ultralight trainers.
Recommendations
Written Test and Practical Examination
There is too much of an increase in knowledge for those who want to fly and
teach people to fly fat-single and two-place ultralights as now defined and
not over cities. The better solution is to also have the option of a Special
Federal Aviation Regulation (S-FAR) attached to FAR Part 103 (Ultralight
Vehicles) for recreational use of single and two-seaters which exceed
ultralight rules but meet the training exemption vehicle definition if
two-seaters.
This new Part 103 SFAR would require a written test associated with operations in Part 103, and would be identical to the written tests passed by ultralight instructors today. The tests would be from FAA and the resulting pilot/instructor certificates would have an FAA logo. FAA would establish standards (by adopting those in current use), and would have full enforcement authority.
Oral and flight tests for those who request only those privileges allowed by FAR Part 103 should be given by ultralight instructors (AFI/BFI's) who should be grandfathered into a new SFAR attached to Part 103 with no additional testing. Allowable aircraft definitions should be identical to today's ultralight trainers and the fat single-place machines as described in the 1994 H. O. Malone petitions.
Basic certificate with additional privileges added with instruction and
endorsement.
USUA believes that training and testing, appropriate to the type of operation
conducted, reduces aircraft accidents. All sport pilots would receive
training tailored to a specific category, class and type aircraft.
In addition, a sport pilot could choose to add privileges, as needed, with the appropriate training. This would reduce accidents or incidents by limiting the privileges and would allow a sport pilot to gain the skills and experience necessary to operate in a simple operating environment and build experience. This building block approach would allow a sport pilot to gain additional skills through additional training when the pilot wants to add more privileges.
Building blocks (allowed by Sport pilot CFI via logbook endorsement) would
include but are not limited to:
o Constant speed propeller
o Multi-engine
o Retractable landing gear
o Towing of gliders/hang gliders
o Tail wheel
o Turbine engine
o Elimination of 10,000-foot altitude restriction
o New category, class or type
Category and Class Endorsement
USUA recommends only a category and class endorsement requirement, not
make/model specific. This would mean a pilot could get one endorsement to fly
all trikes that fly off land. Another endorsement would be needed to fly an
airplane (changing category) or fly off water (changing class). A pilot would
not need an endorsement to change from a Quicksilver Sprint to Quicksilver
Sport.
Also, 5 hours experience in make/model is not necessary on the basis of safety, based upon past experience with 19 years of two-place ultralight trainer exemption experience. USUA recommends that FAA drop make/model endorsement requirements because category and class endorsements adequately satisfy the safety issues associated with changing from one aircraft to another.
The Aircraft
FAA intends to create a new category of aircraft;light-sport aircraft that
would include airplanes, gliders, gyroplanes, powered parachutes,
lighter-than-air, and weight-shift-control aircraft (trikes). Helicopters and
powered-lift aircraft would be excluded.
FAA also intends to create new airworthiness certificates for "Light-sport
aircraft." The FAA proposes to limit these aircraft to a(n):
- maximum of 2 occupants,
- 1,232-lb. (560 kg.) takeoff weight (660lbs for lighter-than-air),
- 44-knot stall speed without lifting devices, 39 kts with lifting devices
deployed (i.e. flaps),
- 115-knot maximum operating speed (VNE for gliders),
- single, non-turbine engine,
- fixed landing gear (except seaplanes),
- unpressurized cabin,
- fixed-pitch propeller (ground adjustable would be OK).
Helicopters and powered lift would not be light-sport aircraft due to their complexity.
FAA internally originated this portion of the NPRM. The "industry," including ARAC, made no such Recommendations.
Airworthiness certificates
- Special airworthiness certificate;light-sport aircraft.
Only complete, "ready-to-fly" aircraft would be eligible for special
light-sport aircraft airworthiness certificates. They would be for sport and
recreation, flight training for compensation, or rental. Gyroplanes are
excluded by FAA. These aircraft would have to be constructed to a
"consensus
standard" approved by FAA. Three years after the issuance of the rule,
instructors would be allowed to charge for instruction only in aircraft with
this airworthiness certificate. Operating limitations would address the
maintenance and inspection requirements, preventive maintenance, as well as
flight test programs, operations in various airspace classes, and pilot
qualification. If an operator chooses not to perform this maintenance, the
special airworthiness certificate in the light-sport category would no longer
be valid.
- Experimental-light sport aircraft
This airworthiness certificate would allow sport and recreation (and free
flight training). Operating limitations would prohibit compensation or hire
while training is being conducted.
a. All fat and 2-seat "ultralights" must apply within 24 months. FAA
inspection must be passed before certificate is issued. Could be used for
compensation and for-hire flight training until 3 years after final rule.
Afterward, flight training could not be for "compensation or hire."
b. Experimental assembled from eligible kit. Manufacturer must have
certificated make/model as light sport aircraft. Used for sport, recreation
and free flight training (But not for compensation or hire).
c. Experimental if it previously had special light sport aircraft
airworthiness. Used for sport, recreation and free flight training. Useful
for those who do not want to comply with light sport aircraft operating
limitations. You could alter the aircraft without the manufacturer's
authorization, or choose not to comply with the mandatory safety-of-flight
actions.
Imported Kits
Imported kits would have to be manufactured in a country that has an
agreement with the United States for the import and export of the aircraft to
be made from the kit.
Maintenance
Maintenance and preventive maintenance on an aircraft with a special
light-sport airworthiness certificate may be performed by:
a. an appropriately rated mechanic,
b. an appropriately rated repair station, and
c. a repairman (light-sport aircraft) with a maintenance rating (see below).
Certificated pilots could also perform preventive maintenance.
Inspections
Required inspections on an aircraft with an experimental, light-sport
airworthiness certificate may be performed by:
a. an appropriately rated mechanic,
b. an appropriately rated repair station, and
c. a repairman (light-sport aircraft) with a maintenance rating.
d. The pilot, if the plane is experimental and the pilot obtained a repairman
certificate (light-sport aircraft) with an inspection rating.
Repairman Certificates
To get a repairman certificate (light-sport aircraft), an applicant would
have to meet certain eligibility requirements relating to age, language, and
citizenship or residency; demonstrate the requisite skill to determine
whether a light-sport aircraft is in a condition for safe operation; and meet
the requirements for one of the following ratings:
Inspection rating:
* Complete a 16-hour training course on the inspection requirements of the
particular make and model of light-sport aircraft.
Maintenance rating:
* Complete an 80-hour training course on the maintenance requirements of
the particular category of light-sport aircraft.
The airworthiness folks at FAA are to be commended for the inventive way in which they have structured this category with no type or production certificates. In general it is a good attempt to address real needs of air sports owners/pilots, and even has an amnesty provision for fat single and two-place "ultralight aircraft."
This method may save on the cost of production compared to traditional type certification. If so, manufacturers could pass down the savings to the consumer, although it would still cost more than present day ultralights and experimental kits. Consumer safety would be enhanced, as a manufacturer would have to declare to FAA that it had met a recognized design standard.
Definition May Need More Weight
The definition of the aircraft permits 130 mph speeds, but excludes many
traditional aviation trainers which are slower than 130 mph, but modestly
heavier than light sport aircraft permits. These aircraft (Cessna 150, 152,
Piper Tomahawk, etc.) are well proven aircraft and are easier to fly than the
"Cubs, Champs and Taylorcraft" for which FAA has modeled this definition.
Some consideration should be given to slightly increasing the weight so as to
allow for these well-understood and time-proven aircraft.
This would be good for those who wished maximum privileges of the certificate. Many more aircraft would be available for training, rental and ownership. This would bring down costs, increase accessibility and would allow newer aged aircraft to be used.
Include Powered Paragliders
FAA should include powered paragliders along with powered parachutes. This
will add another option for powered paraglider pilots. FAA has a good
definition and category for powered parachutes, and it makes sense to include
powered paragliders as they, too, involve two-place operation for instruction
and for recreation. FAA gave no reasoning as to why it proposed to exclude
powered paragliders.
Tandem operations are popular, and as light sport aircraft, powered paragliders would then be eligible for passenger carrying. This would also rule out the need for an exemption complying with FAA's attempt to eliminate "rulemaking by exemption."
Include Gyroplanes
FAA also excludes gyroplanes from the option of gaining a light sport
aircraft airworthiness certificate. If a consensus standard is developed, and
a manufacturer wants to conform to it, why exclude gyroplanes? They
represent some of the more uncomplicated designs with only a freewheeling
overhead rotor and pusher engine. FAA should include gyroplanes in the list
of potential light sport aircraft. This will add another option for gyroplane
pilots.
Consensus Standard Impossible to Evaluate
It is not possible to evaluate the contents of the "consensus standards"
until such standards exist. FAA words NPRM 11133 so that most readers
believe the manufacturers will have control over the contents of the program,
but FAA certainly has the last and final approval authority. How appropriate
and reasonable will FAA be? We cannot know until we see a finished consensus
standard. Therefore, ultralight manufacturers, the FAA, and other affected
parties should get together, create, and publish the industry consensus
standard before the public is obligated to respond to the NPRM without a full
awareness of the ramifications of the light-sport aircraft certification
process and costs.
These standards will determine the cost of compliance for a manufacturer and will determine the resultant cost to the consumer.
The United States Ultralight Association appreciates this opportunity to make our views known.
Sincerely,
Al Carpenter
USUA Chairman of the Board