FAA Sport Pilot Rating

[barney]

Hey what do you guys think about a FAA sport pilot rating? Is it a gay rating that you would be extremely limited in use? I've got about 35 hours in a C-152 as I was working towards my private, and don't know if I would be able to get a private rating due to some circumstances.

However, the transition to sport pilot seems very easily doable.

Does anyone here have a sport rating and use it or is it pointless and a private rating is the only thing to be concerned with?

I know that this is not mil related but some love on this would be appreciated.

[Guest sleepy]

Don't do it, barney. Seriously.

If "some circumstances" has anything to do with medical stuff, I call bullshit. You're going to be a nav, right? If you can pass an IFC1A, you can get a third class FAA.

It does not take too much more effort to get a private, and the privileges far outweight those of a sport and/or recreational pilot. (Is recreational pilot still an option?)

The good thing with changes associated with sport pilot is that it is requiring the moronic ultralight guys to register their lawn chair contraptions and get a ticket themselves. This is kind of ambiguous, though, because many ultralight guys fly ultralights because they don't like following rules. Who's to say they will abide by the new changes?

Another good thing is that it allows folks who have been flying for years to keep flying if they can't pass a physical. Most of these folks are trustworthy enough to self-police, IMO. Besides, the airplane doesn't know if the PIC has a valid medical certificate.

The bad things are, again IMO, plentiful. The airplane market has been flooded with new LSA airplanes. The only ones I think are worth a damn are the remakes: new Cubs (without glass panels) Taylorcrafts and Luscombes.

Now the ones that aren't so good. The Tecnam. It supposedly flies great (salesmen will tell you anything), but it will be a cold day in hell before I put my happy ass into an airplane that has no solid rivets holding it together! Nothing but cherry max pop rivets! Zeniths are like that, too.

The Taxo (sp?) is Spanish and all composite. It is a high ender with all the whiz bang stuff. It's not something for someone learning to fly.

Problem is, these new LSA airplanes are too damn expensive. Bottom dollar is around 60k. Go up from there. So what happens now? Folks who want a sport pilot eligible airplane but can't afford a new one go out and by the old Luscombes, Taylorcrafts, Champs, Cubs, Porterfields, etc. and bastardize them. They change the airworthiness certificate, they make unapproved mods, the f-ck with aviation history. (I have purposefully excluded the Ercoupe...multiple layers of Hades must freeze, thaw, and refreeze before I fly that ugly thing.)

Then, when sales for all these new wizbang airplanes out there aren't as high as expected, another airplane company goes tits up, orphaning what airplanes were sold...e.g., Kitfox.

Sorry, you just asked about pilot privileges.

Don't do sport pilot. Suck it up and get your private. It carries a lot more weight and respect around the local airport. You'll be glad you did.

Good luck!

The beer is getting warm. No time to correct mistakes. You get the idea. Cheers!

[ 22. September 2006, 18:59: Message edited by: sleepy ]

[Guest aggiepilot]

Thought I'd share my limited experience with sport pilot stuff. The sport pilot really only makes sense if you can't pass the medical and own a sport eligible aircraft. There aren't any places I know of that rent sport pilot eligible aircraft. Remember, even a C150 weighs too much. As far as the older aircraft, just because they are sport eligible they still maintain the same airworthiness certificate and are maintained to the same standards. You could and can now change the license to experimental and do you're own maintennance and mods. However, I don't think you'll see people doing this because it really has a negative effect on value. I've been flying a 1940 ragwing luscombe for several years and all of the aircraft of this era offer a lot of bang for the buck. Don't knock the ercoupe until you've tried driving the little thing around with your arm out the window. It's pretty fun, but not as rewarding a making a nice 3 pointer in a Taylorcraft. Anyway do what it takes to get your private, you won't regret it. The sport certificate is really just a loophole in the regs for the old folks who can't maintain the medical.

The glass panel cub is blasphmeny!

[Right Seat Driver]

Get the private, I have seen a few dudes just get the sport to save money, but end up dropping a lot more to get their private when they realize they can't rent anywhere.

[Guest cguarino]

Sleepy, don't worry about those Cherry Max rivets. They were designed to replace solid rivets after manufacture (during a repair)when you can't get to the back of the rivet with a bucking bar. An aluminum/alloy 1/8 (-4) cherry max has approximately twice the shear strength of a solid aluminum rivet (664lbs vs 319lbs). There, I just opened up a whole new option to you. Now, enough of the thread hijack. Barney, get the PPL. You will never regret it.

[GSXR6Racer]

The sport pilot thing really is only a good option if for some reason you cant a medical. I would get teh private, then if for some reason you cant keep you medical but you can keep your drivers license then you can exercise sport pilot priveleges. Thats how I understand it, if anyone knows any different please say so, I dont want to give a guy wrong information. I'll look into more, but thats what I understood.

But my advice anyways, get the private, if you can. Leave the sport pilot option till you know for sure you cant get it

[Guest cbire880]

IIRC, the no medical requirement only applys if you have never been denied. Once you've been denied, you'll still need the 3rd class for Sport Pilot. Check part 61 to be sure.

[GSXR6Racer]

ok I see.. its still such a mess the FAA has made with this one

[Guest sleepy]

Originally posted by TBear:

Sleepy, don't worry about those Cherry Max rivets. They were designed to replace solid rivets after manufacture (during a repair)when you can't get to the back of the rivet with a bucking bar. An aluminum/alloy 1/8 (-4) cherry max has approximately twice the shear strength of a solid aluminum rivet (664lbs vs 319lbs). There, I just opened up a whole new option to you. Now, enough of the thread hijack. Barney, get the PPL. You will never regret it.

Sorry, got to carry on this momentary thread jack.

T.Bear, after a cursory search of the internet, hardware catalogs, and AC43.13, I have no idea where you got those numbers. Neither the shear or tensile strengths I found are anywhere close to that.

I did find this in multiple places in 43.13:

CAUTION: For metal repairs to the airframe, the use of blind rivets must be specifically authorized by the airframe manufacturer or approved by a representative of the FAA.

That says to me that blind rivets aren't always kosher. Why, then, would someone build an entire airplane that way?

I'm not calling you out, I'm trying to learn. PM me if you get the chance, please.

R6Racer--You are right...the FAA has created a big mess, and they don't seem to be doing anything to rectify the inequities or make right the inherent catch-22's. None of it makes sense, and no one can explain what it all means.

In addition to the new enigmatic LSA category of airplane, the EAA/VAA (Vintage Aircraft Association) is attempting to create yet another category in which "vintage airplanes"--there is no concrete definition of what that means--would indefintely forfeit the Standard Airworthiness Certificate in favor of some kind of restricted certificate that would allow any Joe Blow owner to perform the maintenance on said "vintage aircraft."

The FAA, who is obviously in cahoots with the EAA (see the Sport Pilot/LSA debacle), has not spoken to this yet, at least not to my knowledge. It, too, IMHO, is a bad idea. If you have never owned an airplane, the paperwork is very important and is usually a fiasco in and of itself. These changes will only further complicate the matter.

Stick with the tried and true. Private pilot certificate and an airplane with an Approved Type Certificate (ATC) number. If you want to fly an experimental (I do), know what you're getting into.

I apologize for the tangent. Some might be interested, though.

[Guest Demeeta652]

The sport pilot ticket is a great thing if you plan on owning your own LSA and you don't want to go through the hassle of paying for a 3rd class every 2 or 3 years. This has been a godsend for the responsible experimental aircraft pilots who don't want to spend thousands of extra dollars for training and requirements they simply don't need. However, if you're hoping to get any training value that would rub off onto your AF career, go for the Private. Sport Pilot has a lot of advantages for certain people, but it sounds like you would be better off with a PPL.

[barney]

Well it seems people overwhemingly promomte the private license. I guess that I was being a little biatch because my circumstances was a 45 minute drive and I could only go on the weekends and the wx is getting worse, and the money was a concern.

However, I was able to find a way and I am going to go for the PPL. Thanks for the insight everyone.

Thread closed

[Guest cobaltmetallic]

Originally posted by cbire880:

IIRC, the no medical requirement only applys if you have never been denied. Once you've been denied, you'll still need the 3rd class for Sport Pilot. Check part 61 to be sure.

Exactly correct. If you have lost or been denied a FAA medical, you cannot fly under the sport pilot rules without obtaining a new medical. Many of the sport pilots have held other ratings but realize that they will not pass their next medical exam. Therefore, they don't get a medical exam and fly as a sport pilot. Personally, this loop-hole bothers me. There are medical standards for a reason.

[Guest copenhagen]

btw - kitfox is still kicking... under new management, though.

[Buddy Spike]

Originally posted by sleepy:

Sorry, got to carry on this momentary thread jack.

T.Bear, after a cursory search of the internet, hardware catalogs, and AC43.13, I have no idea where you got those numbers. Neither the shear or tensile strengths I found are anywhere close to that.

Need to hone those google ninja skills more.

http://www.peerlessaerospace.com/pub/Produ...F_CHERRYMAX.pdf

See pg 8.

http://www.textronfasteningsystems.com/PDF...ng/speed_US.pdf

See pg 10

[ 26. September 2006, 18:40: Message edited by: PCL Retard ]

[Guest sleepy]

Roger that, PCL Retard. Who's retarded now? It's me, it's me. :D

TBear got me square. There is a difference between ultimate shear strength and single shear strength. Me learn lots.

Thanks, too, copenhagen. I know Kitfox owners/builders who are not aware of that!