sport pilot

[Caribean_gyro]

I just saw this http://www.aero-news.net/index.cfm?Full=1

weight went up on sport aircraft.
ChuckP :) :D

[Caribean_gyro]

but found something that worries me

The FAA has created two new aircraft airworthiness certificates for:
Special Light-Sport Aircraft. A new special airworthiness certificate for a light-sport category aircraft that is "ready to fly" when the manufacturer determines the aircraft meets a consensus standard developed jointly with FAA and industry (gyroplane category is excluded). SO we are excluded to trained and get compensation? DId we all agree to a manufacturing concensus?


Aircraft holding this airworthiness certificate may be used for personal use and for compensation while conducting flight training, rental (similar to primary category), or towing (of light-sport gliders or unpowered ultralights).


Experimental Light-Sport Aircraft. Aircraft holding this certificate may be used only for personal use. There are three ways to earn this new certificate:
existing ultralight-like aircraft that do not meet the requirements for ultralight vehicles
aircraft assembled from eligible kits that meet a consensus standard
aircraft previously issued a special, light-sport category airworthiness certificate.
Certain type-certificated aircraft that meet the above criteria may also be operated with a light-sport pilot certificate

WHat is then the advantage?

ChuckP

[Chuck Roberg]

ChuckP, Right now all flight instruction in an experimental gyro is done thru an exemption from the FAA.

At the time of the Sport Pilot proposal the manufactures of Gyros were not ready to produce a Light Sport Aircraft in the Gyro category. This was because no standards were set yet for gyros, so how could they produce any aircraft even if they wanted to.

This was brought up at the PRA convention last held in Texas. Sue Gardner from the FAA plus some of her staff was there. If my memory serves me right current experimental gyros used for training will be recertified as experimental light sport aircraft. In order for them to be used for training another exemption from the FAA will be issued. After a time when Gyro Light Sport Aircraft are produced the exemptions will expire on the experimental light sport gyros.

If an instructor still wishes to instruct in a gyro under Sport Pilot he (she) will have to purchase a new Light Sport Aircraft Gyro. His old gyro can still be used as an experimental light sport aircraft. But as you noted not for compensation or hire.

I don't know what the transition time will be. I heard 3 years being tossed around. But it won't be overnight. Hopefully in whatever time period it is, an instructor can get enough use out of his current trainer to justify buying a new one. Personally for me at this point I'm not sure I could justify the new purchase cost. So after the exemption expires I'll probably be flying for fun only.

[automan1223]

Be careful what you wish for.

The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

I wont name names of mfgs....but I have serious concerns about this. I dont think that there is a single mfg that will be ready in 3 years to meet the new standards even once they are in place and agreed upon. I dont believe that there will be a reliable certified powerplant to go on these certified gyros. To much is in flux so I could be wrong but:

.... how is the purchase of an entirely new aircraft, at least $30,000-50,000 say, going to make training affordable or plentiful ?

how many instructors are going to pony up and take the plunge when there will be little to be gained from mothballing their primary machine for so many years ?

throwing a wallet at the problem is neither the smart or proven way to solve this dilemma......

Ask me right now if I was an instructor whos machine I would purchase for my training needs.

answer, none.

I feel it getting warmer already.


Sincerely,

Jonathan Weis
Oriental NC

[Caribean_gyro]

But if I remember wrong wasn;t Greg greminger the Champion on getting the gyro included in the sport pilot? I beleived this is a 2 phase process . one to consider the gyro not to be complicated as the Heli and second to get known manufacturer to agree to some standards.

I think there was an UK study of the gyro that was funadmental for this manufacturing concensus? So why to push to get Gyro in sport if the instructor will be killed in the process.

my machine is new and I dont have cash floating to buy another one. Perhaps I am jumping the gun but I dont feel confortable yet.

[Ralph]

The Sport Pilot rules were posted this morning and will be in the Federal Register tomorrow. Check in to the EAA website (www.eaa.org) and you can download a PDF or WORD version of the new rules (~452 pages).

Based on a quick scan, the two big items are:

(1) Sport Pilot certificate holders can fly gyroplanes that meet the definitions

(2) Gyroplanes will NOT be included in the LSA aircraft set due to unresolved design issues that the FAA feels make them more complex than typical LSA aircraft types. Operation under present exemptions for instruction will continue for five years to minimize the impact of this decision. It looks like to issue might be open to reconsideration during the 5 year window.

Ralph

[Caribean_gyro]

I am lost I will waite tomorrow for the rule publishing. I just saw in the proposal a note that reads "91.319 Aircraft having experimental certificates: Operating limitations

"Conduct flight training in an aircraft which that person provides prior to January 31, 2010" Means my trainner is good until 2010 or id when the think we the gyro comunity will have a manufacturing concensus.

If I hit the lotto I will by a GBS hawk and trained in it at $1000.00 per hour

ChuckP

[PW_Plack]

Jonathan,

You said : "I dont believe that there will be a reliable certified powerplant to go on these certified gyros."

Neither these craft nor their engines will be certified by the FAA, only the gyro manufacturers will. That means the huge, expensive process required to get an aircraft "certificated" by the FAA will not apply. That's why so many people are anxious for LSA to happen.

As for the cost of a new machine, the theory is that the people who'd love to fly a gyro but have no interest in a homebuilt, or have been unable to get a 3rd-class medical, will create enough demand to allow some volume and lower costs. If enough people bought them, there's no reason a quality, factory-built two-place gyroplane should cost any more than a Harley.

[Ralph]

The rule excludes gyros from the certified LSA category. You will still be able to buy and build kits that will be registered as Experimental LSAs, but no certified, ready to fly gyros. Here is the text, straight from the FAA:

Paragraph (9) Gyroplane rotor system

The definition of light-sport aircraft in proposed §1.1 included gyroplanes. As discussed in the NPRM, the FAA did not propose to issue special airworthiness certificates for gyroplanes in the light-sport category. The FAA received numerous comments on the subject of gyroplanes (or autogyros or gyrocopters), including a submittal from the gyroplane trade association. Most of the comments concerned the availability of dual-instruction, and the effect that terminating current training exemptions would have on the availability of training for gyroplane pilots. The FAA included gyroplanes in the light-sport aircraft definition to permit a sport pilot to fly the small gyroplanes that are currently available on the market. The FAA believes that the training exemptions have permitted some increased availability of gyroplane flight instructors because the exemptions allowed for a two-seat gyroplane to be operated as an ultralight training vehicle by a qualified ultralight instructor. Existing two-seat gyroplanes that had been operated as training vehicles under the part 103 exemptions, and which have been certificated under §21.191 (i)(1), will be permitted to conduct similar flight training operations for five years, as provided for in §91.319 in this rule. The part 61 provisions of the rule will permit an existing ultralight gyroplane flight instructor to transition to become a flight instructor with a sport pilot rating. The FAA anticipates that this 5-year transition period will permit the gyroplane flight instructor pool to continue to expand to address the concerns of most of the commenters.

Two-seat gyroplanes that have been issued experimental certificates for the purpose of operating amateur-built aircraft under §21.191 (g) may be operated in accordance with operating limitations issued under §91.319. Generally, they may be used for sport and recreation operations, including carrying a passenger, and receiving personal flight training. Receiving personal flight training (obtaining credit for flight instruction received in the aircraft that one owns) was a concern for some commenters.
Many of the commenters were concerned that the consensus standards for light-sport aircraft would add prohibitively expensive costs to gyroplanes, and would result in fewer gyroplane flight instructors. The FAA notes that there are four gyroplane designs that have been type certificated. The FAA notes that many gyroplane designs are smaller and lighter weight than type certificated gyroplane designs. One commenter stated that even with less mass, ultralight gyroplanes are not different from existing gyroplanes and could be considered similar to gyroplanes that have a standard airworthiness certificate. If it is true that existing ultralight gyroplanes are similar to gyroplanes that have a standard airworthiness certificate, then the FAA will work with any manufacturer who desires to obtain a type certificate for a two-seat gyroplane that meets existing airworthiness standards. Part 27 airworthiness standards define an internationally recognized level of safety for small rotary wing aircraft. A gyroplane design may also receive a primary category type certificate, which will be issued if the FAA finds that the aircraft complies with the applicable airworthiness requirements approved under §21.17 (f) and has no feature or characteristic that makes it unsafe for its intended use.

Many of the commenters who called for the special light-sport aircraft airworthiness certificate for gyroplanes referred to the simple design and operation of flight controls. The FAA acknowledges that this is a reason for permitting sport pilots to fly gyroplanes, and for that reason the FAA included gyroplanes in the light-sport aircraft definition. However, the FAA does not agree that this operational simplicity would apply to design and performance criteria for the light-sport aircraft gyroplane design. Complicating design factors for gyroplanes include the location of thrust and lift lines with respect to the center of gravity; horizontal and vertical stabilizer size and location; and effects of turbulence. Larger gyroplanes have greater inertia, which makes the aircraft less sensitive to the relative effects of these factors. The FAA believes that the dynamics of a rotary wing aircraft and the light weight of existing two-seat ultralight gyroplanes require a design standard for structural integrity and aircraft stability that may add prohibitively expensive costs to gyroplanes. One commenter expressed doubt that the ultralight gyroplane industry would agree upon a design standard.

The FAA reviewed gyroplane accident statistics in the NTSB’s electronic database. The data show 70 fatal accidents in the years 1983 through 1994 with mechanical failures accounting for 12 of those accidents. Data show 20 fatal accidents in the years 1995 through 2001, and mechanical failures accounting for two of those accidents. This data tends to support those commenters who state that gyroplane safety is better served by increased availability of training rather than different standards for design and performance of gyroplanes. Refer to the discussion under “VI.5.A.viii. Gyroplanes” for details on how this rule proposes to assure better training for sport pilots seeking a gyroplane rating.

To summarize, the FAA stated in the NPRM that, for sport pilots flying light-sport aircraft, the continued use of exemptions would generally be inappropriate to allow aircraft larger than the limits in part 103 to be used for flight training. At this time, the FAA is not participating in developing consensus standards for gyroplanes, because the FAA believes that, unlike other kinds of light-sport aircraft, there are significant complex design issues for gyroplanes that are unresolved by the industry. The simplicity of operation of gyroplanes supports making this aircraft available to sport pilots. The need for dual instruction in gyroplanes, and the scarcity of gyroplane instructors, is reason for the FAA to issue training exemptions for the gyroplane community. Including gyroplanes in the light-sport aircraft definition will permit the continued construction of two-seat gyroplanes that will support increased availability of gyroplane flight instructors. If the gyroplane community is successful in developing a design and performance consensus standard, and if service experience, including accident data, demonstrates a marked difference between ultralight gyroplanes and those that are built to that voluntary consensus standard, then the FAA may revise the rule to permit gyroplanes to receive the special airworthiness certificates in the light-sport category. Otherwise, before the end of the 5-year period during which aircraft certificated under §21.191(i)(1) may be used for flight training for compensation, the FAA may consider if it will continue to keep exemptions in place to allow flight instructors to train sport pilots in gyroplanes issued


Ralph

[PW_Plack]

Thanks for posting this Ralph, but it's disappointing in a number of ways. The FAA won't get the story by comparing consensus-standard gyros to ultralights, but rather by comparing them to non-consensus-standard experimentals.

Then again, I guess there's no guarantee dangerous designs won't sneak through the process, at least at first. (I guess we all know at least one kitmaker whose "engineers" believe a 10-inch thrust offset and no H-stab are stable.)

Am I reading this correctly? Small rotorcraft can't be LSA because it matters how you design and locate the CG, thrustline and tail? Is their official position to say that such thing don't matter on fixed-wings?!

[Ralph]

Paul,

Their primary argument goes something like this:

(1) Pilots should be able to fly gyros under the rule because gyros are, in fact, easy to fly.

(2) Gyros should not be included in LSA certification because the design issues are more complex than those of other aircraft categories and there is no general agreement with respect to standards.

The latter is a shame since most observers would say that Greg and his group have been successful in arriving at exactly the consensus the FAA would require. If the sport/movement would get its act together and accept the validity of the standards, there is a good chance that we could get another hearing on the issue prior to the closing of the five-year exemption window.

[added after more reading]

In fact, specific language later in the document indicates that the FAA will be receptive to such petitions IF the industry adopts an approved set of consensus standards.

Ralph

[Hognose]

As I read this, the FAA is saying, "Gyroplanes are excluded from the Special Light Sport Aircraft program because the gyro people do not have their $#!+ in one bag."

Call me paranoid, but I smell a concerted attempt to evade or escape consensus standards on the part of one or more manufacturers, being the act that torpedoed this for all of us. The consensus that Greg and all arrived at appears to have been too little, too late.

I also have a real, serious problem with FAA's mishap analysis methodology. Every time a Canuckistan Cratermaker powered itself over, NTSB (meaning, really, FAA, cause the on-the-ground investigation is almost always done by FAA) threw the pilot-error flag. To conclude, as they seem to, that deficient training is the ultima causa of these accidents is a logical non sequitur. You could as easily point a finger at human factors in terms of how the design interfaces with the pilot. If the aircraft has flight regimes that cannot be safely recovered in flight, and if training does not guarantee avoidance of these flight regimes, it's hard to get too excited about training as a cause.

Lack of SLSA gyroplanes is likely to continue to act as a sea anchor on the CFI population.

Damn. This is a disappointing result. However -- it will be good for the industry as a whole. It is probably the death knell of Part 103 -- especially if the FAA decides it wants to swoop on unregistered experimentals being operated illegally under 103 -- but also because so many 103 operators are there because they have medical issues. But it should be good news for the manufacturers and kitters, and should be good news for CFIs and the AFIs and BFIs that will seek CFI (SP) credentialling.

What are the four certified gyros the FAA refers to? A&S 18A, McCullough J2, Pitcairn (and is a Kellett the same thing?), and the machine now hanging fire as "Pegasus"? Who is the brain-dead that told them these machines, which I believe all have fully articulated rotors, fly like light gyros with a teetering rotor system?

cheers

-=K=-

[Hognose]

Also, reading the FAA's convoluted prose, they imply they will continue an exemption for Part 103 gyros but not for Part 61 training in experimental gyros? I think this is probably just a mistake... theirs or mine.

cheers

-=K=-

[Hognose]

And... another little detail. If you have been denied a medical of any class, you can't fly on a driving licence. You need to be 'medically cleared by FAA' -- in other words, back to chasing a Special Issuance.

This isn't anywhere near as empty a vessel as Recreational Pilot was but it certainly has the fingerprints of every constituency in OKC on it.

Welcome to the FAA. Suddenly it's 1967.

cheers

-=K=-

[Mayfield]

Kevin,

I think that there may be a simple explanation to what happened to us.

The LSA rule was sent to OMB several months ago. At that time we had not agreed on a consensus standard.

We finally approved our standard in April or May.

Therefore, the FAA is correct that at the time of submission, we did not have a standard. We do now.

We (AAI) are already approaching the FAA about a deviation approval.

Jim

[Caribean_gyro]

Jim
Can we know what was the concensus. I want to make sure That my aircraft is in line with it . Dont want to be left sitting in the dark with an expensive 2 seater not been able to use comercially.

ps. Have put you company link in my web page so people can see your aircraft hope dont mine.
ChuckP

[Hognose]

Jim,

that's outstanding. Apparently the last three years at the OMB produced those three sentences ("we guess it will cost industry this, and the government that") at the bottom of the press release. I'm really glad I don't work for the USG and can get things donw -- must be frustrating as hell to be them.

As far as the medical is concerned, after sleeping on it, it makes sense. The FAA is playing CYA -- there is no reasonable way they can let a guy they have in their files as unfit to fly go back into the air without some medical review and signoff. This is true even for the multitudes that have been denied in the past for conditions not deniable today. There are probably 30,000 pilots who have lost their medicals but still retain a driving licence, and would like to resume flying.

I'll see you guys at Oshkosh. I hope this gets sorted out for the sake of all of us. Especially the training angle. I've blogged on it at http://hoglog.com/ and will probably update that a little over the next few days as I pull my head out of my 4th Point of Contact w/r/t SP/SLSA/ELSA. There's a lot to absorb and to some extent my bitching about particulars has distracted me from tthe fact that it IS done and all involved (ASTM, the committe, the alphabet groups especially EAA, and FAA, and even the beady-eyed accountants at OMB) deserve a thank you.

cheers

-=K=-

[PW_Plack]

Hog,

There's another group breathing a sigh over this...I'd bet there are probably another 30,000 who might pass their medicals, but have avoided going because they're afraid they MIGHT fail, and wind up with a note to that effect in their records. (Some small percentage of them are probably still flying, too.)

[Udi]

As I see it, this rule would only increase the gyroplane death toll. The LSA rule is saying that, although there will be no LSA-certified gyroplanes, an LSA pilot would be permitted to fly gyroplanes that meet the LSA criteria - which basically means weight and speed limits.

So, in effect, they have lowered the bar for pilots who can legally fly experimental gyroplanes! Until now, only private pilots (actually recreational pilots) and up could fly experimental aircraft. Now, every Joe Schmo with a valid driver's license and 20 hours of dual in ANYTHING can fly experimentals.

They’ve lowered the bar for pilot training while rejecting requests for safety standard for gyroplanes. I can't see how this combination could be positive for safety.

Udi

[Heron]

Thanks guys for all the insights and for digesting for us slower readers/thinkers!
Udi:
Freedom has to be watched!
We the PRA and the dispersed groups have to keep an eye out and do as much educational contact with the general public as we can.
In my watch I will raise hell . . . .:D
I was comparing to the Brazilian Sport Pilot and many things are equal, down there they got together and discussed the issues, created associations for every category of aircraft and the Feds passed the torch with recommendations: DO NOT SCREW THIS UP!!!
The permit to fly is given by the associations and it is almost a certificate, medical conditions have to be checked and the associations are responsible for enforcing the rules . . .
Short and to the point like the military does . . .and they run the show down there.
Heron

[Ralph]

Udi,

The fact is, there are no category requirements for experimentals with existing regs.

Under sport Pilot, if you wish to add a new rating, here are the requirements:

§61.321 How do I obtain privileges to operate an additional category or class of light-sport aircraft?
If you hold a sport pilot certificate and seek to operate an additional category or class of light-sport aircraft, you must—
(a) Receive a logbook endorsement from the authorized instructor who trained you on the applicable aeronautical knowledge areas specified in §61.309 and areas of operation specified in §61.311. The endorsement certifies you have met the aeronautical knowledge and flight proficiency requirements for the additional light-sport aircraft privilege you seek;

(b) Successfully complete a proficiency check from an authorized instructor other than the instructor who trained you on the aeronautical knowledge areas and areas of operation specified in §§61.309 and 61.311 for the additional light-sport aircraft privilege you seek;

(c) Complete an application for those privileges on a form and in a manner acceptable to the FAA and present this application to the authorized instructor who conducted the proficiency check specified in paragraph (b) of this section; and

(d) Receive a logbook endorsement from the instructor who conducted the proficiency check specified in paragraph (b) of this section certifying you are proficient in the applicable areas of operation and aeronautical knowledge areas, and that you are authorized for the additional category and class light-sport aircraft privilege

Ralph

[ben]

udi, any student pilot is legal to fly an experimental gyroplanes

[Udi]

...Under sport Pilot, if you wish to add a new rating, here are the requirements:

§61.321 How do I obtain privileges to operate an additional category or class of light-sport aircraft?...

Ralph - Since Experimental aircraft have no category and class, these requirements do not apply to LSA pilot who wish to fly. The regs require you to have “a rating” to fly exp. Aircraft. An LSA pilot with any rating (e.g. lighter than air, etc.), can fly any experimental aircraft legally. The same was always true for any pilot with a "rating".

Ben - A student pilot is only allowed to fly solo in an aircraft for which he has a solo signoff in his logbook. In the case of Experimental aircraft, it has to be the make and model in which he got dual training in.

Udi-

[ben]

udi, this is what i have found,

Step 5
Pilot Certification for Experimental A/C


This is an area where many people get confused. Here is an excerpt from Advisory Circular 61-98a


14. EXCEPTION OF EXPERIMENTAL AIRCRAFT FROM CATEGORY AND CLASS RATING REQUIREMENTS. Under FAR 61.31(f)(3), the category and class rating limitations of FAR 61.31 do not apply to operation of aircraft certificated as experimental. This includes aircraft originally certificated as other than experimental, but subsequently modified, as well as amateur-built experimental aircraft.


As you can see, you do NOT have to have a Rotorcraft/Gyroplane rating in order to fly your Experimental. All that is required is that you hold some type of Pilot Certificate for powered aircraft and you are current. If you only hold a Student Pilot Certificate, you will need the proper endorsements to fly your Experimental.


Many Operating Limitations will include that the Pilot must be "appropriately rated" to operate the aircraft. This simply spells out the Pilot Requirements to fly. The "Appropriate" rating for an Experimental is covered in FAR Part 61, of which the above Advisory Circular refers to.


So, let's say a Private Pilot is rated for Airplanes. He is current and holds a Medical. He may fly any Experimental Aircraft. (The exception would be if the aircraft requires a Type Certificate, anything over 12,000 gross weight, for example.)


Some people I know, have copied this AC and carry with their Operating Limitations while they fly. This is a good idea if you're like the above example.


For Flight Testing, you may be interested in the FAA Advisory Circular 90-89a.
It's written more for fixed wing than it is for Gyroplanes, but it still contains applicable information.

[Ralph]

Udi,

Experimental LSAs are distinct from the present Experimental category. No one with a Sport Pilot certificate is going to be able to fly aircraft that do not meet the LSA definitions. Since the regulation does not include certification for gyroplanes (hence the only available machines will be experimental LSAs) AND it incorporates training requirements specifically directed to gyroplanes, it is the FAAs clear intent to have type specific ratings for all categories of LSA aircraft.

In that respect and lots of others, the new Sport Pilot certificate is distinct from the Private and Recreational certificate.

Ralph

[Udi]

You are confusing me, Ben. In your previous post you've stated:
udi, any student pilot is legal to fly an experimental gyroplanes

to which, I have replied that a student pilot needs endorsement in his logbook to fly a given make and model.

In your reply, you quote AC 61-98a which supports everything I said in rely to Ralph, and you reiterated what I said in my reply to you re- student pilots. So what are we arguing about???

Ralph - I believe the FAA has placed themselves in a bind with regard to "Experimental LSA". What does that mean? An aircraft is either LSA certified OR Experimental. An "Experimental LSA" aircraft, as I see it, is an experimental aircraft that meets the LSA standards for WEIGHT and SPEED. Now, since this is an Experimental aircraft, by definition, it has no category (rotorcraft) or class (gyroplane). Thus, as described in the FARs quoted above by Ben, the FAA cannot prevent an LSA pilot with any rating from flying a gyroplane.

I guess they can prevent LSA rated pilots from flying experimental aircraft altogether (which would be smart in my opinion), but they cannot, in my judgment, classify experimental aircraft by category and class. This would be in contradiction to all other existing regs.

Udi

[Kandace]

As it was explaned to me, an ELSA is a kit built version of an LS "certified" aircraft and amatuer built will always be an ametuer built. ie: experimental.

Hope this helps.

[Ralph]

Kandace,

Not quite. ELSA will be kit or plans-built machines that meet the definition of LSA but are not "certified". The new rule is insistent that aircraft that already have standard or special airworthiness certificates cannot be transferred to certified or experimental LSA classification. As just one example of the distinction between the present Experimental and ELSA, ELSA does not appear to have the equivalent of the "51% Rule".

Udi,

The next 6-12 months will be very interesting. As with most complex rules, one can build cases for a range of interpretation based on how you choose to quote chapter and verse. I suspect that how the FAA interpretes the rule (the only thing that matters) will shortly become clear as individuals will start pushing the envelope.

Ralph

[Chuck Baltzer]

Paul W. Plack, In post number 8 (see post # 8 on page 1 of this thread) you stated; "...there's no reason a factory built two place gyroplane should cost any more than a Harley".<p>About how much would a Harley cost, or more specifically, what would the cost of a brand new, factory built Special Light Sport Gyroplane be? Thanks- Chuck Baltzer

[Dean_Dolph]

The cost of gyro flying was a topic of discussion between several of us at Mentone.

It is no secret that the flying community in general has an aging population. There are probably several factors in the mix but the entry level cost is one that was getting the play at the PRA Convention. Simply put, the young gyro enthusiast, probably a family man, doesn't have the discretionary income to participate. Sure, there are those that are so passionate about it that they will go to great lengths to acquire a gyro. But, the majority will choose to balance their desire for a gyro with other activities, such as putting food on the table! Don't have any idea where they got the idea that was important. We gyro enthusiasts, and the PRA , need new people, young ones in particular, in order to see our favorite past time innovate and grow. Growth is very, very important!

I don't know what the cut off point is, where the cost of the gyro, plus training, prohibits involvement. But I suspect that $12 - 15K is pretty close. I know there are those that have the ability to scrounge and put a machine together for considerably less. But, the entry level newbee probably isn't going to have the knowledge/skills to do this. Training costs, however, are pretty much fixed. Consequently the need is for affordable kits. Yes, they are available but there doesn't seem to be much effort directed at marketing to the newbee. In the old days there were more newbees than experienced people and consequently the ads and marketing reflected that.

I would like to see the manufacturers put more emphasis on satisfying the entry level market while at the same time continuing to point out their higher priced products features to those that can afford them. The entry level customer is the future for them and many can't afford a Harley. If the cost trend continues I think that gyros will end up like go-karts and other activities that started out as affordable but eventually priced the majority out of involvement. We may have reached that point. There won't be many newbees paying $30 - 65K (that last number was what I heard a Sycamore cost) for their first machine.

[CLS447]

Chuck, a new Harley ranges from $16000 - $25000 aprox.

[GyroRon]

you can buy a brand spanking new Harley Davidson Sportster 883 for under 7000 grand out the door factoring in Harleys 750$ cash rebate going on right now. OR you can spend well over 30 grand for a factory harley Custom with alot of dealer installed Chrome do dads and thingamagiggys.

We need a gyro kit that is bolt together and fly with instruments and everything else you need for under 10-11 grand and a training package for the average student for under 1500$ and you will see growth. And for every newbie model gyro kit sold, there will be another gyro pilot in the future wanting to make the upgrade to the more expensive performance or two place model.....

[Heron]

I can do it for 7.000 and that is the truth!
Heron

[smckenna]

Any of the various ultralight gyros would pretty much meet the requirement for a basic gyro, if someone would offer them as pre-cut & drilled packages. And with a larger fuel tank. Or possibly, a third party who would do the cutting & drilling on one of the material kits on the market. Still, the majority of the costs are engine, rotor, instruments, prop, and tail; so I don't see how the cost can be much below $10K unless Rotax cuts their prices, or a new player enters the market, or, possibly, someone can go into business refurbishing used engines and make a living at it. This, of course requires that the new pilot be willing to accept the limitations of the UL designs - of which, in my opinion, only the fuel/range limitation is really a problem for the beginning pilot.

I just don't see training costs going down to the $1500 range. Even BFIs (must?) charge around $100/hr & I just don't see how a complete newbie (as I was) could possibly learn everything in much less than 20 hours...maybe I'm just clumsy, but I certainly needed the time. Also, as I understand it, Light Sport Pilot requires at least 20 hrs of training, and covers much more information. So you're looking at over $2000 as a minimum. Probably a lot more, even if you fly Part 103, initially, and carry the time over to Sport Pilot. Maybe the PRA Chapters, and other, less formal, clubs, could help on the cost by offering training for the Knowledge tests that Sport Pilot requires.

Steve

[rrduane]

Can I obtain a sport pilot instructor rating and instuct in a built sparrowhawk

[Heron]

Change the training system (long shot down the road) improve ground equipment and the time will be shortened.
Air time as a passenger/observer should be taken to lower costs, time and get the student airborne savy.
Lets get the numbers up so the numbers can go down!
Heron

[rfi]

No, you can not buy a Special Light Sport Gyroplane that is fully assembled because the FAA omitted them from the Sport Pilot/LSA rule, but a Sport Pilot can fly an amateur built SparrowHawk and use it for training under an exemption.

Hopfully, within the next five years gyroplanes may be included in the Special LSA category which will allow ready-fo-fly gyroplanes to be sold and also used for rental.

[animal]

No, you can not buy a Special Light Sport Gyroplane that is fully assembled because the FAA omitted them from the Sport Pilot/LSA rule, but a Sport Pilot can fly an amateur built SparrowHawk and use it for training under an exemption.

Hopfully, within the next five years gyroplanes may be included in the Special LSA category which will allow ready-fo-fly gyroplanes to be sold and also used for rental.

Hi Don great to see you on the Forum.
I had to sell the dusty2 prototype.
To bad the Guy who bought it does not seem to be doing anything with it.
But helicopters are not covered anyway.

[PW_Plack]

Call me odd, but I think a $60K gyro might be more attractive than a $10K gyro to guys used to seeing the prices on new fixed-wings. There's such a thing as maing it too cheap to be taken seriously.

If someone came out with a competitor to the Honda Civic and priced it at $999, most people would be afraid of it and buy the Civic for $14K.