More than anything else, it was my subscription to FLYING Magazine, beginning with the January 1955 issue, that created a thirst for additional knowledge and achievement. I was not alone. A lot of builders and dreamers were entering the private aviation industry in that era, helping transform it from a time of tube-and-rag taildraggers to sleek transportation aircraft.

In the mid-20th century, America was uniquely positioned for the creation of a modern noncommercial aviation system. There was a need for airplanes that could transport families and business people across the vast distances of North America, we had an airport of some sort in nearly every community, and our personal freedom and finances encouraged the utility of light aircraft. The inefficient war-surplus airplanes and vintage taildraggers leftover from the 1940s no longer sufficed. We were ready for easier-to-fly, purpose-built airplanes.

And experienced, visionary heads of aircraft companies were ready to provide them. As with the automotive industry, we had the Big Three—Beechcraft, Cessna, and Piper—plus eager-to-compete smaller companies like Aero Commander, Bellanca, Champion, Maule, and Mooney. As the 1960s arrived, new models and improved veteran designs showed up in the marketplace. Likewise, a new term, avionics, was coined, referring to a fresh crop of highly capable radios for our instrument panels, thanks to transistors and compact power supplies that shrank space requirements. 

• READ MORE: FLYING Magazine Announces 2025 Ultimate FLYING Giveaway

Powerplants also underwent development. Fuel injection and lightweight turbochargers were added to piston engines, small turbojets encouraged the concept of business jets, and new medium-horsepower turboprops filled the gap between 300 hp opposed recips and burly radials. By 1970, GA shoppers were able to buy anything from aerobatic two-seaters to pressurized, cabin-class twins. Available business aircraft ranged from turboprop executive airplanes to fanjet-powered corporate barges. Airports and airspace routings had been improved to accommodate GA’s growth. This laissez-faire ’60s atmosphere kept the industry’s engineering departments working overtime.

The declared goal during the frenetic ’60s and ’70s was to create “gap fillers.” Every company wanted to provide an airplane to suit every need and keep customers loyal to its brand. Piper had a fleet of Cherokee derivatives, from the 2+2 Cherokee 140, the everyday 180 and beefy 235, and the stretched Cherokee Six, leading to retractable Arrows and Lances, and even twin-engine Senecas and Seminoles. Piper’s earlier high-performance Comanche line was retained through 1972 in single and twin versions, with normal and turbocharged engines. And the company also offered heavier twins in various piston-engine Navajo and turboprop Cheyenne models, all while still building the venerable Aztec twin—not to mention the agricultural Pawnee airplanes and an occasional Super Cub.

Beech Aircraft also tried to fill every gap in the market with a Beechcraft. It expanded its line  downward from the three Bonanza models with a lighter Musketeer series, offered in trainer, cruiser, and retractable variants, and it even fielded a light-twin Duchess, all the while offering Baron twins in as many as five styles, plus the sexy Duke and cabin-class Queen Airs. Meanwhile, Beech’s King Air turboprop line grew longer and more capable, even leading into commuter-airliner variations. To round out its offerings, Beech acquired upscale business jets from Hawker and Mitsubishi. 

Cessna, meanwhile, outdid everyone, developing model after model to plug any sales leak in its line. At one time in the ’70s, I counted 22 singles and 13 twins among its offerings, in addition to the burgeoning Citation business jet lineup. Whatever you needed, from two-place trainer to pressurized single, from push-pull “safe twin” to back-door executive twin, agricultural airplanes and bushplanes, Cessna had them all. There seemed to be no end to the swelling Cessna tide, which amounted to 50 percent of the industry’s unit output during the boom times.

At the same time, little Mooney expanded its basic M20 retractable into longer and more powerful models, Rockwell developed single-engine and ag planes to supplement its piston and turboprop twin-engine line, Bellanca/Champion offered a half-dozen two-seat tailwheel airplanes to compliment its Viking retractables, Grumman was making two- and four-seat airplanes plus a twin-engine model, and Maule tweaked and stretched every possible variation from its tailwheel utility aircraft. 

Present Day Flying

Today, we are still enjoying the fruits of these developments in the 1960s, ’70s, and ’80s.

Refurbished examples of the golden age general aviation airplanes sell for many multiples of their original sticker price, while the limited-production, new single-engine airplanes are astronomically unaffordable. The promised introduction of “light sport” airplanes that would provide economical new aircraft hasn’t worked out. They are priced at about twice the expected figure and often don’t have sufficient payload to accommodate two adults plus full fuel. 

A serious implosion in light airplane production took place during the mid-’80s, closing many production lines and shrinking the supply of available models. This was due to an oversupply of airplanes during economic malaise, coupled with the growth of rapacious product liability lawsuits and concurrent manufacturer insurance costs. Most of GA’s growth shifted into big-ticket aircraft such as turbine-powered business airplanes, utility and owner-flown, single-engine turboprops, and fast-glass, piston-engine singles.

As the new millennium arrived, Cirrus Design brought not only a new sleek composite-construction personal airplane but a fresh approach to marketing it. With its integral emergency parachute, side-stick control, video-screen, GPS-based avionics and automotive interior styling, the Cirrus SR series appealed to a new generation of entrants to GA. The company quickly filled a void abandoned by the traditional airplane companies that had been acquired by corporate conglomerates that were more interested in selling big-ticket business aircraft than entry-level models. 

• READ MORE: GA, Private Aviation Dodge Worst of Cyber Outage Impact

The real revolution now stems from the utility gained by effortless navigation provided by GPS data flowing into advanced computing capability, so that panel-mounted displays can not only show current position but flight plan routing, all linked to advanced autopilot technology taking care of most cross-country piloting chores. With uplinked, in-cockpit weather integrated into tablet-based “electronic flight bags” or the avionics suite, there’s no longer any excuse for pressing on into unflyable conditions lurking over the horizon. 

Retrofitting this advanced technology into legacy aircraft is simply a matter of allocating enough money to make the airplane useful. The ADS-B mandate of 2020 has given more flexibility to ATC handling of any size of aircraft—at the cost of privacy and freedom. Yes, we deal with a multitude of airspace rules and restrictions, but we had to negotiate many of those same encroachments in the late 20th century, and with less computing power in the cockpit back then to help us avoid them. 

Airport infrastructure has shifted away from providing accommodations for all comers to building for the biggest user, leaving light general aviation to occupy the corners of the ramp or a remote edge of the airport. Stand-alone, family-operated FBOs have been replaced by chains of opulent palaces catering to the jet set. We can expect to pay for what used to be free services, because our minuscule fuel business is no longer important enough to be willingly subsidized by the big iron customers. 

Expectations are greater in the 21st century—in all aspects of life, not just GA. New entrants to flying expect seamless air conditioning, push-button actuations, plush accommodations, and high levels of service, compared with their more-tolerant parents and grandparents. If passengers can’t have Wi-Fi on board, they don’t want to ride with us. Privileges have their price, reflected in million-dollar sticker prices on new limited-production piston singles and multiple millions for personal turboprops. 

At least we still have options, even though we may have more money tied up in our instrument panel than a first-class traveling airplane cost back in the late 1900s. We’ve lost many airports to housing and industrial developments, but many remain, still giving access to communities via general aviation, providing transportation and utility possible in no other way. 

Flying’s Future

The future, from my jaded perspective, will be different, perhaps not to the tastes of my generation but still suitable and rewarding to those who’ll be doing most of the GA flying.

Accommodations might have to be made for the hyper-promoted electric urban air mobility (UAM) vehicles, manned and unmanned, in various stages of development for a market that may or may not exist. If airspace, bases, and routes have to be carved out for these anticipated thousands of mass-transit conveyances, we may see some disruption of traditional air traffic.

• READ MORE: Hangar Shortage Spurs 2 GA Pilots to Launch Development Project

The big unknown is the impact of governmental and public policy interference on a limited-participation activity like general aviation. Regardless of the facts, the loudest voices get the most attention at law-making levels, and well-meaning but shortsighted regulation can wind up stifling the freedom of flight enjoyed by private citizens. We must continue to support our GA membership organizations, and these associations must link arms with other interests, such as business aviation, helicopter operators, agricultural aviation, flight training, avionics shops, and FBOs, to ward off possible restrictions and bad laws stemming from class-envy and special-interest rhetoric targeting the industry.

I remain eternally optimistic about aviation, because I’ve always observed humankind’s innate desire to fly. From the days of the earliest prehistoric human watching soaring birds, there’s always been something urging us to look skyward, yearning to share the perspective of height. People will always want to fly, and once having tasted the freedom of personal wings, it is difficult to give it up. It behooves us to share flight with as many of our friends and acquaintances as possible, building a coalition to preserve what we’ve been given. 

A love of flying, like all passions, has to be given away if it is to be continuously circulated back to the conferrer.

This feature first appeared in the Summer 2024 Ultimate Issue print edition.

The post Ultimate Issue: The State of U.S. General Aviation appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

Today’s Top Pick is a 1976 Ted Smith Aerostar.

Many pilots consider the Aerostar the ultimate light piston twin. Its projectile-shaped fuselage, swept tail surfaces and wings set farther aft than on the average piston aircraft give this twin a speedy look.

Taking off and accelerating in the climb, you realize that the slick shape is not just for show.

Aerostars have set numerous speed records over the years, and pressurized, turbocharged versions like this 601P tend to be the quickest.

This aircraft received a Machen Superstar 700 conversion package from Machen Inc. in 1999. This is a well-known upgrade that includes intercoolers and other equipment to boost power.

This Aerostar’s speed and large, pressurized cabin give it the feel of a small airliner, which pleases most passengers. For pilots who travel a lot, often accompanied by family, friends, or business colleagues, the Aerostar represents a chance to cut travel time significantly compared with ground and can even beat the airlines easily on certain routes.

This 1976 Aerostar has 7,221 hours on the airframe, 1,173 hours since overhaul on the left engine, and 1,291 hours since overhaul on the right. The engines are 350 hp turbocharged and intercooled Lycoming IO-540s. The left and right propellers each have 1,459 hours since overhaul.

The aircraft’s engines are part of the Machen Superstar conversion to increase performance. This Aerostar also is equipped with vortex generators and air conditioning.

The aircraft’s panel features dual Garmin GNS 430 GPS/Nav/Comms, dual Garmin G5 electronic instruments, Garmin GMA 340 audio panel, GTX 345 transponder with ADS-B, and Century IV autopilot. 

Pilots searching for a high-flying pressurized light twin with six seats and famously high cruising speeds should consider this 1976 Ted Smith Aerostar 601P, which is available for $199,500 on AircraftForSale.

If you’re interested in financing, you can do so with FLYING Finance. Use its airplane loan calculator to calculate your estimated monthly payments. Or, to speak with an aviation finance specialist, visit flyingfinance.com.

• FLYING Magazine: Aerostar 702P
• FLYING Magazine: Things to Think About When Moving Up to a Light Twin
• Plane & Pilot: The Hot Rod: Ted Smith’s Aerostar
• Plane & Pilot: Choosing an Old Light Twin
• The Aviation Consumer: Piper/Ted Smith Aerostar
• AVweb: Refurb of the Month: Jefferson City Flying Service’s Aerostar 700P

The post This 1976 Ted Smith Aerostar Is an Airline-Like ‘Aircraft For Sale’ Top Pick appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

On Monday at EAA AirVenture in Oshkosh, Wisconsin, Piper announced that it renewed its distribution partnership with the aerospace titan, making Boeing its exclusive distributor for key parts and components through 2029.

“We are thrilled to grow this partnership with Boeing,” said Ron Gunnarson, vice president of sales, marketing, and customer support at Piper. “In the coming year, look for improved response time and dedicated, Piper-specific CSR assistance.”

Piper has relied on Boeing as its primary spares depot since 2010. The latter maintains an inventory of Piper parts worth over $22 million and, according to the company, has a fill rate north of 98 percent on forecasted parts. Boeing’s Dallas-Fort Worth warehouse complements Piper depots around the world, including in Europe, to enable international shipments.

Separately, Piper on Thursday announced that it delivered four Pilot 100i’s to the Florida Institute of Technology (FIT), part of a previously agreed order for eight aircraft. FIT is a key customer for the manufacturer, operating a fleet of only Piper aircraft: Archers, Seminoles, and Warriors.

“What makes all of this even more meaningful is that a dozen of our alumni working at Piper helped build these planes,” said John Nicklow, president of FIT. “It’s a high-flying example of the power of a Florida Tech education in action.”

Like this story? We think you’ll also like the Future of FLYING newsletter sent every Thursday afternoon. Sign up now.

The post Piper, Boeing Extend Exclusive 5-Year Distribution Deal appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

The school, located at Page Field Airport (KFMY), is reporting student enrollment is at an all-time high.

According to company president Chris Schoensee, enrollment for the first quarter of 2024 was record setting, creating a backlog of clients who will begin their flight training in September, with other student start dates extended to spring 2025. 

“Clearly, the demand for pursuing a career as a commercial pilot remains exceptionally strong,” Schoensee said. “And it’s not just at Paragon Flight. I’m hearing of positive growth trends in other peer flight academies as well.”

The school predicts it will conduct 40,000 hours of training in 2024, up from 26,000 in 2023.

• READ MORE: Paragon Flight Training Continues to Grow

Paragon now has 50 full-time flight instructors to meet the demand. The school is also increasing its number of maintenance technicians to eight and adding more aircraft to the fleet.

According to school officials, Paragon Flight is on track to add 50 Piper aircraft by the end of 2027. This year, the company is expected to take delivery of nine Piper P100i’s with the first arriving on-site this month. The Piper P100i is the backbone of the Paragon fleet, as the school owns approximately 15 percent of the Piper P100i’s in existence.

• READ MORE: Commercial Airline Flight Schools in Florida

Paragon Flight is also adding to its simulator training offerings, planning to take delivery of two more ALSIM devices and a Redbird Xwind simulator within the next 12 to 15 months.

“Advanced simulator training is an absolute must for leading pilot training programs,” Schoensee said. “The ALSIM simulator matches the cockpit of the Piper P100i button for button, and the Redbird Xwind simulator is essential for maximizing student training in crosswind conditions, which are the most difficult conditions for student pilots to master in the first stages of their pilot training experience.”

The post Paragon Flight Training Reports Record Enrollment appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

Today’s Top Pick is a 1972 Piper PA-32-300 Cherokee Six.

Piper’s Cherokee Six appeals to pilots for some of the same reasons that other Cherokee models are popular, including stability, predictable handling, and reliability. But the Six offers bonuses, including a larger cabin, more horsepower, and room for six. This is a utility airplane that few others can match in terms of all-around capability.

Certified in 1965, the PA-32 Cherokee Six is largely the same as the later model Saratogas that have retractable landing gear and typically offer luxury interiors. The Six is clearly more utilitarian and tends to carry fewer adornments and interior upgrades.

This 1972 Piper PA-32-300 Cherokee Six has 5,226 hours on the airframe and 790 hours on its 300 hp Lycoming IO-540.

The panel features dual Garmin G5 electronic flight instruments, Garmin GTN 650 touchscreen GPS/Nav/Com, MX 170C digital Nav/Com with glideslope, Garmin GMA 345 audio panel, GTX 320 transponder, uAvionix TailBeacon ADS-B, Auto Control III autopilot with Nav coupling, S-Tec 30 PSS altitude hold, and Electronics International digital CHT/EGT gauge.

Additional equipment includes electric pitch trim, rudder trim, Flightcom six-place intercom, cabin ventilation fan, auxiliary power receptacle, and aileron gap seals.

Pilots looking for a large piston single with generous interior space and useful load that is ideal for family travel should consider this 1972 Piper PA-32-300 Cherokee Six, which is available for $244,900 on AircraftForSale.

You can arrange financing of the aircraft through FLYING Finance. For more information, email info@flyingfinance.com.

• FLYING Magazine: The Practical Endurance of the Piper Cherokee Six
• FLYING Magazine: Getting Sucked into Aviation with a Piper Cherokee Six Owner
• FLYING Magazine: Best Used Six Seaters
• FLYING Magazine: Air Compare: Piper Lance vs. Saratoga
• Plane & Pilot: New Piper‘s Saratoga II TC
• Plane & Pilot: Piper Cherokee Six 260/300
• The Aviation Consumer: Piper PA-32 Cherokee Six/Saratoga

The post This 1972 Piper PA-32-300 Cherokee Six Is a Sturdy, Reliable ‘AircraftForSale’ Top Pick appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

Today’s Top Pick is a 1981 Piper PA-44-180T Turbo Seminole.

Piper’s PA-44 Seminole received its type certificate in 1978, arguably at the height of niche formation in general aviation. Aircraft makers were determined to fill every perceived gap in their lineups, and demand for light twins with easier handling, simple systems, and economical operation was strong.

The Seminole readily checked those boxes while its counter-rotating propellers gave pilots relief from worries about the possible failure of a critical engine and the resulting handling challenges.

It is no surprise that Seminoles became popular multiengine trainers and are still common on the ramps at flight schools across the country. The airplane can also perform well as a personal mount, especially for travelers who appreciate the redundancy of two engines when flying at night, over water, or while traversing remote, forbidding terrain. The turbocharged version, like the aircraft for sale here, provides the added flexibility of flying easily at higher altitudes to take advantage of favorable winds or escape traffic.

This 1981 PA-44-180T has 6,141 hours on the airframe, 1,647 hours on its left 180 hp Continental TSIO-360 engine, and 632 hours on the right since overhaul. There are 1,626 hours on the left Hartzell propeller and 3,294 hours on the right.

The panel features a Garmin GNS 430W GPS/Nav/Com, King KY-197 TSO Com, King KN-53 TSO Nav, KMA-24 TSO audio panel with three-light marker beacon, Sandel SN3308 digital EHSI, Garmin GTX 330 transponder, King KN-64 DME, Bendix weather radar, Century 41 autopilot, and dual ECI graphic engine monitors.

Additional equipment includes a uAvionix ADS-B solution, Bob Fields inflatable door seal, 60-amp alternators, propeller synchronizer, oxygen system, front-seat shoulder harnesses, and four-place intercom.

Pilots looking for an economical twin with forgiving handling for training, travel, or time-building should consider this 1981 Piper PA-44-180T, which is available for $189,900 on AircraftForSale.

You can arrange financing of the aircraft through FLYING Finance. For more information, email info@flyingfinance.com.

• FLYING Magazine: Piper Seminole Certified for Garmin GFC 700
• FLYING Magazine: Piper Seminole Goes G1000
• FLYING Magazine: Piper Introduces Diesel Seminole DX
• Plane & Pilot: Our 2021 Roundup of Light Twin Aircraft
• Plane & Pilot: Piper PA-44 Seminole/Turbo Seminole
• Plane & Pilot: Used Light Twins Roundup
• AVweb: Used Aircraft Guide: Piper Seminole

The post This 1981 Piper PA-44-180T Turbo Seminole Is a Versatile ‘AircraftForSale’ Top Pick appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

This is something I see fairly regularly, albeit more commonly in reference to more basic and affordable types. A prospective buyer polls a general audience for specific advice about a major purchase, and the replies are both predictable and suspect. All too common is the warning that parts for anything other than Cessna, Piper, or Beechcraft are impossible to find. While certain aircraft (and engines) do indeed present some difficulty with regard to parts availability, the vast majority are entirely possible to own and operate without too much trouble.

There are far better ways to become informed about a given aircraft type, and my favorite, by far, is type clubs.

• READ MORE: Going to the Birds, And How Not To

For a nominal fee, one can purchase an annual membership to a type club and instantly gain access to a treasure trove of virtually any mass-produced type out there. Good clubs offer online libraries chock full of scanned documents, manuals, diagrams, and literature. Additionally, many club websites are home to online forums with comprehensive prepurchase inspection checklists, airworthiness directive (AD) lists, and firsthand knowledge crowdsourced from current and former owners. Best of all, membership is almost always made available to shoppers who aren’t yet owners, offering an extremely affordable education about a type under consideration. 

As someone who creates spreadsheets and compiles detailed documentation for purchases as minor as a toaster, I joined The International Cessna 170 Association early in my shopping process, years before actually purchasing one. I spent hours soaking up as much info as I could about the type. Of particular note was a pinned thread in its forum that listed approximately 30-40 items to address immediately upon purchasing a 170. The list was detailed, and the reasoning behind each item was provided.

When I finally bought a 170 and dropped it off for its first annual inspection, I presented that list to my mechanic. Before long, he completed approximately a dozen various mods, many of which I’d never have discovered without entering the 170 community. I learned that the parking brake has a history of becoming partially engaged after a rudder pedal is pushed to the stop during crosswind landings or taxiing, and we followed the advice to disconnect it entirely. We proactively replaced the tailwheel leaf springs and old copper oil pressure gauge lines. I also had him perform multiple specific inspections that weren’t called out in any manufacturer materials.

• READ MORE: When It’s Better to Have It and Not Need It

Without question, my $45 annual membership had just paid for itself, and I hadn’t even tapped into any of the scanned documentation. Neither had I posted many of my own questions in the forum or engaged with any of the all-knowing 170 owners and their decades of experience maintaining the type. With such informed and helpful people at my disposal, happy to help tackle problems and lend their expertise, this membership is one that I don’t think twice about renewing.

Type clubs like this are also an excellent source of events. Many hold refresher and currency clinics aimed at sharpening the skills of the owner group as a whole. Some even negotiate special rates with insurance companies for owners who have demonstrated an ongoing effort to undergo recurrent training. And even if a club hasn’t arranged for formal discounts, I’ve spoken with one insurance broker who acts as an owner advocate, presenting underwriters with proof of such training and negotiating lower rates as a result.

Other clubs do an excellent job with social events. At face value, many of them appear to be little more than excuses to devour vast amounts of cheeseburgers and ice cream. But if such temptations are what it takes to motivate owners to preflight their airplanes and get into the air regularly, well, that’s good for airplane and pilot alike.

It’s possible rare types benefit the most from a vibrant, active type club or owner’s association. The Meyers Aircraft Owners Association is a textbook example. With a small fleet size to begin with, airframe parts can occasionally become difficult to source. So when the original factory jigs and tooling were located by a Meyers owner, he purchased everything and stored it all in a secure location for preservation. Due to his efforts, the entire Meyers community will be able to source brand-new airframe parts if and when they are required. 

• READ MORE: 5 Things I Wish I Had Known Before Buying My First Airplane

To determine whether your type has a corresponding club, simply Google your aircraft  along with the words “club” or “association,” and you’ll likely find any that exist. Additionally, the EAA Vintage Aircraft Association maintains an excellent list of type clubs.

Finally, if your time and workload permit, consider getting involved and giving back to your community of owners. Help to organize a fly-out or two during the summer. Contribute some of your newfound knowledge in the forums. And lend a helping hand to others who are navigating the steep learning curve of ownership for the first time. 

The post Navigating the Aircraft Ownership Learning Curve Through Type Clubs appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

In contrast, all light sport aircraft (LSA), experimental amateur-built airplanes, and warbirds are issued special certificates. In my view, the rule can be divided into two main parts: airplane descriptions and capabilities, and pilot certificates, technician privileges, and operating limitations. In short, airplanes or people.

For airplanes, the NPRM (Notice of Proposed Rulemaking) felt like Christmas in July, granting many capabilities industry and pilot member organizations had sought over some years of negotiation. The people part describes who gets to fly and maintain these MOSAIC LSAs and under what rules. This latter section inspired greater concern.

Airplanes: What We Gained

Here’s the list of what FAA offered and how each changed:

Gross weight: LSAs have been limited to 1,320 pounds (land) or 1,430 pounds (water). Under MOSAIC, the weight limit is removed and clean stall constrains size so the aircraft remains what FAA sought: those “easy to fly, operate, and maintain.” It is expected that weight can rise to 3,000 pounds depending on the design.

Stall speed: Presently, LSAs cannot stall faster than 45 knots. This will be raised 20 percent to 54 knots, but this is clean stall, the purpose of which is to limit aircraft size and difficulty. It has no relation to landing speed or slow-flight qualities. This more than doubled the potential size, hence a new term, “MOSAIC LSA.”

Four seats: LSAs are presently limited by definition to two seats. This rises to four in a MOSAIC LSA, but if operated by someone using sport pilot certificate privileges, then only one passenger can be carried. A private certificate with medical may fill all four seats, assuming weight and balance allows.

Retractable gear: Light sport aircraft have been fixed gear only, except for amphibious models. Now any MOSAIC LSA can be retractable. Several imported LSAs already offer retractable options in other countries.

Adjustable prop: LSAs were allowed only ground-adjustable props. Now a MOSAIC LSA can have an in-flight adjustable prop. Such equipment on similar aircraft is common in other countries.

250 knot max speed: An LSA was limited by definition to 120 knots at full power. Now the speed limit matches all other aircraft below 10,000 feet: 250 knots. No one expected such a large expansion, but now retractable and adjustable props make more sense.

Rotary expansion: After 20 years of waiting, fully built gyroplanes will be allowed. That followed years of advocacy effort, but when the opposition finally yielded, the FAA also granted helicopters.

Electric or hybrid: Because the FAA did not want turbine LSAs in 2004, it specified reciprocating engines, unintentionally knocking out electric motors that few were considering at the time. In fixing the definition to allow electric, the agency will also permit hybrids. Examples are already flying in Europe.

Turbine: Perhaps turbine engines were harder to operate 20 years ago when LSA were defined, but today they are seen as simpler, and the FAA will allow them. Turbine-powered MOSAIC LSA candidates are already flying in Europe.

Multiple engines/motors: The LSA has been limited to a single engine by definition. That constraint is removed, although no language was given to address how the pilot qualifies.

Aerial work: The Light Aircraft Manufacturers Association (LAMA) lobbied for MOSAIC LSAs to be permitted to do forms of aerial work, although not passenger or cargo hauling. The FAA has granted this opportunity to the manufacturers, which can specify what operations they will permit. A commercial pilot certificate will be required.

One downside to all these goodies? Each will increase the price. The good news? Present-day LSAs offer lower prices and have proven enjoyable and dependable. Many LSAs are fine as they are and have no need to change.

A lot of LSA producers already meet higher weights in other countries where permitted. They are merely reduced on paper to meet U.S. standards. It should be straightforward for them to redeclare meeting all MOSAIC-level ASTM standards to qualify for higher weights.

The only question is how far backward compatible they can go for aircraft in the field over which they have had no control for some time. It’s an industry question to resolve, and it will swiftly be handled to aid sales.

People and Areas of Concern

Medicals: Lots of questions surround one of the principal benefits of LSA operation: the lack of requirement for an aviation medical if operating as a sport pilot. More specifically, pilots want to fly larger aircraft using these privileges, meaning no medical certificate, or BasicMed, instead using the driver’s license as evidence of their medical fitness.

To keep within their budget, many pilots wish to buy (or keep flying) legacy GA aircraft such as the Cessna 150, 172, 177, and some 182s, plus certain Pipers, Diamonds, Champions, or other brands. Many of the latter aircraft are too heavy to allow such privilege today. MOSAIC appears to change that, but without presenting compelling evidence that possession of a medical assures a flight proceeds safely, the FAA nonetheless clings to this premise. Many assert the occurrence of medical problems sufficient to upset a flight or cause an accident are incredibly small in number.

Stall speed: Most NPRM readers agree that it was a worthy solution to use 54 knots clean stall as a means to limit the size of the airplane and to keep it within the FAA’s mantra of LSAs being “easy to fly, operate, and maintain.”

However, many respondents note that adding just a couple knots to that limit will allow several more airplanes that some wish to buy and fly under MOSAIC rules. Note that the 54-knot reference is not related to landing speeds or slow flight, where lift-enhancing devices like flaps would normally be used.

Some pilots asked if adding vortex generators could reduce stall speed enough to qualify. The problem lies in proving a slower stall speed was achieved. Stall (V_S1) printed in the POH will be the standard about compliance.

Several pilots have complained about use of calibrated versus indicated airspeed for the stall limit, but this is another matter that might be clarified after the comment period.

Endorsements: One of the significant lessons learned in 20 years of pilots operating LSAs is the so-called magic of endorsements. Instead of asking pilots to receive training, take a knowledge test and possibly an oral exam, followed by a practical flight test, they can just go get trained for added skills from an instructor who then endorses their logbook accordingly, and they’re good to go. This puts a significant burden on flight instructors to do their jobs well, but that’s already the situation.

The NPRM already refers to the use of endorsements for retractable gear training or adjustable prop training, and many believe that expanding endorsements to all privileges described in the MOSAIC proposal has merit.

Noise: For the first time, the NPRM introduced noise requirements that encompass several pages. Coincidentally, the LSA sector is already one of the quietest in the airborne fleet.

This is partly because of European noise regulations that have been in place for a long time, motivating quieter engine and exhaust system development. However, LSAs are also quieter because the powerplants are modern, thanks to the faster approval process implied by industry consensus standards.

The industry was not pleased about the noise proposal, as these requirements add burden without identifiable benefit. Nonetheless, the situation might be handled through the ASTM process more quickly and still satisfy political demands.

Night: MOSAIC’s language invigorated many readers when the NPRM expressed support for a sport pilot to fly at night—with proper training and a logbook endorsement. Then the proposal refers to other FAA regulations that require BasicMed or a medical. If you must have a medical, you are not exercising the central privilege of a sport pilot. Why suggest that a sport pilot can do things that are blocked by other regulations? This conflict should be resolved.

This is one of several aspects of the NPRM that many describe as “inconsistencies,” where one part of MOSAIC appears to restrict another part, often for unclear reasons. Such observations lead many to declare the NPRM looks “rushed to market.” Hopefully, most problems can be addressed in the post-comment period.

When surveyed about why night privileges are valued, most pilots wanted to be able to complete a cross-country flight with a landing after dark.

IFR/IMC: Contrary to what many think, the FAA has never prohibited LSAs from IFR/IMC operation. It is the lack of an ASTM standard to which manufacturers can declare compliance that prevents such sales. (Some special LSA owners elect a change to experimental LSA status and can then file IFR, assuming they have a rating, are current, and the airplane is properly equipped.)

However, as with night operations, many LSA owners report higher-level pilot certificates often including instrument ratings, and they would like to be able to use their LSAs to get through a thin cloud layer.

Maintenance and TBOs: The maintenance community has found several objections within the NPRM. It appears that changes could cause a loss of privilege for LSA owners who have taken training to perform basic maintenance on their own LSAs.

In addition to altering the privileges of light sport repairman mechanic (LSRM) certificate holders, MOSAIC adds capabilities such as electric propulsion, hybrid, turbine, and powered-lift devices, which leaves the mechanic-training industry guessing where to start. Some organizations wonder if it’s worth the investment to create appropriate courses with uncertain privilege at the end.

Indeed, eight training organizations suggested they would petition for an extension to the comment period. It was successful, so the extension will delay the expected arrival of the finished MOSAIC regulation. Absent any extension, the FAA has repeatedly said 16 months were needed, equating to the end of 2024 or early 2025.

One group creatively suggested using add-on training modules to solve the problem in much the same way that endorsements can be used to solve pilot training enhancements.

Lack of sector expertise: The FAA knows a great deal about conventional, three-axis airplanes but far less about so-called “alternative LSAs.” For machines that use different control systems or operate substantially differently than airplanes—weight shift and powered parachutes come to mind—some industry experts believe a better system is to authorize an industry organization to manage these sectors. This has been common throughout Europe for many years and could work well in the U.S.

In a document of its size, some errors will arise and some clarifications will be needed. It is only a proposal after all. Pilots can comment on certain aspects but will have little idea how the FAA can or will solve various points, even if they offer solutions.

This frustrates some readers and can cause uncertainty about a pending or planned airplane purchase. In turn, purchase-decision delays frustrate airplane manufacturers. That’s the precarious terrain surrounding new regulations. Such comments on regulation are part of the American way, where the citizens can be part of the process. Here’s your chance to speak and be heard.

This column first appeared in the November 2023/Issue 943 of FLYING’s print edition.

The post Pilots Have Questions When It Comes to MOSAIC appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

Today’s Top Pick is a 1946 ERCO 415-D Ercoupe.

Flying has always involved risk, but it was a particularly dangerous endeavor in its early days. As the decades progressed, so did aviation safety. Still, taking to the sky in small airplanes remained far from a safe activity, largely because loss-of-control accidents have always been common. Aviation history includes a number of designs and features aimed at making small airplanes safer, and the ERCO Ercoupe is among the more successful examples.

Designed during the 1930s by Fred Weick, who would later be instrumental in developing the Piper PA-28 Cherokee, the Ercoupe essentially combined an inherently stable airframe with limited control movements that prevented stalls and spins. The control arrangement also eliminated rudder pedals and the “footwork” that the manufacturer felt was confusing to many pilots. Relatively low power also kept pilots out of trouble. Ercoupes generally ranged from 40 to 75 hp, though a few examples received larger powerplants and many owners upgraded to more powerful engines over the years. The aircraft for sale here has an 85 hp engine.

This 1946 Ercoupe has 2,871 hours on the airframe and 305 hours on its  engine since overhaul. Avionics include a Garmin 250XL GPS/Com, GTX 321 transponder, PMA 4000 intercom, and uAvionix AV-30-C instrument.

Pilots who understand the appeal of traveling in a historically significant antique aircraft that is equally at home at vintage fly-ins or on modern airport ramps should consider this 1947 Ercoupe, which is available for $39,000 on AircraftForSale.

You can arrange financing of the aircraft through FLYING Finance. For more information, email info@flyingfinance.com.

• FLYING Magazine: Approachable Aircraft: Ercoupe
• FLYING Magazine: Hawaii Lessons in an Ercoupe
• FLYING Magazine: The Process of Obtaining a Medical Certificate
• Plane & Pilot: Ercoupe
• The Aviation Consumer: Used Aircraft Guide: Ercoupe and Cadet

The post This 1946 ERCO 415-D Ercoupe Is an ‘AircraftForSale’ Top Pick Built For Safety appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

The OEM’s latest turboprop contender breaks 300 knots, and clocks in at $4.1 million, it announced on Tuesday afternoon in a livestream event. The change instigating the new model number? The introduction of a 700 hp Pratt & Whitney PT6A-52 engine—replacing the flat-rated 600 hp PT6A-42A in the M600. Piper anticipates FAA type certification by the end of the first quarter of this year.

The M700 stays at its 6,000 pounds maximum takeoff weight to comply with Basic Med, as well as retaining the Garmin G3000 integrated flight deck and Halo emergency autoland system—which secured the Collier Trophy as well as FLYING’s Innovation Award in 2021.

READ MORE: We Fly: Piper M600/SLS Halo

Pushing past the specs on the M600/SLS it will replace, the M700 is projected to meet the following targets:

• Maximum range: 1,149 nm at the 301-ktas maximum cruise speed and 1,424 nm at normal cruise speed
• Takeoff distance: 1,994 ft over a 50-ft obstacle, at sea level on a standard—-a 24 percent improvement from the M600 at 2,635 ft under the same conditions
• Departure climb: 2,048 fpm—a 32 percent improvement over the M600—at MTOW
• Time to climb: 13.9 minutes to FL250, covering 34 nm and burning 97 pounds of fuel, all 25 to 35 percent improvements over the M600
• Landing distance: up to a 26 percent reduction in ground roll over the M600
• Garmin’s PlaneSync technology, adding remote aircraft status capability using the Garmin Pilot app, and database downloads while the aircraft is powered down

“The M700 Fury is a beautifully efficient, cross-country thoroughbred that gives our customers a performance-based flight experience with economics never seen before,” said Piper Aircraft’s president and CEO, John Calcagno. “We listened, and we delivered. The M700 Fury encompasses power, performance and the most advanced safety measures available today and an overall value proposition that is extremely compelling to individuals and corporate flight departments alike.”

Customers can choose from six interior schemes with updated leathers and design elements.

Following certification, U.S. deliveries will begin immediately, according to Piper, with validations with Canada, EASA, the U.K., and Brazil on the horizon next. With the sunset of the M600, the M-series now encompasses the M700, M500 turboprop retaining the PT6A-42A at 500 hp, and M350 piston-powered high-performance singles.
Look soon for FLYING’s We Fly pilot report on the M700.

The post Piper Lifts the Veil on the M700 Fury, Its Fastest Single Yet appeared first on FLYING Magazine.