Rick, You may be right about not seeing a "grey" area. But, I think if I were just starting out building a new KR with the thought of making it LSA compliant, I would probably call it something other than a KR2 - maybe a "modified" KR2, or "whizz-bang special".
You are incorrect about E-LSA being for "fat" ultralights (assuming you mean "only"?). There are quite a few plans built aircraft that have already been issued Special Airworthiness Certificates in the Light Sport category. Mine was certified near the end of 2005. As far as Amateur Built vs E-LSA positives and negatives, it's a matter of choice. A deciding factor with quite a few builders is, if they should sell their E-LSA, they can point out to the new owner that he (with a little training) will be able to do his own annual "condition inspection" whereas someone who purchases an Amateur Built will have to hire the original builder or an appropriately certified person (like an A&P) to do it. All said and done, Rick, I see no reason to believe that you can't eventally go with E-LSA certification. As Colin Rainey mentioned in another message, not all FSDOs at the present time are on the same page about this matter, which may cause you to have to search around a bit for the answer you like. Ed From: <rahu...@peoplepc.com> To: "KRnet" <kr...@mylist.net> Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2007 10:03 AM Subject: Re: KR> N202RH sometimes they don't fly right out of the box > Ed - I don't see a grey area at all - during the AB-experimental > certification process there are no requirements to list speeds of any kind. > The FAA or DAR never asked for that information. You know the Sonex lists > higher speeds than 138 but still contends than when equipped with the 4 cyl > Jab. or VW it's LSA compliant and nobody seems to be bothered by that. > Anyway design top speeds and Vh are two different matters. > > Right now E-LSA is for fat ultra lights and that goes away at the end of > Jan. next year. They are still trying to get the standards together for kits > to be registered as an E-LSA, and the way I read it, plans built aircraft > will never qualify as a E-LSA. > > My POH and log book entries based on my Phase I testing are the only > documentation needed to show compliance. You have to also keep in mind that > in this case compliance is for my aircraft only not for all other KR-2's. > Remaining an AB-experimental offers more advantages than negatives! Van > registered his RV-12 as an AB-experimental and I suspect when he puts out a > kit it will be as an AB-experimental not an E-LSA. > > Rick Human > Houston, Texas > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Ed Janssen" <ejans...@chipsnet.com> > To: "KRnet" <kr...@mylist.net> > Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2007 9:35 AM > Subject: Re: KR> N202RH sometimes they don't fly right out of the box > > > > Rick, > > > > It appears, looking at your numbers, that your KR falls within the > > parameters of the definition of a "Light-Sport Aircraft" and therefore > could > > be flown as such by the holder of a Sport Pilot certificate. The gray > area > > of concern would be the KR design top speed which is greater than 138 > mph.Of > > course, it can't be re-registered as an Experimental Light Sport Aircraft > > (ELSA), but must remain as an Amateur Built. Perhaps your stall speed and > > maximum speed was listed somewhere for the DAR at the time it was > inspected? > > You may know of a DAR that could clear up that point for you. > > > > Ed > > > > > > > > Ed Janssen > > mailto:ejans...@chipsnet.com > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: <rahu...@peoplepc.com> > > To: "KRnet" <kr...@mylist.net> > > Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2007 8:41 AM > > Subject: KR> N202RH sometimes they don't fly right out of the box > > > > > > > So where are we and how does it perform. First all speeds quoted are > > average of multiple GPS readings. At the 2550 redline line we have > measured > > it at 132.5 mph CAS, Climbs at 750 fpm at 1130 lbs., has been flown at the > > max weight of 1150 lbs., Stalls clean at 50.7mph CAS at 1130 lbs. and a CG > > of about 27.8% MAC (range is 16.7 % to 29.2%). This is as close to max > > weight and aft CG as I am willing to go. My test pilots are thoroughly in > > love with N202RH - it has no vices except it wants to float forever, even > > with full flaps, and has made landing challenging- by the way that's a > > change from when it had a nose gear - the nose gear I had at least acted > as > > a speed brake. > > > > > > Based on those numbers and comparing them to the LSA regs - It's my > > opinion the aircraft registered in the Amateur-Built Experimental Aircraft > > category as Human KR-2 (N202RH serial # 7269-66RH) is in compliance and > can > > be operated under those regulations. > > > > > Rick Human > > > Houston, Texas > > > > > > _______________________________________ > > Search the KRnet Archives at http://www.maddyhome.com/krsrch/index.jsp > > to UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to krnet-le...@mylist.net > > please see other KRnet info at http://www.krnet.org/info.html > > > _______________________________________ > Search the KRnet Archives at http://www.maddyhome.com/krsrch/index.jsp > to UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to krnet-le...@mylist.net > please see other KRnet info at http://www.krnet.org/info.html >
