LSA seaplanes constitute a highly fluid market yet we can see clues suggesting what might be ahead for some of the main brands. With summertime approaching, this State-of-the-Sector article attempts to keep up with the rapidly changing landscape (or waterscape).
We'll first look at two high-end entries that have been in the news and conclude with present LSA seaplanes and their status in the market.
Russ continued, "Founder Paul Vickers said the company is now raising capital to fund the push to begin deliveries on its backlog."
Vickers added, "The plane has finished its flight testing and shook out with a 120-knot cruise and useful load of 750 pounds with a Rotax 916 iS pushing it along."
Paul said the company is planning to manufacture Wave in the U.S. "Most current investors are Americans," Paul noted. A U.S. customer will receive the first Wave.
Wave has had a long development cycle but their timing with Mosaic approaching next year looks prescient.
“The decision to designate a stalking horse bidder underscores our commitment to ensuring the long-term viability of our business,” said Jerry Meyer, CEO of Icon. “We believe that this proactive approach will help employees, partners, and customers have confidence in our ongoing operations, enabling the company to achieve the best possible outcome.”
Icon reported that during their bankruptcy process the California company will continue to build, sell, and service its amphibious A5 LSA seaplane. The company noted the bankruptcy sale is expected to continue through late May 2024.
Icon announced more promising news
However, Searey won 
According to a party I know to be reliable, new buyers are ready and have proposed to reacquire the onetime American company. Even original designer Kerry Ritcher is said to be part of the group interested in taking over from the Chinese. While plans remain uncertain, an American group could quickly breathe life back into a moribund brand. In recent years, the company's appearance at airshows was modest and unenthusiastic. Over the last year, no one has answered the phones. Now the factory is shuttered.
Under lock without access, Progressive Aerodyne is reportedly packed into containers in their former factory, while the rent continues unpaid. It looks dire, but a moderately-well-funded investor group could get up and running fairly quickly, it was imagined. The parts business alone has sustained the company and offers a route back to normal operation; reviving that would be a relief to current Searey owners. Action will depend on current ownership making a decision; when that may happen is not known.
Yet combined with the original talent that created this popular LSA seaplane, new investors could quickly brighten those cloudy skies.
The lightest-of-SLSA-seaplanes 
"The company owes several million dollars to creditors and customers," a reliable source told me. "Employees have voiced concerns and some are taking action." Seamax leaders have reportedly managed to keep their core team using "informal payments."
"In North America, the Brazilian company allegedly has more than a dozen orders to fulfill, to customers that have made substantial deposits." The prognosis for those deliveries is unknown, though the company reportedly delivered one aircraft to America recently using unorthodox channels.
While “buyer beware” is always good advice, one thing I've learned from decades of reporting on this particular sector of aviation: Never write off a worthy design as dead and gone. I've seen many popular aircraft such as Seamax return after internal reforms or under new leadership..
Let's do this up front: the price of a ready-to-ship kit is $59,900. It's available today.
"Due to enhancements in our production capabilities," Aero Adventure stated in a recent mailing, "we produced an additional kit beyond our standard production last month (April, 2024), which is now available for purchase!"
Compare a low price and immediate delivery to any of the aircraft above. It seems like an earlier time when people could actually afford stuff and dealers had products in-stock, ready to deliver. Of course, you'll have to add an engine, avionics, and you might want to doll up the interior but the base price is righteous.
For not much more than $100,000 you could be airborne in a brand-new, well-proven seaplane from a stable manufacturer that is growing their enterprise. Given almost everything you buy has doubled in price during the 2020s, Aventura seems a genuine bargain in 2024.
If you believe it's worth a closer look, 
I have often written about many seaworthy aircraft and invite you to 
One of the most active sectors in light aviation is LSA seaplanes. We’ve seen ups and downs, arrivals and departures of LSA seaplane producers. Admittedly, these flying machines are more complex than current-day LSA. For example, amphibs need retractable landing gear and substantial boat hulls able to take water loads. LSA seaplanes constitute a highly fluid market yet we can see clues suggesting what might be ahead for some of the main brands. With summertime approaching, this State-of-the-Sector article attempts to keep up with the rapidly changing landscape (or waterscape). We’ll first look at two high-end entries that have been in the news and conclude with present LSA seaplanes and their status in the market. Vickers Wave Writing for AVweb (part of Firecrown, which also owns Flying and ByDanJohnson.com plus several other publications), my fellow aviation journalist Russ Niles stated, “New Zealand-based Vickers Aircraft Company says it intends to make its first delivery of the Wave two-place amphibious aircraft to a U.S.
Barely after we rang in the new year, here's a review of 2021 market shares and info regarding the state of the light, recreational aircraft industry. After a surprisingly strong 2020 despite Covid, 2021 returned to Earth a bit but with some shifting between categories. This year the contrast that stood out was between Factory-Built and Kit-Built.
In 2020, perhaps because builders were locked down at home and completed more projects, kit registrations blew the doors off factory-built. For 2021, the ratio equalized again with kits narrowly edging out factory-built (nearby chart).
Note that for this reporting, datastician Steve Beste said, "We define kit-built as aircraft registered as Experimental Amateur Built. Factory-built are everything else, including SLSA, ELSA, Exhibition, Primary, and Standard." To understand how Steve solves the FAA database mysteries, 
Two other important factors in 2020-2021:
The first chart above, counting total registrations of factory-built versus kit-built shows that for 2021, both grew at almost an identical pace.
When you combine both production methods, the total (317 aircraft in 2021) compares favorably to deliveries of Part 23 single engine piston aircraft (the closest comparison). As you can see, for 2020, kit-built aircraft had more than double the factory-built totals but for 2021, the equilibrium returned.
In retrospect, 2021 improved on surprisingly good results for 2020. Pilots are buying and flying — great! — while producers are maintaining or growing; both are good outcomes we can celebrate.
While much of America and the world were topsy turvy over the pandemic and the sweeping mandates placed on individuals and businesses, Light-Sport Aircraft fared reasonably well. Translation: sales held roughly steady despite Covid fear and talk of FAA regulation change hanging in the air.
The Sport Pilot kit market and Part 103 ultralights had nothing short of a banner year 
It may be too early for this kind of thing, and I don't typically go very far into gift suggestions. I know most of you visit ByDanJohnson.com to read nuts-and-bolts information and airplane flight qualities, but many pilots have those dark, cloudy days of winter ahead when flying our recreational aircraft is less predictable.
So… how about a good book?
I am reading "Sky Stories" by a good friend in the publishing game, Dave Unwin. You know his name because he has 
AirVenture Oshkosh is arguably the most important aviation event in the world each year, bringing people together from all points on the compass… or, at least it usually does.
For 2021, international representation was far below the usual. I don't have hard numbers but few of my overseas airshow friends could make this year's event.
One objective of mine was achieved when a trusted, reliable source provided me with hard data about the state of the light aviation industry around the world. Most readers know I follow the 
Do you think you have what it takes to fly around the world?
At minimum, such a trek involves lot of hours in a fairly confined space plus a challenging amount of waiting (for weather, maintenance, permission). At worst, it could be intimidating and dangerous, for example when crossing the frigid North Atlantic. You also have to cope with foreign languages and different customs. Your body clock would be catching up for weeks.
Zara has a good aviation foundation. She reports traveling in small planes since the age of six, skydiving at 11, and flying a plane at 14. After all that why not go for broke at 19? Ah, youth!
"I will be flying a 
The title isn't new.
For 14 years I wrote a column I called "The Light Stuff" for Kitplanes magazine. The column name was an adaptation of "The Right Stuff" movie about astronauts.
Through those years, a man I learned to deeply admire edited the publication. Many readers will recognize the name Dave Martin from earlier days. He had an impeccable reputation earned through thoroughness and fairness, capability and approachability. I could never slack off when preparing material for Dave. He could be a tough taskmaster but also acknowledged when a piece was good. My writing undoubtedly improved because of years of input he offered me. I so enjoyed working with him.
With sadness I note his passing, alerted by mutual friend Phil Lockwood, developer of the AirCam (photo) in which Dave is seated when the two made a flight to the Bahamas. So long, Dave! 
Here in early summer 2021, new information was discovered that shines additional light on what is ahead.
I am privileged to have recent information in which I have very high confidence.
While we do not know everything yet — neither does FAA itself — we are getting a clearer picture. Nonetheless, you should remember this is a proposal still in deliberation. It is not a completed regulation. We will know definitely what FAA recommends only when the NPRM (Notice of Proposed Rule Making) is released. My best guess for that is EAA AirVenture Oshkosh 2022 …about one year in the future. The final rule, after assessing all comments, is not expected until the end of 2023.
LAMA, represented by myself and Roy Beisswenger, had numerous fruitful discussions with FAA. We went to many meetings and made several trips to FAA headquarters in Washington, DC. In most of these meetings we found FAA people interested to advance LSA in the aviation world and interested to hear what changes we wanted. LAMA was satisfied with those discussions and, indeed, FAA incorporated into the proposal every LAMA request. All LAMA's "asks" are captioned in 
This report took a bit more time as the effort to begin counting Part 103 ultralights altered our view of the FAA aircraft registration data. Most of you may prefer this simpler report, but the data hounds among readers can drill all the way down to the last aircraft on 
Many may be surprised. Registrations grew? …in 2020!? Indeed, they did, and that's without counting Part 103 ultralights that do not need to be registered with FAA. We'll have lots more on Part 103s in a couple months (the 
Why is this true? Many reasons might explain but affordability is a key element and, no question about it, investing your labor reduces the cash outlay to have your own airplane. At the same time, the sophistication of Special LSA has risen over the years. Features such as bigger, more powerful engines, autopilot, big fancy panel displays, leather interiors, complex manufacturing with carbon fiber, and the cost of complying with ASTM standards has increased the cost of some SLSA beyond $200,000. At this price point, some readers note a recreational aircraft can cost more than your house (not in California or New England, perhaps, but in many U.S. regions this may be true).
"Look at the slope of the lines," Steve advises. "The brown (kit) line is steeper, especially last year. That means two things: First, a lot of people finished their kit planes in 2020 – more than finished them in 2019 (so that’s how they spent their lockdown time). Secondly, people are buying more kits than factory-built aircraft. Of course, there’s a lag in the data
Whatever the explanation, Italy-based Magni surged from well behind the market leader to race ahead in the American gyroplane market for 2020.
"
In this context, how might the aviation industry be holding up? We read — and some brave travelers have experienced first-hand — how the airline industry is in a deep hole, prompting large layoffs.
In this third quarter report for the calendar year, I'll look at some numbers for general aviation manufacturers as well as the light aviation industry that has my full focus.
The short answer: some are doing surprisingly well.
It bears repeating. You can go poke around FAA's database yourself …but while you access the same information you won't get the same details as we have here without a lot of work.
What you see here is thanks to Steve's noteworthy skills at organizing data and solving the puzzles made by aircraft with varying registration information.
To better understand Steve's marvelous work, 
Steve summarized, "Some [producers] are doing stupendously better than last year. Others, not so much."
Some, like "Most Improved" 
FAA is moving forward on the rulemaking project yet everything remains in progress while the agency gathers internal assessments. What follows is as accurate as possible at this time but changes will occur.
FAA generally agreed with our back-calendar estimate that the NPRM may be forthcoming in late 2021 or early 2022. This was based on the perceived amount of work remaining.
The NPRM must be released about that time to allow FAA to have a finished regulation by the end of 2023. The 2023 date is a deadline set by the U.S. Congress as part of approving FAA’s budget — called the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018.
While changes in wording are inevitable, it is the big changes on which we will focus here. Please remember, MOSAIC encompasses more than LSA, but LAMA’s focus remains entirely on matters of interest to the LSA producer community, to other businesses that serve that market, and to the recreational pilot community.
FAA functions under the Department of Transportation.
A number of pilots and aircraft developers, surprised by the large potential increase in weight, have wondered what will keep these aircraft from becoming very large. If FAA will not specify a weight, what will prevent LSA 2023 from becoming heavier aircraft beyond the scope of LSA and the Sport Pilot certificate?
In addition to the Power Index concept, here are methods to describe and constrain unlimited weight as learned in LAMA's last conference with FAA:
At present, FAA has given no specifics on speed, but reading between the lines, LAMA expects maximum flight speeds could be 140-150 knots.
Pilot & Mechanic Certificates — Related to FAA’s ultimate decisions about what a Sport Pilot is allowed to fly and for what flight missions, what about mechanics? Specifically, what changes are coming?
FAA is examining what type of mechanics (LSR-M or A&P) can do what kind of work on specific systems of aircraft.
As an example, will a LSR-M be allowed to work on an in-flight adjustable prop, retractable landing gear, or electric/hybrid propulsion systems?
These questions are still being evaluated, but FAA acknowledges that the issue may work itself out through the industry consensus standards process as it has for similar maintenance issues.
However, matters regarding operation of LSA falls under Flight Standards, the people who manage Part 61 (airmen certification) and Part 65 (mechanics).
Because MOSAIC is such a wide-ranging rule, various other FAA departments will address areas of their expertise. Note that this is a central reason why the regulation will take all of the next two years to fully develop.
FAA is evaluating what type of mechanics (LSR-M or A&P) can do what kind of work on specific systems of aircraft but maintain their focus on the consensus standards process to sort out maintenance issues.
This report is current and was reviewed in March 2020. It is as accurate as we can make it at this time, but it bears repeating one more time: this is a regulation still in process. Many changes may occur. Despite that caveat, the report shows where FAA is generally headed with MOSAIC. Keep your seat belts fastened!
If the Ip value worked out to be less than 1.2, it was proposed at one point that the aircraft would fit within the definition of a Light Sport Aircraft. This formula would only work for airplanes, not applying to rotorcraft, powered parachutes and weight shift control trikes.
Earlier, an Excel spreadsheet escaped from the FAA that allowed a user to plug in different values for maximum gross weight, wing area, and maximum horsepower and it would instantly calculate the Power Index value.
Industry people played around with the spreadsheet, putting in different values. Soon they found that no matter what value they put in for the weight of an aircraft, it never changed the Ip. This became a topic of vigorous discussion.
However, there is a very simple explanation for the lack of sensitivity of the formula to weight. And in fact, the explanation comes from algebraically simplifying the equation itself. When you do that, you find that even though weight appears in the original equation, it quickly drops out since it is in both the numerator and the denominator.
So let’s start with the original equation:
Ip = {(W/S)/(W/P)}1/3
If you divide by a fraction, that means that you are multiplying by the inverse of that fraction. (The inverse meaning that you switch the numerator and denominator.) Doing that, you get this:
Ip = {(W/S) * (P/W)}1/3
That means that the weight is being divided by the weight, which works out to 1. The equation then solves to:
Ip = {P/S}1/3
That means that weight has no influence on the Power Index. Instead, the power index is essentially a ratio between the power of the engine in horsepower and the size of the wing.
Now that the equation is simplified, we can do something else interesting. Let’s solve for Max Power:
Ip = {P/S}1/3
Ip³ = P/S
Ip³ * S = P
In other words, the larger the wing, the more power you can use. That certainly makes sense from a safety point of view.
Solving for Max Wing Size:
S = P/Ip³
That says the same thing. The more power you have, the larger your wings need to be. Let’s see what that looks like with some real world numbers.
If you have a 100-hp motor (for example, the very common 100-hp Rotax 912ULS) then for an Ip of 1.2, your smallest possible wing size is:
S = 100/1.4³ = 57.87 square feet
As an example, the wing area of a Flight Design CTSW is 107.0 square feet indicating that it is considerably larger than the minimum 57.87 square feet defined by an Ip of 1.2.
This probably means that an Ip of 1.2 is unlikely to be the only way that a light sport airplane will be defined with MOSAIC. Perhaps a smaller number will be used or perhaps it is only going to be one way of defining a light sport airplane (see above constraints). Perhaps a minimum stall speed (above) may also be included. That way a maximum gross weight won’t be cooked directly into the regulations, but will still end up being a consideration for airplane designers.
