A lot has been written about the contents of the MOSAIC NPRM and many people and organizations have been able to comment on it to the FAA. Much of the commentary has been around the extension, or in some cases, curtailing of existing privileges for Sport Pilots, aircraft that can fit into the Light Sport definition and Light Sport Repairman certifications. I don’t plan to re-hash any of that here. This article will focus on what some of these changes could mean, in practical terms, to the market for Light Sport Aircraft and its customers. As you will see, it has the potential to be highly disruptive which not everyone will be happy about but will do so in a way that also opens up opportunities to a wider audience.
Before delving any deeper, let’s dispel the myth held by some in general aviation that Light Sport has been a “failure”.MOSAIC – A Different Perspective
A lot has been written about the contents of the MOSAIC NPRM and many people and organizations have been able to comment on it to the FAA. Much of the commentary has been around the extension, or in some cases, curtailing of existing privileges for Sport Pilots, aircraft that can fit into the Light Sport definition and Light Sport Repairman certifications. I don’t plan to re-hash any of that here. This article will focus on what some of these changes could mean, in practical terms, to the market for Light Sport Aircraft and its customers. As you will see, it has the potential to be highly disruptive which not everyone will be happy about but will do so in a way that also opens up opportunities to a wider audience.
Before delving any deeper, let’s dispel the myth held by some in general aviation that Light Sport has been a “failure”. Yes, like pretty much any revolution, its first manifestations probably did not meet the hype, but it has indelibly changed the aviation landscape in positive ways for all aviators. I will briefly hit a few of these:
- BasicMed would still be a twinkle in the eye of AOPA and others if the hard proof from Sport Pilots not dying en-masse and crashing into houses the moment their medicals expired had not provided the empirical evidence supporting the proposed relaxations.
- Angle of attack indicators, glass panels, digital autopilots and other aids to safe flight and situational awareness came from the experimental market into the Light Sport market and proved very quickly that compulsory FAA approvals only served to delay and make less affordable, potentially lifesaving technologies.
Major changes to Part 23 certification for small aircraft to allow them to conform with ASTM consensus standards came directly from the (largely) positive experiences from Light Sport aircraft that were being made to a consensus standard. - The number of pilots exercising Sport Pilot privileges far exceeds the number of Sport Pilot licenses issued because every expired medical creates a Light Sport eligible pilot. A very large percentage of pilots exercising Sport Pilot privileges fall into this category. Accident statistics clearly support the notion that expanding the range of potentially eligible planes would likely maintain Light Sport and Sport Pilot safety on the desired continuum of safety—between Experimental and fully certified.
- As soon as BasicMed came along and had proven to be a success, the medical justification for keeping Light Sport aircraft within a somewhat arbitrary weight, equipment and performance envelope were no longer justifiable or sustainable, but it took the FAA a while to reach that same conclusion.
Having set the scene, this article is going to examine how some of these changes could play out from a fixed wing aircraft and pilot perspective.
Fate of Existing Light Sport-Eligible Aircraft
Many, but not all, of the current Light Sport specific aircraft (S-LSAs) could accommodate higher gross weights and have modifications that would give them adjustable propellers and higher speeds but there is some uncertainty as to whether this would be allowed under the final regulations and whether the current manufacturers would want/be able to make these changes. From a consumer perspective, the desirability of these options is very clear. However, some manufacturers might not have the capability to make these changes while others may see upgrades of existing planes as a detriment to future sales of new aircraft that do meet the new standards. The downside to manufacturers not giving an answer prior to the final regulations coming into effect could be a freezing of sales of current new and used aircraft. Some manufacturers have committed to providing an upgrade path for existing owners. As time moves on, we could see a divide in the market between those manufacturers who have committed and those who have either kept silent or specifically declined to offer upgrades.
Where things could become controversial, is what owners of E-LSAs (Experimental Light Sport) will, or won’t be able to do to modify their aircraft to take advantage of the expected expanded definition of a Light Sport aircraft. E-LSAs fall into two main types—those built from kits based on a model that has been shown to be S-LSA conforming and those that started life as an S-LSA but whose owners chose to re-register them as E-LSAs.
Lets say that an S-LSA manufacturer opts to provide an upgrade path to a higher useful load for its existing models, could E-LSAs that either started life as the same make and model or those built from a kit follow suit? Well, the current E-LSA regulations might suggest not, as E-LSAs must be operated in accordance with the operating limitations issued to the aircraft at the time it receives its airworthiness certification. So, you could have the strange situation where Experimental aircraft are being held to a tighter standard than the one that is being applied to a higher level of aircraft. Basically, a reversal of the FAA concept of a continuum of safety.
The NPRM does little to clarify any of this, but it would not be the first time that there has been this effective reversal of safety logic. Here’s another example. At the present time, a fully certified aircraft under Part 23 can run over engine TBO when operating under Part 91 but an S-LSA might not be able to, depending on the whim of the aircraft manufacturer. Many of the proposed changes are considered to be beneficial to safety, such as increased weight and controllable propellers, so why would it be in the general interest of safety to create a two-tier market?
About Legacy Aircraft
Something else to consider: How might the expansion of Light Sport definitions affect existing legacy aircraft that will now fall within the Light Sport Eligible category?
Let’s start with a little history lesson. For liability reasons Cessna stopped producing light aircraft in 1986 and re-started production of the Cessna 172 in 1996 following the passage of the General Aviation Revitalization Act, making its first shipments in 1997 at a “typically equipped” price of around $136,000. Fast forward 28 years, and the US Bureau of Labor Statistics, tells us that the Consumer Price Index has increased by a factor of 1.97 times. So, if all things were equal, which they never are, the same plane would be selling at $267,920 today. It is not easy to find an exact current list price, but full retail is in the region of $650,000 or 4.8 times the 1997 price. Yes, the 2024 plane would come with an incredible suite of avionics in the form of the Garmin G1000 that would command a premium price but it has basically the same engine and airframe as before.
Here is where things get interesting. Part 23 certification can act as a two-way barrier by protecting legacy aircraft manufacturers that have amortized their investments many times over due to the ultra slow/no pace of technological advances in legacy engines while limiting new entrants to the four-seat certified market because of the costs of entry.
The Cessna 172 has effectively set the price expectation for training aircraft which has then increased the profitability and attractiveness for other companies as well such as Piper, Cirrus, Diamond and Tecnam who are able to price at similarly elevated levels due to shortage of capacity and high flight school demand. Product pricing can certainly come from a formula that starts with costs and adds a margin, but in the case of a protected market (which is what certification does) pricing can be whatever the market will bear.
MOSAIC potentially lowers both the barriers and the cost of entry for new four-seat aircraft as they can be manufactured to an agreed standard and use components that have not, themselves, had to go through very expensive certifications. With many traditional legal design burdens lifted, we can reasonably expect to see new aircraft that are lighter but potentially stronger than their legacy colleagues, full of avionics that are a fraction of the cost of the fully certified versions and with engines that are more efficient, use less expensive fuels and weigh less.
It is certainly possible that new entrants will simply follow existing pricing trends, but given volume opportunities and the need to break into a very restricted, brand-conscious market, they are more likely to seek market share through price and features. Most flight schools cannot afford brand new aircraft from any of the current market leaders because a new plane offers no discernible operating cost advantages over the same model that is 20 or more years old, and any ability to price at a premium for new versus old is negligible.
UND’s training fleet is underwritten by school tuition, something that smaller flight schools can’t bring to bear.
The new aircraft market for training aircraft is currently limited to a very few, very large flight schools who are often part of a college program so can cross subsidize through tuition fees for academic courses. New, four seat Light Sport aircraft built to the new ASTM Light Sport standards could easily be sold profitably for half of the price of a legacy aircraft while offering engines that could decimate operating costs and avionics that are at least comparable, if not better, in functionality and ease of use.
Taking the Cessna 172 as an example, this plane would now be Light Sport eligible but still constrained by certification limitations and a price that could be double that of new competition. Is that a sustainable position? Only time will tell but the legacy models could potentially be re-tooled and equipped in line with ASTM standards and relaunched as a Light Sport. This would bring certain costs down but require new investment in manufacturing practices which may leave the net costs of production unchanged but pricing at a potentially much lower level in line with new generation Light Sports.
How Will MOSAIC Influence Flight Training?
The answer is probably in multiple parts. The first, and immediate, answer is that it will boost the attraction of holding a Sport Pilot license or exercising Sport Pilot privileges. The vast majority of flight schools and rental fleets do not offer any Light Sport aircraft for rent and do not see the benefits of having multiple training options just to cater for this audience. With existing aircraft in the fleet becoming Light Sport eligible, schools could well see a fast expansion in Sport Pilot training and rentals. Existing Sport Pilots who downgraded from full private and above certifications will get rapid check outs in legacy aircraft and owners who had previously needed to sell aircraft because they did not feel comfortable with full medical renewals or BasicMed, will likely keep them. The possible downside of this could be a further restriction on the supply of affordable used aircraft as owners choose to retain them plus more people looking to rent.
Secondly, for others, the Sport Pilot license would become a more affordable and accessible option to get into flying as more airports would now have planes they could fly once they achieved their Sport Pilot Certification. However, there is a certain stigma still attached to both Light Sport Aircraft and Sport Pilots probably due to lack of understanding and some of the myths discussed above.
Thirdly, and potentially most importantly, this would be an opportunity to expand the pilot population and increase the proportion of successful completions from the 20-30% (for a Private Pilot License) highlighted in AOPA’s 2010 study to something significantly higher. With a Sport Pilot license theoretically achievable in 20 hours compared to 40 for a Private Pilot License it could and perhaps should be the starting point for all aspiring pilots. However, there are barriers to this including the current lack of Light Sport aircraft in flight schools and the need to take another written test and check ride to move up from Sport to Private. The former will change almost overnight with the publication of the final regulations following the NPRM but the latter is not impacted by MOSAIC. However, this would open up one of MOSAICS many opportunities for productive change.
At the present time the content of a Sport Pilot check ride and Private Pilot check ride is effectively the same with no difference in expected performance or maneuvers. The oral exam would have some differences concerning limitations and privileges that come with the certification. Currently a Sport Pilot could, through experience and with an instructor, gradually add-on the capabilities and training that would be required for Private Pilot privileges—3 hours of instrument training, 3 hours of night, airspace clearance, towered landings and additional solo time. Ironically, none of these “add-ons” are actually specifically tested during a second flight test for Private Pilot beyond what had already taken place under the original Sport Pilot check ride. Consequently, a Sport Pilot moving to Private Pilot is being tested twice for the same skills with the same performance requirements but having to pay for both an extra written test and flight test.
Not surprisingly, this acts as a disincentive for people to start with the more affordable and swifter option of a Sport Pilot license if their ultimate goal is to add ratings later. The obvious solution to this would be to make Sport Pilot the starting point for all aviation certifications with a formal DPE conducted check ride and then gradually move up to Private Pilot through adding endorsements with one CFI and a final endorsement from a different one, as is currently allowed for moves between Light Sport Categories. The endorsements would cover both knowledge and flight skills/experience. This would increase the number of pilots who are able to complete something and give them the incentive to continue to add skills and experience knowing that there is not another massive expense waiting for them to be able to move up. As with many aspects of the Light Sport/Sport Pilot revolution, the success of this low-risk modification could also provide data for whether non DPE instructors can be relied upon to safely transition these pilots.
In conclusion, MOSAIC is going to have a major positive effect on aviation accessibility and affordability but not just because of the obvious changes but also from its direct consequences on related matters that might not, at first sight, even be in play.
A lot has been written about the contents of the MOSAIC NPRM and many people and organizations have been able to comment on it to the FAA. Much of the commentary has been around the extension, or in some cases, curtailing of existing privileges for Sport Pilots, aircraft that can fit into the Light Sport definition and Light Sport Repairman certifications. I don’t plan to re-hash any of that here. This article will focus on what some of these changes could mean, in practical terms, to the market for Light Sport Aircraft and its customers. As you will see, it has the potential to be highly disruptive which not everyone will be happy about but will do so in a way that also opens up opportunities to a wider audience.
Before delving any deeper, let’s dispel the myth held by some in general aviation that Light Sport has been a “failure”.
Short story:
“Buy an aircraft manufacturer with a certified product and also selling in the Light-Sport Aircraft class for, what? …£100 million? Try again and aim low: just over £12m ($15.3 million),” wrote Flyer staff.
Earlier, a Chinese buyer was going to absorb the prior debt while paying slightly less for the company. The supposed Chinese buyer never explained how they would earn such a large amount to cover that debt service.
Dürkopp Adler Group describes itself as “a global innovation and technology leader in the field of industrial sewing. We develop, produce and sell high-quality sewing machines and equipment.”
Flyer reported the opposition
“They alleged that the majority shareholder, Shanghai Pudong Science and Technology Investment Co. Ltd., which has been the controlling equity holder of Icon since 2017, seized control of the management, operated the company as its own property, and systematically dismantled it to expropriate Icon’s intellectual property to China.
Law360 (paywall)
On June 14, a Porto Aviation’s 
Dunnellon is in Marion County, not Ocala but the close proximity helps both. Under airport manager (and pilot) Mike Grawe‘s leadership through the last six years, X35 has become a thriving facility with energetic new businesses sprouting up.
Randy has taken over an existing operation, is preserving the originator’s names 
These two new businesses join the veterans at X35 adding to the success Mike Grawe has been building.
Edge has clearly gone beyond just fitting fuel injection to Rotaxes. The table on Page 52 shows Edge’s available kits and upgrades, starting with straightforward big bore/EFI kits up through highly experimental mega-hp conversions of 1000cc motorcycle engines. (Note that although EP’s conversions start with a factory-new Rotax engine, its mods void any Rotax warranty and Rotax no longer considers these engines as Rotax.) The common thread among Edge’s engines is a conversion to its EFI, substitution of the intake/throttle body and for the relevant models, a turbo upgrade. The invisible part of the upgrade though is equally important: tuning.
So let’s get to the elephant in the living room: How does Rotax feel about Edge modifying their engines? “We get asked that a lot,” laughs Hauklien. “It’s a funny story. Until three or four years ago, we had a quite intense relationship with Rotax. They obviously didn’t fancy what we were doing because they were obviously afraid of us hurting their brand and reputation for reliable engines with our modifications, which is understandable. What was funny, though, was that every time we went to an exhibition the Rotax salespersons would give us the most intense stares. Meanwhile the young engineers from Rotax came by and really appreciated the work we had put into the engine. They would say, ‘Why didn’t we think of this, what clever solutions!’ That was always fun for us to watch. I think Rotax just got fed up with all the local NTSBs approaching them who would say, ‘We have a Rotax engine with this serial number and there was a crash, it had an engine failure, we need you to investigate it, we need a statement from BRP [parent company Bombardier].’ And obviously as soon as Rotax got pictures from the site or the wreckage, they could see that it was a modified engine.”
Company owner Mark Schaible joins us to talk about the airplane’s gestation and expectations for performance and when it might fly. Hint: You’ll be able to see a cabin mockup at AirVenture this year at the least. In general, Sonex is hoping for performance similar to the low-wing Sonex designs and will be building the first example as a taildragger with a 130-hp ULPower engine. Schaible also discusses changes to the design now that MOSAIC is closer to reality. Expanded Sport Pilot rules could allow Sonex to give the High Wing a gross weight above the current 1320-pound maximum for LSA.
My objective was to build an “
According to 
OK, let’s come back to Earth… or water perhaps …or either. Aero Adventure continues to fly as it has for three decades (though management has changed at least three times over the period). For a tiny fraction of $13.5 million, much less $170 million, Aero Adventure has built a line of aircraft, including kit versions and an SLSA version. They’ve also offered the 
The U.S. operation of Aero Affinity ranges widely through the light aircraft space and has entered somewhat larger aviation, no doubt a good direction to be going as we contemplate Mosaic LSA that require new expertise for equipment like retractable gear, adjustable props, alternate propulsion systems, and more. Last year Alex took factory training by 
As to affordability
To hold prices from soaring even higher, this move by Aero Adventure makes economic sense. I’d bet they can also add new sales from South America.
How much investment has this California company attracted? Numbers I’ve been quoted vary enormously but all estimates run into many millions of dollars. If these guesses are even close to accurate, Icon has generated more investment funding than nearly any LSA producer. Only one outstrips them. That was a reported $200 million sale of Pipistrel to Textron, owner of Cessna and other aviation brands. I hope the aerospace conglomerate got all they hoped for because that is a super-premium valuation for any LSA company, even one as tech-savvy as Pipistrel.
Icon has performed reasonably well in recent years (
Yicai reported on May 22, 2024 that “shares of stock in Shang Gong Group soared to the exchange-imposed limit after the Chinese sewing machine maker and logistics service provider said that it will invest $13.5 million to buy insolvent US light airplane maker Icon Aircraft and take on its debt.”
“As the assets will be sold by auction, Shang Gong will bid against any other competitors and the actual transaction cost may be higher than the current offer price,” Yicai continued.
The market for recreational aircraft like Icon A5 is very small in China. The country leans toward practical solutions like transportation rather than leisure flying, although any opening of the lower-altitude airspace might quickly change that situation.
In our exchange, Tai and I agreed that the idea of eVTOLs may be technically achievable now, at least to some range of operation, but public acceptance of this aircraft development may still take years.
Editor’s Note: This news release came across our (virtual) desks today and we feel it’s of interest to provide this update now. However, our man Dan Johnson has arranged to speak with current CEO Alex Rolinski in the next few days to get more detail on these changes and what to look for from Aero Adventure in the near future.
James came to aviation from the computer business, where the pace isn’t fast — it’s furious! Over the years Dave and I covered James and his output, we’d make a new video at every airshow, it seemed, as he had moved on from the last design to the next. That’s what they do in the world of computers but it made pilots’ heads spin.
It also probably slowed sales because, as with computers, why buy this airplane when the next one will be even better?
James founded Belite and began with ideas about carbon fiber tube airframes. It was a marvelous, modern, even exotic idea but it was quite unorthodox for most builders. Plus, in those days, carbon fiber was expensive and a Part 103 aircraft needed to be affordable.
The pair is at an early stage of the development in this project. SkyKicker’s website is in process. However, given a design that has already proven itself, and adding the high level of energy Nick and Charlotte are bringing to the task, I doubt it will be long before Chipper becomes a product on the market.
The episode discussed how an Alaska pilot had repaired his aircraft after a bear attacked it and clawed the fabric covering in several places (see simulated bear claw). The pilot made repairs with — you guessed it! — duct tape, and flew home successfully.
When thinking of affordable aviation, it’s impossible not to talk about the 
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.”
Wave has had a long development cycle but their timing with Mosaic approaching next year looks prescient.
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.
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.”
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.
If you believe it’s worth a closer look, 
I have often written about many seaworthy aircraft and invite you to 
When we last wrote about the 
Not just any prop. This special “non-planar” three-blade prop designed by Craig Catto features an unusual bit of blade shape near the tips, all aimed at reducing noise while retaining or, even better, increasing efficiency. As tested on the Whisper Sling, the 
