Our MOSAIC survey is now closed because the collector reached its limit in only five days.
The survey covered some of the key aspects of the new FAA regulations surrounding light sport aircraft (LSA) purely as a litmus test on attitudes in Australia. Whilst it was not comprehensive, and the sample too small to be a definitive measure, some trends did become obvious.
Most strongly of all was that the respondents approved of the new LSA standards to one degree or another.
In response to the first question about the removal of the MTOW, 57% said having no MTOW was a good idea. Another 22% preferred it to be raised to 760kg, and 17% thought an MTOW of 1360 kg was the best idea. A small fraction of only 2.5% thought the LSA MTOW should remain at the current 600 kg. This reflects the current thinking that LSAs are hampered by the arbitrary MTOW set 20 years ago.
MOSAIC will now limit the LSA category by a stall speed of 61 KCAS, which will impact the MTOW as a secondary effect. Respondents supported the new stall speed, with 67% agreeing that 61 KCAS was appropriate, with a further 17% preferring the original increase to 54 KCAS as detailed in the FAA's NPRM. Very few (3%) wanted the stall speed to remain at 45 knots.
It appears that retractable undercarriage is a no-brainer, with 80% agreeing with the amendment to the LSA standard. The current regulations prohibit retractables, although seaplane LSAs are allowed to have repositionable gear to permit amphibians to fall into the category.
More contentious is whether or not Approved Self-administering Aviation Organisations (ASAO) like RAAus should have the privilege of administering the new standard in total. 67% approved, but 12% wanted the 760-kg limit to remain and 20% said the point was moot because ASAOs should be abolished and all administration returned to CASA. This issue is currently the one perplexing CASA the most about MOSAIC.
One of the FAA's motivations for the new rules is to encourage people to buy an LSA rather than build their own aeroplane, citing safety as the issue. Of our respondents, 47% agreed saying LSAs were safer, 12% said home-builts were safe because the person who built it had to fly it, and 40% took the middle road and said in effect that comparing the safety records of LSAs verses home-built aircraft was confusing.
When it came to demands of CASA in light of the changes, 40% wanted complete implementation as soon as possible, with 27% urging more careful consideration on the impacts. Interestingly, 32% said CASA should implement, but restrict ASAOs to LSAs with a published MTOW of 760 kg only, a course of action that is open to CASA and separate from the aircraft standard. Tellingly, no-one wanted to stick with the current LSA standard.
Our seventh and last question was the one that would give us perhaps the deepest insight into a MOSAIC future for GA in Australia, and accordingly was the one with the widest spread of answers. Calling on respondents to choose one only, we asked what would be the greatest impact of MOSAIC. The results came in as (rounded figures):
- Help retire the old GA fleet – 32%
- Enable more people to transfer to recreational flying – 22%
- Revitalise manufacturing in Australia – 17%
- Not enough information is available – 17%
- See the demise of type-certified aeroplanes – 5%
- No impact at all – 5%
Australian Flying would like to thank everyone who took their time in filling out the survey. It is not a comprehensive view of broad industry opinion, and fuels no solid conclusions. However, we do hope it will start some conversations out there so the GA community is well versed and well prepared when CASA consultation begins in the next year or so.