A couple of weeks ago, I contacted the FSDO in Miami about a CD model that had never been converted to a 1400 lb gross weight aircraft by virtue of a 337 but had an error in the weight and balance. A month after manufacture, landing lights were added and the weight and balance were recalculated erroneously using 1400 lb gross weight. The operating limitations at the time of manufacture listed the gross weight at 1260 lbs, which should have been used for the calculations but was not. The answer I got was this; "THERE ARE NO CERTIFICATED AIRCRAFT THAT ARE ELIGIBLE AS A LIGHT SPORT AIRCRAFT". Caps intended. Yikes! I asked if that meant Piper Cubs and Taylorcraft BC-12's also and they responded "That's what our expert says". A further check by another person with the FSDO in Des Moines got the same answer. I think the guys at the FSDO are interpreting the phrase " A specific type of aircraft could not ever have been certified at a higher gross weight any time in its history" as meaning any airplane that had any versions that exceeded 1320 are not eligible as light sport aircraft. Oklahoma City says the FSDO's are responsible for final determination of light sport eligibility. I also think their is some "field guidance" from headquarters out there since we got the same response from two different FSDO's. Point is, before we all go off half-cocked about the gross weight rule, we'd better make some subtle inquiries to be sure we are on the right track before we blow our foot off and have all Ercoupes declared as non-light sport.
PS Still haven't found an instructor with his own plane to give me an hour of dual so I can get insurance. Glen's plane is in the shop for a month. Mine is in Iowa. I am in Naples, FL. I have an ATP and not a learner's permit. Anybody got any ideas? Robert Bartunek See the USA, in your Air-Coo-Pay!
