Rick's statement is incorrect. A plans built aircraft can still be an ELSA if the manufacturer has developed a procedure for building all of the parts and the builder follows it. Of course this assumes that the manufacturer has built and certified at least one SLSA.
The statement by Kevin that the KR1B is E-LSA compliant is misleading / incorrect. It may be LSA compliant, but since RR hasn't built one and performed the SLSA analysis and testing it can't be an ELSA. The advantage of an ELSA is the new repairman certificate that lets you work on more than one airplane. For those interested in the details go to EAA's sport pilot site www.sportpilot.org. Colin, I was trying to stay out of this thread. I'm sure that I am on your list of those that have beat this topic into the ground in the past and am also in the category of never having built, owned or flown a KR, although I do own a set of KR2S plans. I also own a copy of the ASTM Standards F 2279-03 "Standard Practice for Quality Assurance in the Manufacture of Light Sport Airplanes" and F 2245-04 "Standard Specification for Design and Performance of a Light Sport Airplane." Included are interesting things like the required performance for a go-around. "4.4.5 Balked Landing-The airplane shall demonstrate a full-throttle climb gradient at 1.3VSO which shall exceed 1?30 within 5 s of power application from aborted landing. If the flaps may be promptly and safely retracted without loss of altitude and without sudden changes in attitude, they may be retracted." If you increase the chord of the wing a constant percentage you don't change the lift distribution for a fixed quantity of lift (i.e. airplane weight) you just decrease the required dynamic pressure to achieve that lift (i.e. the velocity of air flowing past the wing). The advantage decreasing stall speed this way is that all previous calculations and testing regarding the strength of the spar are still valid because you have not changed the load distribution on the spar. -- wesley scott k...@spottedowl.biz Bryan, TX > > Message: 11 > Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2006 19:57:51 -0500 > From: "Rick Human" <rahu...@ev1.net> > Subject: Re: KR> Making KR ELSA - rebuttle > > And let's set some facts straight - let's quit misusing the term ELSA - an > ELSA designation is to be used for kits where the builder performs less than > 51% of the assembly - any aircraft built from plans or a 49% kit will be > registered as an Amateur Built. So a KR would still be an amateur built but > if that aircraft can show compliance with the LSA rules it can be flow by a > Sport Pilot or a Private Pilot with a Drivers Lic. rather than a medical. > Message: 21 List-Post: krnet@list.krnet.org Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2006 13:46:20 -0600 From: "Kevin Angus" <kan...@talkcycle.com> Subject: RE: KR> Making KR ELSA - rebuttle KR1-B is E-LSA compliant.
