When the comment period closed for the MOSAIC Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) in January, it was suggested that the final rule might be announced at EAA AirVenture in Oshkosh, Wisconsin, in late July, but that is no longer the expectation.

“It is correct that early to mid-2025 is expected to be the announcement of the final rule,” said EAA spokesman Dick Knapinski. “That’s been no secret. We’ve been telling those who ask that, based on our conversations with the FAA, most recently at our annual winter summit in Oshkosh in early March.”

• READ MORE: Pilots Have Questions When It Comes to MOSAIC

Knapinski said the FAA sincerely wanted to get the rule ready for this year’s AirVenture, “but it would have been an impressive stretch even in the best of circumstances, given that the NPRM public comment period closed in early 2024. Any slippage would have made that even tougher.”

The timeline was also hit by the need to reopen comments for 30 days in February to backfill an omission in the original document.

• READ MORE: We Break Down the State of MOSAIC By the Numbers

The coming election will also use government resources that would be needed to process the new rule, which is intended to reduce certification burdens for new and legacy recreational aircraft while enhancing safety with new technology. Knapinski said the Department of Transportation will release its spring rulemaking plans in a few weeks, and that should give an official timeline for the MOSAIC rule.

Editor’s Note: This article first appeared on AVweb.

The post New Timeline Projected for MOSAIC Final Rule appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

In contrast, all light sport aircraft (LSA), experimental amateur-built airplanes, and warbirds are issued special certificates. In my view, the rule can be divided into two main parts: airplane descriptions and capabilities, and pilot certificates, technician privileges, and operating limitations. In short, airplanes or people.

For airplanes, the NPRM (Notice of Proposed Rulemaking) felt like Christmas in July, granting many capabilities industry and pilot member organizations had sought over some years of negotiation. The people part describes who gets to fly and maintain these MOSAIC LSAs and under what rules. This latter section inspired greater concern.

Airplanes: What We Gained

Here’s the list of what FAA offered and how each changed:

Gross weight: LSAs have been limited to 1,320 pounds (land) or 1,430 pounds (water). Under MOSAIC, the weight limit is removed and clean stall constrains size so the aircraft remains what FAA sought: those “easy to fly, operate, and maintain.” It is expected that weight can rise to 3,000 pounds depending on the design.

Stall speed: Presently, LSAs cannot stall faster than 45 knots. This will be raised 20 percent to 54 knots, but this is clean stall, the purpose of which is to limit aircraft size and difficulty. It has no relation to landing speed or slow-flight qualities. This more than doubled the potential size, hence a new term, “MOSAIC LSA.”

Four seats: LSAs are presently limited by definition to two seats. This rises to four in a MOSAIC LSA, but if operated by someone using sport pilot certificate privileges, then only one passenger can be carried. A private certificate with medical may fill all four seats, assuming weight and balance allows.

Retractable gear: Light sport aircraft have been fixed gear only, except for amphibious models. Now any MOSAIC LSA can be retractable. Several imported LSAs already offer retractable options in other countries.

Adjustable prop: LSAs were allowed only ground-adjustable props. Now a MOSAIC LSA can have an in-flight adjustable prop. Such equipment on similar aircraft is common in other countries.

250 knot max speed: An LSA was limited by definition to 120 knots at full power. Now the speed limit matches all other aircraft below 10,000 feet: 250 knots. No one expected such a large expansion, but now retractable and adjustable props make more sense.

Rotary expansion: After 20 years of waiting, fully built gyroplanes will be allowed. That followed years of advocacy effort, but when the opposition finally yielded, the FAA also granted helicopters.

Electric or hybrid: Because the FAA did not want turbine LSAs in 2004, it specified reciprocating engines, unintentionally knocking out electric motors that few were considering at the time. In fixing the definition to allow electric, the agency will also permit hybrids. Examples are already flying in Europe.

Turbine: Perhaps turbine engines were harder to operate 20 years ago when LSA were defined, but today they are seen as simpler, and the FAA will allow them. Turbine-powered MOSAIC LSA candidates are already flying in Europe.

Multiple engines/motors: The LSA has been limited to a single engine by definition. That constraint is removed, although no language was given to address how the pilot qualifies.

Aerial work: The Light Aircraft Manufacturers Association (LAMA) lobbied for MOSAIC LSAs to be permitted to do forms of aerial work, although not passenger or cargo hauling. The FAA has granted this opportunity to the manufacturers, which can specify what operations they will permit. A commercial pilot certificate will be required.

One downside to all these goodies? Each will increase the price. The good news? Present-day LSAs offer lower prices and have proven enjoyable and dependable. Many LSAs are fine as they are and have no need to change.

A lot of LSA producers already meet higher weights in other countries where permitted. They are merely reduced on paper to meet U.S. standards. It should be straightforward for them to redeclare meeting all MOSAIC-level ASTM standards to qualify for higher weights.

The only question is how far backward compatible they can go for aircraft in the field over which they have had no control for some time. It’s an industry question to resolve, and it will swiftly be handled to aid sales.

People and Areas of Concern

Medicals: Lots of questions surround one of the principal benefits of LSA operation: the lack of requirement for an aviation medical if operating as a sport pilot. More specifically, pilots want to fly larger aircraft using these privileges, meaning no medical certificate, or BasicMed, instead using the driver’s license as evidence of their medical fitness.

To keep within their budget, many pilots wish to buy (or keep flying) legacy GA aircraft such as the Cessna 150, 172, 177, and some 182s, plus certain Pipers, Diamonds, Champions, or other brands. Many of the latter aircraft are too heavy to allow such privilege today. MOSAIC appears to change that, but without presenting compelling evidence that possession of a medical assures a flight proceeds safely, the FAA nonetheless clings to this premise. Many assert the occurrence of medical problems sufficient to upset a flight or cause an accident are incredibly small in number.

Stall speed: Most NPRM readers agree that it was a worthy solution to use 54 knots clean stall as a means to limit the size of the airplane and to keep it within the FAA’s mantra of LSAs being “easy to fly, operate, and maintain.”

However, many respondents note that adding just a couple knots to that limit will allow several more airplanes that some wish to buy and fly under MOSAIC rules. Note that the 54-knot reference is not related to landing speeds or slow flight, where lift-enhancing devices like flaps would normally be used.

Some pilots asked if adding vortex generators could reduce stall speed enough to qualify. The problem lies in proving a slower stall speed was achieved. Stall (V_S1) printed in the POH will be the standard about compliance.

Several pilots have complained about use of calibrated versus indicated airspeed for the stall limit, but this is another matter that might be clarified after the comment period.

Endorsements: One of the significant lessons learned in 20 years of pilots operating LSAs is the so-called magic of endorsements. Instead of asking pilots to receive training, take a knowledge test and possibly an oral exam, followed by a practical flight test, they can just go get trained for added skills from an instructor who then endorses their logbook accordingly, and they’re good to go. This puts a significant burden on flight instructors to do their jobs well, but that’s already the situation.

The NPRM already refers to the use of endorsements for retractable gear training or adjustable prop training, and many believe that expanding endorsements to all privileges described in the MOSAIC proposal has merit.

Noise: For the first time, the NPRM introduced noise requirements that encompass several pages. Coincidentally, the LSA sector is already one of the quietest in the airborne fleet.

This is partly because of European noise regulations that have been in place for a long time, motivating quieter engine and exhaust system development. However, LSAs are also quieter because the powerplants are modern, thanks to the faster approval process implied by industry consensus standards.

The industry was not pleased about the noise proposal, as these requirements add burden without identifiable benefit. Nonetheless, the situation might be handled through the ASTM process more quickly and still satisfy political demands.

Night: MOSAIC’s language invigorated many readers when the NPRM expressed support for a sport pilot to fly at night—with proper training and a logbook endorsement. Then the proposal refers to other FAA regulations that require BasicMed or a medical. If you must have a medical, you are not exercising the central privilege of a sport pilot. Why suggest that a sport pilot can do things that are blocked by other regulations? This conflict should be resolved.

This is one of several aspects of the NPRM that many describe as “inconsistencies,” where one part of MOSAIC appears to restrict another part, often for unclear reasons. Such observations lead many to declare the NPRM looks “rushed to market.” Hopefully, most problems can be addressed in the post-comment period.

When surveyed about why night privileges are valued, most pilots wanted to be able to complete a cross-country flight with a landing after dark.

IFR/IMC: Contrary to what many think, the FAA has never prohibited LSAs from IFR/IMC operation. It is the lack of an ASTM standard to which manufacturers can declare compliance that prevents such sales. (Some special LSA owners elect a change to experimental LSA status and can then file IFR, assuming they have a rating, are current, and the airplane is properly equipped.)

However, as with night operations, many LSA owners report higher-level pilot certificates often including instrument ratings, and they would like to be able to use their LSAs to get through a thin cloud layer.

Maintenance and TBOs: The maintenance community has found several objections within the NPRM. It appears that changes could cause a loss of privilege for LSA owners who have taken training to perform basic maintenance on their own LSAs.

In addition to altering the privileges of light sport repairman mechanic (LSRM) certificate holders, MOSAIC adds capabilities such as electric propulsion, hybrid, turbine, and powered-lift devices, which leaves the mechanic-training industry guessing where to start. Some organizations wonder if it’s worth the investment to create appropriate courses with uncertain privilege at the end.

Indeed, eight training organizations suggested they would petition for an extension to the comment period. It was successful, so the extension will delay the expected arrival of the finished MOSAIC regulation. Absent any extension, the FAA has repeatedly said 16 months were needed, equating to the end of 2024 or early 2025.

One group creatively suggested using add-on training modules to solve the problem in much the same way that endorsements can be used to solve pilot training enhancements.

Lack of sector expertise: The FAA knows a great deal about conventional, three-axis airplanes but far less about so-called “alternative LSAs.” For machines that use different control systems or operate substantially differently than airplanes—weight shift and powered parachutes come to mind—some industry experts believe a better system is to authorize an industry organization to manage these sectors. This has been common throughout Europe for many years and could work well in the U.S.

In a document of its size, some errors will arise and some clarifications will be needed. It is only a proposal after all. Pilots can comment on certain aspects but will have little idea how the FAA can or will solve various points, even if they offer solutions.

This frustrates some readers and can cause uncertainty about a pending or planned airplane purchase. In turn, purchase-decision delays frustrate airplane manufacturers. That’s the precarious terrain surrounding new regulations. Such comments on regulation are part of the American way, where the citizens can be part of the process. Here’s your chance to speak and be heard.

This column first appeared in the November 2023/Issue 943 of FLYING’s print edition.

The post Pilots Have Questions When It Comes to MOSAIC appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

The post We Break Down the State of MOSAIC By the Numbers appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

Now, yes, 20 years later, we’re just getting around to fixing those issues—and in a big, bold way. In fact, the GA industry reacted almost entirely positively to the recommendations published on the eve of EAA AirVenture last summer. The comment period—extended after the government shutdown last fall and buoyed by the appointment of the new FAA administrator, Michael Whitaker—closed Monday. As anticipated, the usual aviation associations weighed in, but with an interesting nuance. Normally, AOPA, GAMA, EAA, NBAA, and NATA either comment completely separately or as one, it seems—but in this instance, GAMA stood apart. It had to, as its membership could not be so neatly addressed by the usual consolidated effort. 

• READ MORE: Comments from Aviation Associations Take On Pros and Cons of MOSAIC 

You see, GAMA represents a broad swath of the general and business aviation manufacturing business—and its interests do not necessarily match those of the pilot and user groups behind AOPA and EAA, in particular, and to a lesser extent NBAA and NATA.

And what GAMA diverged on has definite repercussions for other certification-defining efforts in play—notably, those aircraft seeking approval under the advanced air mobility umbrella, by and large as a new breed of aircraft entirely, the eVTOL (electric vertical takeoff and landing) aircraft.

Change Is Hard

So, you’ve gotta ask yourself: What’s a bigger flex for the FAA and industry, MOSAIC or the certification basis for eVTOLs? A great number of which—if you read their various timelines and PR—are set to begin darkening the skies late this year and next? 

If we can’t flex the rules to allow for equivalent levels of safety in a four-seat, 250-knot, 3,325-pound “light sport aircraft”—defying the term, really, but so many of these are already in the field and some certificated under EASA—how can we come to grips with those that fly using completely new (read noncombustion) propulsion systems and simplified (read highly automated) flight control regimes? 

I contemplated this question as I piloted (in loose terms) a Corolla down the 405 freeway, paddling my way toward LAX for a painful x-c home last week after a trip to demo a new—yet-traditional Part 23—airplane for an upcoming pilot report. I looked around me at my fellow humans commanding four-seat SUVs of a similar weight to MOSAIC LSAs (a ton or so), inflicting varying degrees of terror upon the drivers around them. I thought, ‘Do I really want all of these [frickin’ idiots] barreling through the skies over the LA Basin alongside me in their personal eVTOLs?’ They can barely manage two dimensions, let alone three…and isn’t SoCal Center already saturated with its current level of traditional fixed-wing and rotor traffic? At least the gates at LAX are saturated, perpetually. Local communities are more in the business of closing airports—Santa Monica—as opposed to opening them, these days.

And therein lies the promise of the MOSAIC NPRM, as EAA and the other signatories have chosen to cautiously embrace it, that’s distinct from the next stage, which is the road map for eVTOL certification on a broad basis. As it stands, the recommendations outline solid, incremental yet meaningful improvements. They meet the SMART goal standard—“A” for achievable with what we know now, and flexible enough to accommodate the future. 

I understand GAMA’s reticence to push all of its member companies into the future, but then again, five of the seven most recently added GAMA members announced this week are involved directly in AAM. The embrace of this future is real, even among those OEMs who have been until recently concerned solely with developing aircraft under the existing certification paths.

One thing seems clear to me: If the FAA and industry can’t wrap its collective brain around the thoughtful progress made by the ASTM’s F37 committee on LSA and its constituents, there’s no way any of us will be in the mindset to bring on the AAM revolution. And with the pushback now coming to a head in the general public regarding self-assessment and oversight—thanks to the Boeing door plug debacle and its cascade of realizations—that internal oversight formed a compelling part of what kept LSA development in check in terms of cost.

And that would be a shame. ’Cause even though the thought gives me pause now, I have a feeling I’ll be ready to pay good money at some point in the not-too-distant future to engage with the masses soon to be zooming above the 405 rather than on it.

The post Can the FAA Flex? appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

As the comment period closed on January 22 for the MOSAIC revamp of the light sport aircraft approval process, several signatories backed EAA’s take—and the FAA must address the proposal in light of ongoing quality and oversight issues at Boeing.

EAA submitted its response Monday, cosigned by the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association, National Business Aviation Association, and the National Air Transportation Association, with broad support of the measure, including several key areas to refine or expand.

“We support and strongly encourage the agency to commit the resources needed to continue to move this proposal forward and implement these changes,” said the consortium in the EAA statement. “Doing so will further enhance the safety, utility, and commercial viability of general aviation by fostering new aircraft designs and further stimulating the development of new technology.” 

Those elements include: 

• Removal of exclusions on aircraft class, expanding from the currently limited list of airplanes, gliders, powered parachutes, weight-shift control, and lighter-than-air, to add rotorcraft and powered lift and allow for new classes as technology advances
• Removal of the maximum takeoff weight of 1,320 pounds for land-based aircraft (1,430 for water-based aircraft)
• Raising the maximum level flight V_H speed from 120 to 250 kcas
• Allowing for alternative powerplants, controllable pitch props, and retractable landing gear
• Raising the maximum stall speed V_S1 from 45 to 54 kcas—in fact, the consortium would like to see a speed raised to 58 kcas or as high as 61 kcas
• Raising the maximum seating capacity from two to four seats, with the allowance for sport pilots to have up to three passengers

The final two items are apparently where the EAA/AOPA/NATA/NBAA consortium and GAMA diverge in some specifics, with GAMA opposing the allowance of a higher stall speed than 58 kcas, as well as the expansion of sport pilot privileges to allow for carrying up to 3 passengers.

FLYING reached out to GAMA for its comments, and they responded with the following statement, along with its general support for those submitted by EAA/AOPA/NATA/NBAA.

“GAMA supports the key aspects of the MOSAIC proposal to increase the size, performance and scope of aircraft that can be flown by sport pilots and issuance of a special airworthiness certificate in the light-sport aircraft category with the objective of improving safety, functionality, innovation, and availability of small general aviation aircraft. However, there are areas of the proposal regarding new and complex design and expanded operations of light-sport aircraft which are not fully supported by operational safety data alone and require additional consideration and understanding on how FAA intends to implement with the appropriate mitigations for risk.”

“In addition, GAMA believes FAA could more fully realize the intended objectives and benefits of this proposal by applying a consistent safety continuum approach across all small aircraft airworthiness and certification processes.” In translation, the association seeks further investigation of that risk before broadening the remit of the light sport model. The association notes that it was unable to gain consensus across its membership in the risk mitigation inherent in the proposal—given its inclusion of OEMs that build everything from LSA to Part 25 and 29 category aircraft.

Now, the FAA must sift through the recommendations and comments from a broad range of industry users and transform into action those elements that a consensus of the general aviation community has supported, as FLYING has observed.

Allowing for internal oversight is a key element that has propelled the development in LSA under ASTM. The transition to the certification program under the NPRM needs to acknowledge that in the face of increased public outcry on FAA oversight of similar types of self-assessment, such as Boeing and certain other OEMs of Part 23, 25, and 29 aircraft enjoy.

Who Do They Represent?

EAA in its letter acknowledged its 290,000 members and 900 local chapters of pilots, aircraft builders, and kitplane/vintage/warbird enthusiasts, while AOPA mentions its 300,000 “individuals who collectively operate 85 percent of all general aviation aircraft in the United States.” NATA reflects the operational side of GA, representing “nearly 3,700 aviation business locations across a broad cross section of the industry,” including fractional and Part 135 operators, and FBOs, MROs, and flight training providers. NBAA notes 11,000 “business and professional members involved in business aviation.”

• READ MORE: MOSAIC Questions Linger in Light Sport Aircraft Community

GAMA was formed to “foster and advance the general welfare, safety, interests, and activities of the global general and business aviation industry,” with more than 150 member companies represented, according to the association. Those constituents also include FBOs, pilot and maintenance training facilities, and fleet operators.

The EAA consortium comments may be read here. GAMA’s comments may be reviewed here.

The post Comments From Aviation Associations Take on Pros and Cons of MOSAIC appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

• READ MORE: What This MOSAIC Preview Means

MOSAIC is intended to broaden the scope of eligible aircraft while expanding performance and weight-based limits on the category. It’s considered a safety move by its proponents because it allows more margins of safety in aircraft available to those with so-called “driver’s license medicals” and more flexibility for creating new designs of light aircraft. The comment period for the NPRM ends Jan. 22. GAMA’s full statement to AVweb follows:

“The GAMA team is currently working across our broader membership to develop collective comments and recommendations in response to the FAA’s MOSAIC proposed rule which are due on January 22nd. Overall, GAMA supports the direction of key aspects of the proposal to increase the size, performance and scope of aircraft that can be flown by sport pilots and be issued a special airworthiness certificate with the objective of improving safety, functionality, innovation, and availability of small general aviation aircraft. However, there are areas of the proposal which go beyond what was expected and require additional clarification and justification from the FAA. In addition, GAMA believes the FAA misses a significantly important opportunity to fully realize the intended objectives and benefits of this proposal by not applying a consistent approach across all small aircraft airworthiness and certification processes. Our submission will go into further detail on these issues.”

Editor’s Note: This article first appeared on AVweb.com.

The post GAMA Has Issues with MOSAIC appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

That strange-looking aircraft is the BlackFly, the preproduction model of personal eVTOL manufacturer Pivotal, which on Thursday rebranded from Opener Aero. The company also unveiled Helix, its first scalable production aircraft, which will go on sale for a base price of $190,000 starting in January.

The company said the new design supports “its transition to become a product-delivering entity.” Pivotal is referring to delivering at scale here. But already it has sold and delivered a BlackFly to customer Tim Lum, whom the firm considers to be the first private eVTOL pilot in the world. SkyDrive, a Japanese eVTOL maker, claimed the first private customer for its SB-05 in April but has not delivered the aircraft.

BlackFly has been in development for more than a decade and features a patented “aeroarchitecture,” as Pivotal CEO Ken Karklin refers to the aircraft’s structure and systems. But Helix will help the company take the next step.

“With Helix, we become the leading manufacturer of light eVTOL aircraft,” Karklin said in a statement accompanying the announcement. “Helix presents the next iteration of 10-plus years of innovating, testing, and delivering on the promise to give individuals access to small, yet mighty aircraft. Pivotal reflects our mission to transform movement with the power of flight. The new identity shows the versatility of our system architecture and encapsulates both the exhilaration and utility of flight.”

Karklin, a 13-year veteran of AeroVironment—where he was named chief operating officer in 2020 before taking the reins of Pivotal in May 2022—sat down with FLYING to discuss the ins and outs of Helix, as well as the Early Access Program that has allowed customers such as Lum to become personal eVTOL trailblazers.

The Specs

Helix is built on Pivotal’s fourth-generation eVTOL platform and is aimed primarily at recreational flyers and short-hop travelers. Like its predecessor, the new design relies on a tilt-aircraft architecture. In other words, the entire aircraft—not just the rotors and propellers, as is the case with many other manufacturers—tilts when transitioning between hover and cruise.

The Helix includes an integrated display and user interface, providing real-time altitude, location, speed, and other key measurements. Both BlackFly and Helix utilize the same core control system, and the aerodynamics are nearly identical between the two. Both models include a full-aircraft parachute as a backup safety system.

BlackFly and Helix are winged lift-plus-cruise designs, relying fully on propulsion for hover but allowing the aircraft to glide on its wings in cruise. As seen in the video above, the transition happens pretty quickly. And having flown a BlackFly simulator, I can tell you that changing flight modes was as simple as pushing a button and pulling or pushing the joystick.

Helix, however, will offer improved power and propulsion to expand its range of use cases, Karklin told FLYING. For example, greater efficiency at higher revolutions per minute will enable flights at higher altitudes. The new design also features upgraded digital electronics hardware, and its target payload will surpass BlackFly’s 200 pounds (though Karklin couldn’t yet specify by how much).

Helix’s flight deck “won’t be as austere as a race car,” said Karklin, alluding to the BlackFly’s more stark architecture: a carbon fiber frame, basic seat, and two joysticks.

“That’s it,” he said. “If you’re buying an expensive vehicle like [Helix], you’d expect a little bit more.”

So, Pivotal redesigned BlackFly’s canopy and flight deck to give Helix an integrated pilot display, more comfortable seating, and improved safety features. For example, a new and more durable livery will reduce the effects of weather, age, and solar loading, extending the airframe’s lifespan and increasing comfort.

“With the Helix, we now have new composite materials that make up that aerostructure,” Karklin said. “A lot of the weight comes out. That enables us to have the kind of creature comforts and accessories that a premium aircraft buyer would expect. They can select beacon lights. They’ll be able to select an aviation radio, [and] they’ll be able to have a livery that they want.”

Other add-ons will include a transport trailer, fast charging, aviation and ground radios, ADS-B, and a gimbal camera that would allow someone on the ground to watch the flight as if they’re in the air with the pilot. 

Customers will also be able to download a free smartphone app that simplifies preflight checks, captures flight history, and manages charging and aircraft service. And in the future, the company will add support for next-generation, field-replaceable batteries to extend the eVTOL’s range and endurance.

Pivotal has tentatively priced Helix at $190,000, but customers can place their orders starting in January for a deposit of 25 percent of the purchase price. Initial shipments are expected June 10. After 12 months of producing the aircraft, Karklin expects Pivotal to churn out “a couple hundred in the first year.”

Helix was designed to comply with FAA Part 103 ultralight requirements: Pilots must fly it during the daytime in Class G airspace over uncongested areas, but they won’t require certification to do so.

The model is primarily geared toward recreation. But Karklin noted public service and defense as other possible use cases. Part 103, he said, allows some rule bending for these applications, and Pivotal could conceivably build a bigger, faster, rangier design to use as a search and rescue platform, for example. He claimed the company could cross-train an EMT to fly Helix in just a few weeks.

“They could be the first person that arrives on the scene of an accident that takes them an extra 45 minutes or hour to get to via truck, because they can fly point to point,” Karklin said. “And that could save lives.”

Further down the line, whenever the FAA’s MOSAIC proposal is codified, Karklin said Pivotal could certify a future model as light sport aircraft, enabling some commercial operations.

Lessons From BlackFly

Pivotal is unique in the eVTOL space, having already sold its preproduction model to a half dozen customers. By and large, rivals in the space have developed working prototypes and allowed some users to fly simulators (and even preproduction models). But none have actually sold and delivered an aircraft to a private customer outright.

The company required prospective owners to complete initial and recurrent flight training to ensure safety, and customers can select those dates based on delivery timing. Karklin said BlackFly users typically train on a simulator for about a week before being cleared for takeoff.

All this has been facilitated by Pivotal’s Early Access Program. The company selected participants who are at least 18 years of age, live in the U.S., have access to Class G airspace, and are willing to commit time to training and program development. Not only does this allow users to get in on the action early, but it provides the company with valuable customer feedback. 

Karklin said there are six spots left to fill. Readers interested in owning their own BlackFly can apply to join “The 12” by filling out this form.

Like this story? We think you’ll also like the Future of FLYING newsletter sent every Thursday afternoon. Sign up now.

The post Opener Rebrands to Pivotal and Unveils Helix, Its First Scalable Production Aircraft appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

Originally published on July 24, MOSAIC aims to revise regulations governing the manufacture, certification, operation, maintenance, and alteration of light sport aircraft (LSA). 

The proposal’s primary goal is to enhance safety, performance, and privileges under sport pilot and LSA rules, with a focus on suitability for flight training, limited aerial work, and personal travel.

The NPRM, as published in the Federal Register on July 24 (88 FR 47650), originally had a comment period set to conclude on October 23. With the extension, interested parties now have until January 22 to provide feedback on the proposed changes.

• READ MORE: A MOSAIC Study Guide

This move comes in response to a formal request from several aviation organizations, including the AEA, Aeronautical Repair Station Association, Aviation Suppliers Association, Aviation Technician Education Council, Helicopter Association International, International Air Response Inc., Modification and Replacement Parts Association, and the National Air Transportation Association. These organizations jointly submitted the request on August 29, expressing the need for additional time to thoroughly review and assess the extensive amendments proposed by MOSAIC.

While much of the public’s attention has been drawn to the potential expansion of sport pilot privileges and the increased weight and performance allowances for LSA, organizations like AEA are concentrating on four key areas that may affect its member companies and employees. These are continued operational safety, limitations on modernization and upgrades, personnel, and repetitive rulemaking.

• READ MORE: MOSAIC Questions Linger in Light Sport Aircraft Community

The FAA’s decision allows the public and relevant organizations to more thoroughly identify inconsistencies, duplications, or unintended consequences that may arise from the proposed changes. 

This extension also underscores the importance of engaging industry stakeholders and the public in shaping the future of LSA regulations. This opportunity to provide valuable insights and feedback on the MOSAIC proposal ultimately contributes to the ongoing process.

The post FAA Extends MOSAIC Comment Period appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

Now for this week’s top story:

Blue Origin Appoints Amazon’s Dave Limp as New CEO

What happened? As rivals SpaceX and Virgin Galactic dominate the commercial spaceflight sector, Jeff Bezos’ Blue Origin has been grounded. Its pace of progress has slowed from a run to a walk to a limp. But perhaps the best way to correct a limp is with a Limp—Dave Limp, senior vice president of Amazon devices and services, to be specific.

Tumultuous tenure: Bezos hired Limp as CEO in part because of his “sense of urgency,” which hints at the billionaire businessman’s aims. Under current chief executive Bob Smith, Blue Origin completed the highly publicized maiden voyage of its New Shepard spaceship, ferrying Bezos and Star Trek icon William Shatner to the edge of the atmosphere.

Since then, the company has stalled. It made a few more commercial flights before a September 2022 crash prompted the FAA to bring down the hammer, grounding New Shepard indefinitely. Smith has also missed out on lucrative NASA and DOD contracts, struggled to launch the New Glenn super-heavy rocket, and faced accusations of a toxic workplace.

Changing of the guard: Bezos is probably hoping Limp is the catalyst Blue Origin needs to right the ship, both figuratively and literally. At Amazon, he was involved with Project Kuiper, a planned competitor to SpaceX’s Starlink satellites, and led ambitious projects such as Alexa, Echo, and FireTV. He also held executive positions with a pair of now-defunct technology firms.

Limp is not an aerospace expert by any means. But Bezos clearly trusts his ability to turn ideas into reality (it’s an open secret that Alexa and Echo were pet projects of his), and do it quickly. He’s certainly an upgrade over Smith, at least according to current employees, one of whom gave the less-than-glowing assessment, “Anything is better than Bob.”

Quick quote: “I’ve worked closely with [Limp] for many years. He is the right leader at the right time for Blue. Dave is a proven innovator with a customer-first mindset and extensive experience leading and scaling large, complex organizations. Dave has an outstanding sense of urgency, brings energy to everything, and helps teams move very fast,” Bezos wrote in a note to Blue Origin employees obtained by CNBC.

My take: When this news came across my radar, one thing in particular caught my attention: Bezos’ repeated emphasis on speed.

Reading too deeply into the public comments of a CEO is a dangerous game, but it’s easy to see why Bezos might prioritize quickness. Since New Shepard was grounded, SpaceX has launched thousands of satellites and ferried astronauts to and from the International Space Station with NASA. Virgin Galactic has now completed space tourism trips in back-to-back-to-back months. United Launch Alliance has made a handful of launches, too.

All of these competitors have leapfrogged Blue Origin—at least for now. Limp’s likely prerogative as new boss will be getting one of the company’s programs (New Shepard, New Glenn, the Blue Moon lander, or the Orbital Reef space station) into orbit quickly. New Shepard, for which the FAA just closed its mishap investigation, seems to be a likely candidate.

Deep dive: Can Blue Origin Course Correct With Amazon’s Dave Limp at the Helm?

In Other News…

Boosters Delivered to Kennedy Space Center for Artemis II Mission

What happened? About one year from now, NASA will send four astronauts around the moon and back. Before then, though, it needs to build the spacecraft that will carry them. That process appears set to begin soon, after contractor Northrop Grumman delivered 10 booster motor segments to Kennedy Space Station

Back to the moon: Artemis III, tentatively planned for 2025, would mark humanity’s return to the moon for the first time since Apollo 17 more than half a century ago. Before that, Artemis II will serve as a litmus test—if it succeeds, the agency will move to the next step. The mission will be flown with the Space Launch System (SLS) super-heavy lift rocket and the Orion spacecraft.

Northrop provided segments for the SLS’s twin solid rocket boosters, which will generate 8.8 million pounds of thrust and help Orion reach 24,500 mph on its way to the moon. Now, the parts are being evaluated and are expected to be stacked in February. NASA also added four RS-25 engines to the rocket’s core stage last week. But concerns the project will fall behind schedule persist.

Deep dive: Booster Delivery Marks NASA Artemis II Moon Mission Milestone

VI&E Solutions, Ace VTOL Look to Add 700 Vertiports in Oceania

What happened? As more electric vertical takeoff and landing (eVTOL) aircraft designs hit the market, they’ll need a place to land. Enter Volatus Infrastructure and Energy Solutions (VI&E): The vertiport company partnered with eVTOL manufacturer Ace VTOL to build a network of 700 vertiports in Australia, New Zealand, and other countries in the region.

Global dominance? The vertiport industry will rely on the development of another industry, eVTOL aircraft, for scale. But when those wacky-looking aircraft finally hit the skies, VI&E is in position to capitalize. The company is planning four U.S. vertiport projects for 2024 and will look to add more through partnerships with regional aviation real estate developers.

Of greater consequence, perhaps, are the company’s plans beyond the U.S. It has agreements with eVTOL manufacturers, infrastructure developers, and regulatory authorities in Japan, South Korea, Singapore, and more. Already, that gives it a global footprint, with which the likes of Ferrovial Vertiports, Groupe ADP, and other rivals will need to compete.

Deep Dive: VI&E Solutions, Ace VTOL Plan to Add 700 Vertiports in Oceania Region

And a Few More Headlines:

• NATO is set to adopt the U.K. Ministry of Defense’s SAPIENT protocol as a standard for counter-uncrewed aerial systems (C-UAS).

• VoltAero made what it says is the first flight of an electric aircraft running on 100 percent sustainable fuel…made from wine waste.

• In another milestone flight, Beta Technologies’ electric conventional takeoff and landing (eCTOL) aircraft crossed the border from New York to Montreal.

• The FAA announced a $300 million allocation for net-zero goal projects, such as sustainable aviation fuels infrastructure.

• The agency also proposed a rule to limit debris from commercial space vehicles.

Spotlight on…

Horizon Aircraft

[Courtesy: Horizon Aircraft]

Air taxi manufacturers Joby Aviation, Archer Aviation, Lilium, and EHang share one core tenet: They will only build 100 percent electric aircraft. Horizon Aircraft raises an eyebrow in response.

Rather than go full-electric, the Canadian company built a hybrid eVTOL which relies on a gas-powered range extender that charges its batteries during flight. Like the firms above, Horizon plans to use it for regional air taxi routes, as well as for medical evacuation, critical supply delivery, and commercial cargo services.

The company’s aircraft may not achieve the same emissions reductions as its rivals. But the Cavorite X7, a newly announced model that will replace its flagship Cavorite X5 (pictured above), is expected to have a greater range, speed, and useful load than all of them. Plus, with seven seats, it projects as one of the highest occupancy eVTOL designs out there. Keep an eye on this one.

Deep Dive: Horizon Aircraft Announces Plans for 7-Seat Hybrid eVTOL Design

On the Horizon…

No one likes a government shutdown. But the one currently looming could be a real doozy for the FAA. That’s because Saturday marks the deadline for FAA reauthorization, and a funding bill has yet to pass both houses of Congress. In short, this could be a disaster.

Commercial and passenger airlines will still fly. But air traffic controllers, Transportation Security Administration personnel, and FAA staff will work without pay. What’s more, training for ATC learning the ropes will be put on hold, potentially exacerbating an existing shortage. Airport infrastructure investments, FAA rulemaking, and facility security inspections will all go on pause.

For our purposes, the shutdown would also prevent the passage of key incentives for the drone and advanced air mobility (AAM) industries, which are included in the House FAA reauthorization bill. These include provisions such as a timeline for a final beyond visual line of sight (BVLOS) drone law and permanent rules for AAM operations.

The Modernization of Special Airworthiness Certification (MOSAIC) proposal the FAA submitted in July is another piece of rulemaking that could be put on hold. Comments on that document will close October 23, less than a month from now (mark your calendars!). But the agency won’t be able to begin the process to address them through rulemaking until a shutdown ends.

Mark Your Calendars

Each week, I’ll be running through a list of upcoming industry events. DroneX 2023 wrapped up Wednesday in London, but here are a few conferences to keep an eye on:

• Airtaxi World Congress—October 2-5 in San Francisco
• UP.Summit—October 4-6 in Dallas 
• FAI World Drone Racing Championship—October 6-9 near Seoul, South Korea
• Intergeo 2023—October 10-12 in Berlin
• Dronitaly—October 11-13 in Bologna, Italy
• World’s Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Conference—November 12-14 in Jerusalem

Tweet of the Week

Want to see your tweet here next week? Have comments or feedback? Share your thoughts on Twitter and tag me (@jack_daleo)! Or check out FLYING’s media accounts:

X (formerly Twitter): FLYING Magazine (@FlyingMagazine) / Twitter

Facebook: FLYING Magazine – Home (facebook.com)

Instagram: FLYING Magazine (@flyingmagazine) • Instagram photos and videos

I want to hear your questions, comments, concerns, and criticisms about everything in the modern flying space, whether they’re about a new drone you just bought or the future of space exploration. Reach out to jack@flying.media or tweet me @jack_daleo with your thoughts.

If you liked this, and want it to be delivered to your inbox, you can sign up here.

The post Can Dave Limp Correct Blue Origin’s Limping Pace? appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

I don’t know about you, but I can guess that Modernization of Special Airworthiness Certification (MOSAIC) fatigue is setting into a lot of quarters. Some pilots have done an extraordinary job of digging into the FAA’s 318-page Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) document to distill essential parts that need to be addressed. Many pilots get exhausted just looking at the NPRM.

Me too.

• READ MORE: How to Comment on a Proposed FAA Policy

MOSAIC has given us an inside look at how the FAA works. Many improvements resulted when the industry worked in harmony with government officials. Nonetheless, careful study found areas of concern in the NPRM. Recent articles in other publications hit essentially the same points as I did in my talk. Those points were partly my thinking, but I also relied on other experts to whom I had posed a variety of questions.

Still, some of the best commentary has come from non-experts—regular pilots who were concerned about a certain part of the NPRM and explored it thoroughly. With this in mind, I was keen to hear from my audiences at the Midwest LSA Expo 2023.

What follows represents my distillation of a number of questions that were asked in lengthy Q&A sessions following the two presentations. Several conversations developed between people in the audience, and therefore asking you to listen to all of that would not be engaging. I attempted to faithfully reproduce those questions and comments, and my responses, below.

• READ MORE: A MOSAIC Study Guide

Aircraft Descriptions

If my LSA has been restricted to 1,320 pounds to meet current regulation, will a pathway exist to use a higher weight if the aircraft has been appropriately tested?

The answer depends. If your aircraft is Experimental Amateur Built, you are the manufacturer and can change what you want. So if you want to fly on drivers license medical at a higher weight — so long as you clean stall at 54 knots or less — you can do so. On a Special LSA, the manufacturer will have to redeclare that they meet all applicable ASTM standards at the higher weight and could then start supplying aircraft with higher gross weights. However, that does not mean they will go backwards compatible and make all earlier aircraft so capable. A manufacturer would have no idea how the aircraft had been maintained or operated and they may not want to take on the added risk.

Some producers may not make aircraft specific to the U.S. market…

I agree, but many CAAs, especially in smaller countries, mirror FAA regulations closely. Since the U.S. aviation market remains the largest in the world, many producers cannot ignore American rules.

Will the FAA allow a sport pilot, perhaps by endorsement, to carry more than one passenger?

This represents a good place to urge your comment. If you believe a sport pilot, with added training and an endorsement, should be allowed to fly on a drivers license, say so.

What weight limit is applied to MOSAIC LSA?

No weight limit is specified. Instead, aircraft size is well governed by specifying clean stall at 54 knots. That is VS1 not VS0, clean—not flaps out. The purpose is to limit aircraft size and does not relate to slow flight or landing speeds.

Why the 54 knot clean stall? Why not with flaps?

Understand that the FAA’s point about a 54-knot clean stall is to provide a means of limiting the aircraft size. It works well for that, but this can also be easily defended by the pilot (show the FAA the POH) and verified by the FAA (by examining the POH). It’s a simple solution.

I fly a Beech Sundowner, a [Cessna] 172-like aircraft. The POH states a 62-knot clean stall. If I add vortex generators to it and lower the stall speed to 54 knots, will it qualify even though the POH will still say 62?

Since Sundowner is a Part 23 certified aircraft, it would require an STC to add anything to the airframe. At that time, a modification could be added to the POH but FAA officials in various places will not initially know how to handle this. The problem is, how do you know it stalls at 54 or less, and how do you defend it? The cost to demonstrate convincing evidence that stall is now lower than the POH states may be excessive.

• READ MORE: FAA’s MOSAIC Preview Has Major Implications for Helicopters, eVTOL

You referred in one slide to “high performance.” That term and “complex” are already defined in Part 61. If it has an adjustable prop, a 200 horsepower engine, and flaps, it is “high performance.” If it is retractable, it is “complex”, although it may not also be “high performance” (ex: a C-172 RG is complex but not high performance).

The FAA perceived a gap between LSA and Part 23 certified aircraft; they evidently see pilot certification similarly in discussing endorsements. While MOSAIC LSA gain many capabilities, sport pilots remain bound by other rules. It was not clarified how a sport pilot qualifies for “high performance” operations. We hope endorsements will suffice; they’ve worked well for 19 years of SP/LSA.

Will aircraft from other countries that have met other certification systems be accepted under MOSAIC?

The commenter refers to a government arrangement called “reciprocity” where one country accepts the methods of other countries. It comes as part of the Bilateral Safety Agreement. While the FAA will accept such approvals, they are still likely to assure an aircraft still meets every line item in ASTM standards for MOSAIC LSA.

Sport Pilot Privileges

If I already have retractable experience or night experience, can I use that as a sport pilot under MOSAIC?

You will have to get an endorsement, it appears, but any instructor who sees a lot of related recent experience in a logbook and flies with you for verification may be willing to endorse your logbook accordingly in short order. If you are not current with those skills, that person may recommend added training.

• READ MORE: Training Aircraft in Reach with FAA’s Proposed MOSAIC Rule

Is the reason for the medical requirement to fly at night related to color blindness?

The FAA did bring that up at EAA AirVenture 2023, saying that when the states give you a drivers license, they don’t adequately test for this. Personally, I find the argument weak to require pilots to pursue a medical over the relatively remote possibility that they might one day need a light signal from the control tower.

Couldn’t I just go to a doctor and only have my vision checked for color blindness?

That would make a worthy comment and would appear to address the FAA’s stated concern.

Will the opportunity to fly IFR be available to sport pilots without a medical?

Given the FAA’s attachment to medicals, that seems unlikely. However, the same response about the weak relationship between medical possession and aviation safety remains.

As pilots age, insurance companies want more frequent medical visits (even if the FAA may not). Will the insurance companies accept drivers license medical on MOSAIC LSA?

That’s a worthy question but not one about MOSAIC. Insurance companies are private and can require any evidence of medical fitness their contracts specify. They have accepted LSA use on drivers license medical and as I keep saying, no one has presented compelling evidence that possession of an aviation medical assures the flight is safer. What insurance companies do in the future is more a matter of the reinsurance market than an FAA regulation. At present, any pilot over 75  will find challenges getting insurance, regardless of that person’s health.

Have any parts of sport pilot flight instructor been changed?

That is not an area on which I am as well informed but, yes, I saw several references to SPIs. I urge you to use the USUA/LAMA study guide and use its search capability to look up that part more fully yourself. Then, please comment. 

Are you still saying that, assuming no change in the 90-day comment window, this will not go live until the end of 2024 or early 2025?

Yes, although an extension may be granted to a group of maintenance companies in which case the rule will be pushed back at least an additional 90 days.

• READ MORE: FAA’s MOSAIC Comment Window Is Soon Closing

If multi-engine is being allowed, how do you qualify for that?

This is another of those clues that this NPRM seems a bit rushed to market. FAA Aircraft Certification will permit multiple engines/motors, but the Flight Standards Group did not address pilot qualifications. A conventionally-acquired multi-engine rating is far less applicable today because designs include multiple electric motors, advanced computer controls, and many other technical capabilities the FAA never confronted.

What do you mean by “equal work” for powered parachutes or weight shift?

This refers to NPRM language that effectively discriminates against those aircraft types. A pilot cannot take advantage of the opportunity to use LSA for aerial work because a commercial pilot certificate is required and none is available for those aircraft types. They should have equal opportunity to perform aerial work; they may be perfectly suited to some tasks.

How fixed is the FAA on one passenger only? Could the agency be convinced otherwise?

First, the restriction is on the pilot not the aircraft. A private pilot with a medical could use a four-seat mLSA with four people on board, assuming weight and balance allows. Regarding the FAA’s flexibility on this, given its tight cling to medicals even though the evidence for them is weak, I suspect convincing the agency to let sport pilots fly three passengers is a long shot, but you can certainly comment if you have reasons to believe this is wrong.

What was the YouTube address for the MOSAIC Masterclass videos?

A series of videos may be found here.

Maintenance

Could you take two seats out of a six-seat legacy GA airplane, so it only has four, assuming it has a clean stall of 54 knots or less?

This is a “What if”-type question that can go on too long, but essentially if the aircraft has four seats and a clean stall of 54 knots, it can qualify to be flown by a pilot using sport pilot privileges, although only with two persons on board. In order to modify a Part 23-certified aircraft, however, you’d have to get a STC and your local FSDO or MIDO will not be up to speed on MOSAIC initially, so they may not understand the request.

Can a second owner of a LSA take a course to do maintenance on that aircraft?

This can happen today but some questions have been raised under MOSAIC. Rainbow Aviation expressed reason for concern on this. It is more expert on maintenance and I deferred to the company’s knowledge. 

It appears it will be more restrictive, will take more effort to get LSRM credentials. Any such action will reduce mechanics, already in short supply. Existing A&Ps don’t have enough experience or training on Rotax or Jabiru.

You appear to understand correctly. This is an area where I defer to those with greater knowledge so I have been recommending the Rainbow Aviation YouTube channel as it has been outspoken on this.

Are We About Done with MOSAIC?

Yes! Of course, I will continue to report on MOSAIC developments and news but now it is time for me to formulate my own comments to the FAA. I hope you found all the MOSAIC information useful. I hope you will comment.

The post MOSAIC Questions Linger in Light Sport Aircraft Community appeared first on FLYING Magazine.