Aero-TV: 'Mr. Regulation' Explains The Current MOSAIC Process

preview_player
Показать описание
AEA's Ric Peri Goes Into Detail On Where MOSAIC Is... And Is Likely To Go

ANN knows of NO ONE who is as 'on top' of all things regulatory as AEA's Ric Peri... And by chance, we ran into Ric and some of the AEA gang at NBAA 2023 and corralled him into explaining the modus operandi for their request (along with other org's) for an extension of the proposed Modernization of Special Airworthiness Certification (MOSAIC) rule.

The request got a few folks a little hot under the collar thinking that the extension would cause extensive delays in the publication of the final rule. However; Peri seems to think that delays will be minimal, but more important, a better, more carefully examined and edited rule will result -- even referring to the history behind several previous attempts to reset the light aircraft regulatory environment.

Ric talks both about the process and the history of this and other regs, as well as the need to carefully audit the 318 page MOSAIC NPRM so that the final rule does aviation the best possible good... especially since the aviation community will have to live with the results for quite some tie.

The potential for the civil aviation community is pretty positive... but only if the FAA gets as much studied and carefully considered input as possible... so that the best rule may result.... we shall see.

Aero-TV is a production of the Internationally syndicated Aero-News Network. Seen worldwide by hundreds of thousands of aviators and aviation adherents, ANN's Aero-TV has produced well over 5000 aviation and feature programs, including over 2500 episodes of our daily aviation news program, AIRBORNE UNLIMITED, currently hosted by Holland Lee. Now in its third decade of operation, parent company Aero-News Network, has the most aggressive and intensive editorial profile of any aviation news organization and has published well over a half-million news and feature stories since its inception -- having pioneered the online 24/7 aviation new-media model that so many have emulated.

©2023 Aero-News Network, Inc., ALL Rights Reserved

Рекомендации по теме
Комментарии
Автор

I'm on track to get my sport pilot certificate by this coming summer. Been doing most of my training in a 172, but as it stands I'll have to solo in the Piper Cub, which IMO is a trickier plane to fly. Its a bit ridiculous that I wouldn't even be able to fly a 150 under the current rules. I'm really hoping MOSIAC goes through soon!

shelbell
Автор

Hmm, 61Kt is extremely interesting!

Redefining the FAA definition of consensus standard is a nuance of MOSAIC I've missed and not heard before that seems to have far reaching consequence. I'll have to dig in more; reference or further coverage on that point would be greatly appreciated!

The issue with requiring manufacturer approval is certainly contrary to keeping up to date on the latest improvements in safety; but I understand the desire to tie an aircraft's configuration over time to what has been (accepted/approved/etc.) by the FAA. Hard to reconcile, if that is their intent.

hexadcml
Автор

Seems to me, wing loadings light enough to support a very slow stall speed, result in an aircraft that is very uncomfortable and difficult to control in typical turbulence. I’m in the US Southwest. The same light airframe is also easily blown many feet away from its trajectory on final, when encountering a gust or the random thermoconvectional air movements that are common in the environment I’m most familiar with. If dealing with some wind during taxi, I feel safer in a plane with some pounds being supported by its wings. All this to say, I’m in full support of a more reasonable 61 knot stall speed for any airplane that is designed to land on a paved runway. As always there are trade offs but IMO, a plane that stalls at 60 knots is safer than one that stalls at 40.

foesfly
Автор

Ric makes the comment at the end that he doesn't know why manufacturers are not going to Primary category. I discontinued my Primary category TC project because the FAA would not allow me to use an ASTM consensus standard. I had to use part 27 as the certification basis and Primary category requires a FAA approved Production certificate. Very restrictive. I also had to work with an ACO which was time consuming.
Brad Clark
Vertical Aviation Technologies

bradclark
Автор

Post midnight video release…. Go ANN!

😃

AC-jkwq
Автор

It's not about flying a 172 or 150. It's the fact that LSA companies can't make a plane most peeps can afford! I'm 5'6" and 'around' 235lbs. Yes, fat, not giant, not out of control, and will lose weight. The thing stopping me is the cost of buying a safe airplane. Cubs keep going up in cost. New LSA is literally INSANE. I'm not building a plane and don't want to. Being honest, the 172's that are affordable need so much work and are aging out. I would much rather see FAA ditch the medical of a full license. What are they even using to justify what meds are and aren't okay? Have people died on lexipro and if so, was it the cause? In 2024, pretty much everyone get's some sort of meds not allowed! Seems to me, we didn' t need sports pilot, we needed the FAA to start living in 2024! A 172 can't really cause any more damage than a SUV. NOW, think of the idiots driving giant RV's everyday? The airplane is so much safer! There is literally ZERO actual logic here. Public safety? NO! It's got to be about the wrong people in charge! Should be simple. Doctor says, no heart issue. No obvious health risks. No worry of mental stability. In the meanwhile? An insane person buys a gun, kills 20 people, and that's all good. A private plane crashes, it kills one person, or two worse case. Just restrict the passengers via special medical same as sports pilot. It's all so stupid. I really start to hate everything about our fed government!

I guess on the other side of this? I go by an ultracraft, paramotor with trike gear, and need NOTHING. (well, training, but that isn't even required, LOL). How much more likely am I to get in an accident with those vs. a 172? Or J3 Cub? So, what justification is there to make it so much more impossible to be in a much safer craft with a proven track record.

Curious_Skeptic
Автор

I'm from the god_vernment. I'm here to help.

nea