EAA Sport Aviation - March 2011

I was disappointed in the superficial and misleading sidebar on page 70 of the January issue in that it stated “…which instruments must be in an aircraft flying in VFR conditions.”

14 CFR 91.205, upon which that statement is based, applies only to civil aircraft with standard category airworthiness certificates. Instrument and equipment requirements for experimental amateur-built aircraft, which a large percentage of your readers are building and flying, are controlled by the operating limitations for each individual aircraft.

I would appreciate your publishing clarification of this subject.

Owen C. Baker, EAA 73580 Fairfax, Virginia

Editor’s Note: Mr. Baker included a document outlining minimum instrument and equipment requirements for powered amateur-built experimental aircraft. You can find that document at www.SportAviation.org.

Light Twins? Really?

I joined EAA to keep up to date on what our little industry niche is doing—new products, new airplanes, building tips. Stay on task, folks; keep focused on the EAA mission. And it ain’t factory spam cans and PIREPs.

Howard Hockman, EAA 582187 Plano, Texas

Certainly there are interesting light twins, biz jets, and the like, but I can read about those in Flying or the AOPA Pilot magazine. Neither pays much attention to experimental aviation. Why is Sport Aviation trending away from the homebuilt and warbird scenes?

Brad Benson, EAA 585067 Maplewood, Minnesota

Anyone with half a brain already knows the benefits of owning a homebuilt, and that is why they subscribe…they don’t subscribe because they want to buy a light twin. And forget this nonsense about appealing to a wider audience…if you follow that logic, then there should be a swimsuit edition.

Thomas Hunter, EAA 28155 Paso Robles, California

As EAA President Rod Hightower shares in his Grassroots Pilot Tour, 47 percent of EAA members own a production airplane. A large number of homebuilders also own and fly production airplanes. EAA is not moving away from homebuilts or warbirds but is expanding to embrace all who fly to try to preserve all of GA for the future.—Editors

EAA’s online community includes Oshkosh365, Facebook, and Twitter. This month’s featured discussion comes from one of our newest sites, Mac McClellan’s Left Seat blog. Mac recently editorialized on “Airbags, Shoulder Harnesses, and the NTSB,” in which he encouraged all aircraft owners to install shoulder harnesses.

Here are a few highlights from this ongoing discussion:

I asked AmSafe where I could have the airbag seat belts installed in my 1978 Beech Sierra. (Their) response was our airbags are not STC’d for your plane and probably won’t ever be. The FAA should summarily automatically grant STCs for products that are of such a vital safety need that their installation could immediately save lives! —Gene McPherson

Each individual should make their own decision on the need for these things. Personally I am into safe flying and learning how to land properly so this kind of event won’t happen. —Buzz Baxter

I agree with the others in this post that airbags are a great extra level of protection. Although AmSafe can’t cover all the aircraft flying around out there, they do have STCs for nearly 50 percent of the models. You can check it out on their website, www.GAAirbags.com. —Carlotta Soares

Ironically, the regulatory environment means it’s harder than it ought to be to install safety equipment. The FAA talks sincerely about safety. But from the way they act, their real priority is increasing the reach and grasp of their control of everyone in the industry. Regulatory certification strangles innovation and compromises safety. —Kevin R.C. O’Brien

I agree with all of you. A four-point harness is a necessity. I fly an RV-8A with a five-point system. I am only about 18 inches from the sharp glare shield in front of my face. I don’t have to worry about hitting it in a crash just as I don’t have to worry about going through the windshield of my car while wearing seat belts. … Like everything else, price is the major deciding factor. If they can get them down to around $1,000 I will be interested. —Larry Maynard

I wonder what the thinking is at the FAA that it requires an STC for seat belt airbags. Kind of like requiring an STC for a handheld radio or GPS. It supplements, but doesn’t replace, existing equipment. —John Hunt

As the FAA gains experience with the airbags we can hope, and even expect, that multiple model STCs may be made available as the agency has done for a number of avionics systems. —Mac

With the impressive safety record aviation enjoys over every other mode of transportation, let’s fight to keep additional restraint/impact devices at the owner’s option. I fly a B-737 for a living, but my real airplane is a 1932 Waco, and I am perfectly happy with my risk assessment in every aircraft I fly, and conscious of the hazards involved. ... Let’s turn our energies toward issues that pose a much greater threat to aviation safety. —Larry Harmacinski