Post by ChiMike on Jul 31, 2023 16:13:43 GMT
Where will Tecnam be with Mosaic?
At Oshkosh, speaking with Tecnam U.S. officials, there was disdain for the idea that the proposed rule changes could be beneficial to existing owners of existing aircraft, or prompt current owners to purchase more capable aircraft under the Mosaic proposals. (And, sadly, there was huge disdain for the opinions of those of us who follow and contribute to this message board.) And in all candidness, the person I spoke to at length admitted he had not read the proposals, didn’t think it would amount to anything beneficial for Tecnam, scoffed at the idea of “Sport Pilots” flying complex aircraft such as the P2010, and stated that, as the number 2 GA manufacturer in the world (behind Cirrus,) he didn’t see Tecnam doing much if anything to influence the final FAA rules while it is in the discussion period.
Mosaic, as proposed but not yet finalized, does two things: it reexamines what a Manufactured airplane “is” given manufacturer disclosed capabilities such as stall speeds, and it proposes that properly trained and endorsed “Sport Pilots” have PIC privileges for complex aircraft and aircraft of any type—to include helicopters—so long as the “stall speed” is not more than 54knots and there are no more than four seats in the aircraft. Also, limitations on night flying go away. The four limitations for sport pilots would be only one passenger, 10,000 feet msl / 2,000 feet AGL when crossing high terrain max altitude, VFR no IFR, and medically allowed per the self-declaration/drivers license standard. So planes like the Diamond and Cessna 172 and others in that class will now be available to sport pilots.
There are many unanswered questions and who knows how the final Mosaic rules will be structured, but wouldn’t it make sense that the “#2 GA manufacturer” would want to see the rules be as favorable as possible to their current and potential product line?
I went to Oshkosh thinking that. But it doesn’t seem to be what Tecnam is thinking—or at least what they are saying. Has anyone heard anything else?
At Oshkosh, speaking with Tecnam U.S. officials, there was disdain for the idea that the proposed rule changes could be beneficial to existing owners of existing aircraft, or prompt current owners to purchase more capable aircraft under the Mosaic proposals. (And, sadly, there was huge disdain for the opinions of those of us who follow and contribute to this message board.) And in all candidness, the person I spoke to at length admitted he had not read the proposals, didn’t think it would amount to anything beneficial for Tecnam, scoffed at the idea of “Sport Pilots” flying complex aircraft such as the P2010, and stated that, as the number 2 GA manufacturer in the world (behind Cirrus,) he didn’t see Tecnam doing much if anything to influence the final FAA rules while it is in the discussion period.
Mosaic, as proposed but not yet finalized, does two things: it reexamines what a Manufactured airplane “is” given manufacturer disclosed capabilities such as stall speeds, and it proposes that properly trained and endorsed “Sport Pilots” have PIC privileges for complex aircraft and aircraft of any type—to include helicopters—so long as the “stall speed” is not more than 54knots and there are no more than four seats in the aircraft. Also, limitations on night flying go away. The four limitations for sport pilots would be only one passenger, 10,000 feet msl / 2,000 feet AGL when crossing high terrain max altitude, VFR no IFR, and medically allowed per the self-declaration/drivers license standard. So planes like the Diamond and Cessna 172 and others in that class will now be available to sport pilots.
There are many unanswered questions and who knows how the final Mosaic rules will be structured, but wouldn’t it make sense that the “#2 GA manufacturer” would want to see the rules be as favorable as possible to their current and potential product line?
I went to Oshkosh thinking that. But it doesn’t seem to be what Tecnam is thinking—or at least what they are saying. Has anyone heard anything else?
