LAMA President
Dan Johnson released the manufacturer organization's
first newsletter of 2010 with some
interesting news. There's lots in there: I'll endeavor to summarize:
In the beginning, there was
FAA, and FAA created
Light Sport, and saw that
it was good.
And FAA decided it could rest, but first it said, "We shall smile down and only monitoreth thee...so long as thou provideth
third-party oversight."
"Forsooth, thou shalt
police thine own act to maintain
compliance with
The Rule, lest fedgov
lightning bolts shall rain down in the form of
aggressive compliance
auditing and other regulatory
interferences."
To forestall FAA's wrath, third-party oversight is offered by LAMA through extensive
audits of LSA company
procedures and
documentation.An initial LAMA audit costs roughly
$7,000. Several - but
not nearly all - manufacturers have signed up for LAMA audits.
Evektor, European producer of the
SportStar, was the
first company to successfully complete a LAMA audit.
Meanwhile, FAA conducted a
spot survey of
30 manufacturers and
importers, (U.S. only). Purpose? To provide a
snapshot of
industry compliance. Result? Not bad...but the industry needs to
do better...much better.
The LAMA newsletter summarizes FAA's survey report, as analyzed by
FAA Evaluations and Special Projects Manager Brian Cable, who notes: "SLSA manufacturers and importers are
trying hard to follow requirements...but many companies are
falling short."
Relax, Chicken Littles. Light sport flivvers will
not fall from the sky. Cable says much of the discrepancies have to do with
paperwork. Specifically,
incomplete or
improperly done paperwork.
Some details:
In general, Cable highlights shortcomings in airworthiness
documentation, maintenance
procedures and documentation,
assembly procedures and documentation, and
compliance with
design standards.One key observation: although LAMA audits are intended to help members resolve problems
before they become issues for the FAA, it appears companies were under the impression that they had
done well on the (FAA) survey—which didn't cost anything - and therefore
wouldn't need an independent
audit.Not true. The one-day survey by design could only hit the
highlights. Yet, although 22 LAMA members signed up for audits before the survey, most subsequently
declined to follow through.
Wrong conclusion.LAMA's
caveat: a reasonably good survey result does
not an FAA endorsement make.
LAMA enjoins manufacturers not to cavort too long before the
golden idol (shirking audits to save money) lest
fire and brimstone (
mandatory -and vastly more
expensive -
oversight by the almighty FAA itself) descend down upon the land.
Okay, I know this is a lot of dry stuff, but here's what to take from this: the LSA
experiment is meant to find out whether aviation can keep its own sandbox clean. It's not guaranteed to go on forever, especially if airplanes
do start falling out of the sky for
lack of proper compliance with the rule.
So when you see that LAMA sticker on the LSA you're thinking of flying or buying, think "
Good Housekeeping Seal": it means that manufacturer is doing
everything it can to make sure you
fly safe, legal, and with minimal government
intrusion.
Ask your LSA sales rep if his/her company plans on getting an LAMA audit. If the answer comes back "No", ask why not. If you don't like the answer, consider
looking elsewhere.