I started flying a Cessna 162 light sport along with a Cessna 172. For passenger currency within 90 days 3 landings/takeoff etc. The 162 is part of the light sport "category" but I having a hard time finding info on the FAR considering it a different category or class. I'm just curious in regards to passenger currency while flying these two aircraft. I'll run it by a CFI but just curious on your thoughts. To date I've treated them as separate and have kept up the currency for both.

It's been about 400 years since I studied that stuff so my guess is since both the 162 and 172 both have wings and one engine they are in the same category. (airplane)
Class = single engine land.
Bolt another engine on either one and it moves to the same class as a 747, i.e. multi engine land.
There are a few instances where the FAA use words that have different meanings that depend on the context of the entire sentence.

That is an interesting question. As a practicing CFI who sometimes teaches in a Skycatcher, my first instinct is to say that the Skycatcher is an ASEL for purposes of staying current, but my instinct means nothing in the FAA world. Maybe you should call:
Larry L. Buchanan
Branch Manager AFS-610
Phone: (405) 954-6400
Fax: (405) 954-6688
who is the horses mouth in all things S-LSA with the FAA. I'd be interested to hear what he said.

As for a 747 being an AMEL...well that is true to a degree, but getting current in a Beach Barron won't get you current in a 747. The 747 requires a type rating and to be current in it you have to fly that type or an allowable sub-type. Trying to simplify FAA requirements usually is a mistake. Titus577 is right to ask questions...might save him (and me) a problem.

If the Cessna 162 were not, by FAA designation, an Airplane, Single Engine, Land (category and class), then a private pilot with ASEL on his/her certificate would not be qualified to fly it.

And, they are. It is an ASEL

MTV

My thoughts are similar that they are the same category and class. I started to question the logic when I was not passenger current in the Cessna 162 and planning on taking someone up. I did the three landings prior just to cover myself.

I'll do some more research and post what I find but MTV's logic seems pretty good to me.

ASEL is ASEL. It's a 162, might as well be a 152, just made out of gold. Fly it like you STOL it.

Just the term light sport "category" made me stop and think. Same word different meaning leagly according to the FAR's just wasn't sure if the FAA changed something within "category."

Titus577 wrote:Just the term light sport "category" made me stop and think. Same word different meaning leagly according to the FAR's just wasn't sure if the FAA changed something within "category."

See FAR 61.31 (c) "aircraft category class and type ratings " &
61.31 (d) "aircraft category class and type ratings"
Also, wth regards to sport pilot certificates, FAR 61.317, 61.319, 61.321, & 61.323.

I have been told by someone that should be up on regs that I can be current in a nosedragger (my C182) and to fly a taildragger I need to be current in it. And in the Cub the landings need to meet the 'full stop' provision. This is not true I am gathering from this thread.....
Probably a good idea, but evidently bogus as a requirement.....

lc

littlecub,

Tailwheel airplanes are still same category and class--Single Engine Land. Here is the requirement for an endorsement to operate them: (i) Additional training required for operating tailwheel airplanes. (1) Except as provided in paragraph (i)(2) of this section, no person may act as pilot in command of a tailwheel airplane unless that person has received and logged flight training from an authorized instructor in a tailwheel airplane and received an endorsement in the person's logbook from an authorized instructor who found the person proficient in the operation of a tailwheel airplane. The flight training must include at least the following maneuvers and procedures:

(i) Normal and crosswind takeoffs and landings;

(ii) Wheel landings (unless the manufacturer has recommended against such landings); and

(iii) Go-around procedures.

But, this is NOT a "type rating" as defined in the regulations.

Here's the regulation pertaining to Recency:

§ 61.57 Recent flight experience: Pilot in command.

(a) General experience. (1) Except as provided in paragraph (e) of this section, no person may act as a pilot in command of an aircraft carrying passengers or of an aircraft certificated for more than one pilot flight crewmember unless that person has made at least three takeoffs and three landings within the preceding 90 days, and—

(i) The person acted as the sole manipulator of the flight controls; and

(ii) The required takeoffs and landings were performed in an aircraft of the same category, class, and type (if a type rating is required), and, if the aircraft to be flown is an airplane with a tailwheel, the takeoffs and landings must have been made to a full stop in an airplane with a tailwheel.

Note that this says the airplane must be of the same category, class and type, if a type rating is required. Type ratings are required for all turbojet powered aircraft, all aircraft over 12,500 pounds AUW and other airplanes specified by the administrator.

This regulation specifically implies that a tailwheel in and of itself does not constitute a type rating or a different category or class of aircraft.

Category is "Airplane". Class in this case is "Single Engine, Land" or "Multi Engine, Land", or Multi Engine Sea, etc.

So a super cub by definition is an Airplane, Single engine, land category and class. According to the regs, you have to have an instructors endorsement to fly a tailwheel airplane, and according to 61.57, you must have logged three landings within 90 days to a full stop in a tailwheel airplane to be current.

If you landed a Grumman Goose three times on land within 90 days, that does NOT qualify as recent experience for flying a Super Cub. The Goose is an "Airplane, Multi-Engine Land or Sea" airplane, and therefore a different CLASS (Multi Engine) than the Super Cub.

In any case, the Skycatcher is indeed an Airplane, Single Engine Land machine. Anyone with an appropriate PPL and single engine land privileges on his or her certificate can fly it with no further ado.

MTV

......you have to have an instructors endorsement to fly a tailwheel airplane, and according to 61.57, you must have logged three landings within 90 days to a full stop in a tailwheel airplane to be current.

Got it, MTV. Thank you (!) for the clarification. That is what I have been doing for years here, but I had questions (!) with what was being posted.

So if I did my 3 full stop T & Ls at night in the cub (if it had nav lights ) I would be good to go in both TDs and NDs SEL 24/7 if VFR for 90 days......

Stay the course.
lc

Yes, that's the "correct" interpretation, according to the powers that be that I've discussed this with.

Landing currency in a tailwheel airplane (SEL) meets the requirement for ANY SEL airplane--category and class.

MTV

Addressing the original question, I believe there's some confusion with the definition of "category." From FAR 1.1:

Category:
(1) As used with respect to the certification, ratings, privileges, and limitations of airmen, means a broad classification of aircraft. Examples include: airplane; rotorcraft; glider; and lighter-than-air; and
(2) As used with respect to the certification of aircraft, means a grouping of aircraft based upon intended use or operating limitations. Examples include: transport, normal, utility, acrobatic, limited, restricted, and provisional.

The 162 has not been issued a standard (per FAR 21.183) airworthiness certificate, but rather a special (per FAR 21.190) airworthiness certificate for light-sport category aircraft. That's the second definition of category. For currency, you need to be concerned with the first. FAR 61.2(b) talks about the different categories and classes of aircraft for pilot certificates WRT definition 1. And FAR 1.1 defines airplane as:

Airplane means an engine-driven fixed-wing aircraft heavier than air, that is supported in flight by the dynamic reaction of the air against its wings.

So I'd say the 162 is indeed an airplane for the purposes of currency, but since I'm just some guy who happened to take a regs class recently, take what I type with an appropriately sized grain of salt

One other thing--those of us who logged time as PIC in tail draggers, complex, and high performance eons ago, before there were endorsements for any of these things, are still able to fly them without any endorsements--1991 for TDs, 1997 for complex and hi-perf. Personally, I'm so rusty in TDs that I wouldn't fly with me without some recurrency training--legal is not necessarily proficient.

Cary

I think we've answered the question but I wanted to post what I found out since I started the thread. What I was told is that category in regards to light sport is in regards to class and category for pilot only. Currency in class and category for the aircraft to carry passengers is single engine land fthe org the 162 and 172.