AMD - ZODIAC CH 650 LS Special Light Sport Aircraft, Built in the USA, Continental engine, tough metal airframe

As a US manufacturer of certified Special-Light Sport Aircraft (S-LSA), we hear many of the same questions and concerns over and over again from pilots who contact us for more information on our product (the Zodiac LS) and about the LSA rule. The following is provided to help answer some of the most common queries we receive. Please contact me at 478-374-2759. John Degonia.

Q1: I am looking at purchasing an S-LSA designed and built in Europe. How do I know that the aircraft complies with the LSA rule?

A1: Bottom line: there is no sure way of knowing at this time. When the aircraft is brought into the USA, it is reassembled by the importer and a C of A is issued by a local LSA DAR. The manufacturer should supply a signed conformity statement stating that the aircraft was designed, built and test flown in compliance with the appropriate ASTM consensus standards (the “LSA rule”). Unfortunately, the DAR issuing the C of A cannot audit the aircraft design data or flight test results from the manufacturer. The DAR is not responsible for the structure of the aircraft, or quality systems put in place by the manufacturer. Even the Flight and Service manuals cannot be audited by the DAR. The main thing checked is often the documentation delivered with the aircraft. The DAR can inspect the general condition of the aircraft including placards, markings and ID plate.

A2: A certified S-LSA aircraft simply means that its manufacturer has signed a statement of conformity for it, and that a DAR has issued a C of A for it. There are no FAA verifications, inspections, audits or FAA flight tests required. The FAA will only get involved if there is an accident. However, if the manufacturer is located abroad (i.e. in the Czech Republic), the FAA will not go there as part of its investigation. The FAA may request that local authorities audit the manufacturer, but few local authorities know what the LSA rule is (it only exists in the USA and is only available in English). Also, local authorities may not interpret the LSA rule in the same way the FAA would. Note that the LSA rule documents are copy-write protected by ASTM and can only be purchased from ASTM. All regulatory bodies and manufacturers must purchase their own copy of the standards.

Q3: I’ve noticed that “wing size” seems to vary greatly between different S-LSA designs. For instance, there are aircraft that have less than 130 square feet of wing area! The Zodiac 650LS – which has a high-lift wing design that helps it stall slower – has 132 square feet and just meets the stall speed requirements for Light Sport. So how can an S-LSA with a smaller wing area meet the LSA rule?

A3: The answer here lies in the history of most available LSA today: In Europe (where most imports originate), the gross weight of the Ultralight category is approximately 1,000 lbs. The LSA gross weight is 1,320 lbs. In Europe, there is no speed limit on ultralights and flaps can be used to meet the requirements of the ultralight rules. So, European manufacturers designed fast Ultralights with small and low lift wings with huge retracting flaps. In the US, LSA must stall below 51mph without the use of flaps. In quite a few instances, it would appear that some European manufacturers, after making minimal changes (“upgrades”) to their ultralight designs, started shipping their aircraft to the US as S-LSA, hoping they would comply. A number clearly don’t. FAA involvement in the certifying process of S-LSA would solve this problem.

A4: The LSA rule has a very detailed QC section (possibly even more detailed than FAR 23) listing minimum QC requirements for LSA manufacturers. Each manufacturer must have a QC manual and QC protocol which complies with the LSA rule. The problem here is that there is no oversight; the FAA does not audit manufacturers – especially overseas.

A5: It is up to each manufacturer to dictate who can – and who cannot – do work on your S-LSA. The manufacturer must specify this in the Aircraft Service Manual. If your wing is made of composite materials, the manufacturer may want to do all major repairs in-house. This is because most A&P’s in the US do not have the facilities to do major repairs to composite aircraft. In this case, there is a good chance you will have to crate your wing and ship it all the way back to the manufacturer. This naturally applies to other components as well…

Q6: I’ve noticed that a lot of components and materials used in many S-LSA are different from commonly-used aviation-grade supplies. Is that OK?

A6: There is nothing in the LSA rule about the use of aircraft materials. It is entirely up to the manufacturer to choose what materials to use. Choosing an S-LSA that uses as many standard aviation items as possible has many long-term advantages: The quality of parts is usually far superior; you can purchase replacement parts locally; and your mechanic is more likely to be familiar with them. Wheels, brakes and tires are a good example of this: In order to save weight, a lot of S-LSA are equipped with non-aircraft items. They are not approved for aircraft use, but again, the manufacturer decides what to install... Make sure you can purchase items prone to wear and tear locally, and that your mechanic is familiar with them.

A7: The Rotax ULS is by far the most popular engine used in most S-LSA. It is lighter than the competition and not certified (EXPERIMENTAL), therefore also less expensive than regular aircraft engines. (There is a certified version of the 912 engine, but yes, it is a lot more expensive, and very hard to get). The real problem is that an A&P mechanic is required for all significant maintenance and repairs on S-LSA; these mechanics are not allowed to maintain/overhaul an engine unless appropriately trained to do so. As of this writing, there are still relatively few mechanics approved to work on the Rotax 912 in the US. Talk to your local mechanic before buying.

A8: The engine is very popular in Europe due to its low fuel consumption (fuel in Europe is more than twice the price we pay in the US). The average US pilot flies 50 to 100 hours per year. Burning 1-2 gallons per hour more will not make a very big difference to the operating cost. This is with the 80hp 912. The 912S (100hp burns about the same as the 0-200. The 912 series, however, has a lower time between overhaul (TBO) than traditional engines such as the Continental 0-200. Rotax has a service bulletin in Europe that requires the complete tear-down of the engine at 550 hours. Having a TBO of 1,500 or 2,000 hours will make a huge difference to the maintenance cost, and will significantly affect resale value. It is not clear whether the 912 will be more economical than traditional engines in the long-run. Compare how many Service Bulletins have been issued by Rotax for the 912 and by Continental for the 0-200.

A9: The 0-200 is a classic engine which has been around for more than 50 years. Continental has an excellent reputation servicing its products and parts are easy to obtain. Additionally, virtually all light aircraft mechanics know how to maintain this basic engine. The engine is FAR 33 certified and can therefore be used in IFR airframes. The simplicity of the engine also makes it very reliable and inexpensive to operate. The C-150 uses the 0-200. Also, certified products generally have a higher resale value, and the 0-200 is no exception. Selling your used S-LSA with a 0-200 will give you a better return.

A10: It is highly recommended that you shop around for insurance BEFORE you purchase an S-LSA. Most insurance companies will price very high on new S-LSA designs. Typically, a manufacturer needs to sell more than 25 aircraft before premiums become reasonable. Purchasing a classic type airframe with classic type engine is always preferred by insurance companies.

Q11: I am interested in adding additional equipment to my S-LSA. Can I do that?

A11: In order to ad new equipment (or to modify anything) on an FAR 23 type certified aircraft, an FAA certified A&P must make a request to the FAA using FAA form 337. It is the FAA that approves changes to these aircraft. This system does not exist for S-LSA. You (the owner) will need to make a personal request to the manufacturer. It is completely up to the manufacturer to allow you to install the equipment (or make the modification). There is no FAA involvement. It is unclear who would allow you to install additional equipment if the manufacturer ceases to exist. Chose a reputable manufacturer, and one you will be able to communicate with.

Q12: What about Service Letters, Service Bulletins and Airworthiness Directives?

A12: These do not exist in the LSA category. Again, the FAA has no involvement. It is up to manufacturers to write up and issue SAFETY ALERTS, SERVICE BULETINS and NOTIFICATIONS. Make sure that your S-LSA manufacturer has a system in place for this.

Q13: When taking a demo flight, is there anything that I can try in order to see if the aircraft truly meets the LSA rule?

A13: A professional flight-test pilot is the best qualified to check compliance. However, there are a few simple tests you can do:

A) Stall speed: With a GPS, slowly stall the aircraft. Repeat in the opposite direction. Take the average, and that must be lower than 45Kts. Note that the aircraft should be at gross weight (most S-LSA are at gross with 2 people and full fuel on board). Flaps must be up, aircraft must be level, RPM must be at idle (as per engine manufacturer’s recommendations) and stall entry must be slow.

B) Stability: In cruise speed, abruptly move one rudder pedal and release. A S-LSA must return to straight flight by itself. Do the same with the elevator, up and down.

C) Trim: on final approach, see if you can trim the aircraft so that there are no loads on the control stick. Approach speed should be about 1.2 of stall speed. Repeat for take off. You must be able to trim an S-LSA in all flight modes.

· Does the aircraft of my choice meet the LSA rule? Stall speed (wing area), stability, structural strength, etc. (If it were found that your S-LSA did not meet the LSA rule, it would be illegal for you to fly it and you would have a hard time re-selling it).

· Is there a local mechanic available who can legally work on the airframe and engine and is willing to work on the S-LSA of my choice?

· Are there restrictions in the Service Manual on what a certified FAA A&P can do to the S-LSA of my choice?

· Can I purchase wearable parts such as tires, brake pads, fuel filter, oil filter locally (for example, from Aircraft Spruce & Specialty)?

· Does the manufacturer offer safety features such as a BRS parachute and airbag seatbelts?

· In the event that I need to purchase a new airframe assembly (i.e. a new aileron due to hangar damage), who and where do I have to purchase it from; what is the cost, and how long will it take?

· Will I get a parts list and all other required documentation with my aircraft? (Note: there is a HUGE difference in the quality and completeness of manuals provided by the many S-LSA manufacturers. Ask to see these before you buy!)

· Can you easily visit the manufacturer and will they readily show you their Q.C. system and LSA compliance check lists?

· Does the manufacturer have product liability insurance? One small lawsuit can wipe out a manufacturer. Picking a manufacturer likely to be around for years is critical.

Q15: Can I fly a special light sport aircraft (S-LSA) in IFR conditions or at night?

“Only day/VFR conditions are specifically addressed in the ASTM consensus standards that govern the production of S-LSA. Being that sport pilots and those exercising sport pilot privileges are limited to flying only in day/VFR conditions, this seems appropriate.

On the other hand, if an appropriately rated pilot (example: private pilot with an instrument rating) wants to fly S-LSA under IFR or at night, the aircraft's operating limitations must allow it, and the aircraft must be equipped per 91.205 for VFR flight at night and/or IFR flight. Additionally, 91.327(d) requires all S-LSA to be operated in accordance with the aircraft's operating instructions. Operating instructions differ from operating limitations in that the engine, airframe, and accessory manufacturers issue them; the FAA issues operating limitations.

An example of operating instructions is a S-LSA equipped with a Rotax engine. Rotax's operating instructions prohibit the use of a Rotax engine at night or in IFR conditions unless it is the FAA type certificated engine (14 CFR part 33). Other engine, airframe, and accessory manufacturers might impose similar restrictions.

If you are appropriately rated and would like to operate a special light sport aircraft at night or under IFR, contact the manufacturer to determine if any provisions can be made”.

Q16: If I fly an S-LSA that is IFR approved by the manufacturer, how do I know that it is protected against lightning strikes?

A16: AMD certifies that the all-metal Zodiac LSi model (IFR approved) is equipped with lightening protection equipment. By contrast, aircraft made of composite materials are not protected against lightning unless they have a steel type mesh imbedded into their components. This is heavy and expensive and it is highly unlikely that any composite S-LSA will offer this. In passing, note that wooden and metal propellers are used on FAR 23 certified propellers; Composite propellers are not, as they can explode when hit by lightning.

A17: Aluminum naturally spreads the energy of a lightning strike. However, a lot more must be done to the airframe in order to make sure that the energy is properly conducted and spread out. Heavy duty grounding straps must be added throughout the airframe. This is especially true in areas where there are hinges. The fuel system is another area that must be protected. Lightning deflectors can be used, as well as moving the fuel tanks away from the fuselage. All of these techniques are used in the Zodiac LSi.

Q18: What about all these other systems found on FAR 23 IFR certified aircraft, such as: alternate static, heated pitot, IFR pilot window, TSO gauges, etc.? Do they need to be installed in an S-LSA for IFR flying?

A18: There is nothing defined in the ASTM rule on designing an IFR certified S-LSA. It is left up to manufacturers to design appropriate IFR aircraft. AMD uses the same approach used with typical FAR 23 certified aircraft to manufacture the Zodiac LSi. All items listed in the above question are standard equipment in the Zodiac LSi.

A19: The original Zodiac CH 600 was designed by Aeronautical Engineer Chris Heintz who was part of the supersonic Concord design team. He later designed FAR 23 type aircraft in Europe and numerous kit aircraft in North America. Mr. Heintz has designed more than 25 different aircraft models.

In the early 80’s he designed the Zodiac CH 600. From this model came the 601UL, 601HD, 601 HSD, the 601 XL and now the CH 650 LS. The original Zodiac XL is still flying today, equipped with a Lycoming 0-235 engine. The aircraft is presently used by Quality Sport Planes in California. A second Zodiac XL prototype was built in 2001 by Zenith Aircraft of Missouri.

This second XL aircraft has now logged over 1,400 hours (as of February 2007) and has crisscrossed the USA dozens of times. It is still the official Zenith factory demo aircraft today. Zenith estimates it offers about 300 demo flights per year in its Zodiac; that’s over 1,800 passengers in the last 6 years. Additionally, over 15,000 people have sat in this aircraft at different shows and fly-ins, as well as at the factory. Amazingly, the aircraft still looks great!

Originally, the 912 (80hp) was installed in this airframe; then the 912S (100hp) and more recently, the 120hp Jabiru. It must be noted that the landing gear has never been changed on the aircraft, nor has any other structural component. This is quite a statement – and gives the aircraft tremendous credibility. While typical aircraft manufacturers rotate their demo aircraft every year, Zenith Aircraft has done the opposite to show people that even after so many hours, the aircraft still looks and flies great!

Q20: One of your competitors told me that there have been accidents involving Zodiacs; that the airplane is not safe and that I should not buy one. What can you tell me about this?

A20: AMD does not deny the fact that Zodiacs have been involved in accidents over the course of the design's 25-year history. With over 1,000 Zodiacs flying, this is bound to happen. As previously mentioned, Zenith Aircraft's current demo plane has more than 1,400 trouble-free hours on it! The structure of the aircraft has been well proven; it has been tested in the field as well as in the lab – more than a few independent load tests have been done on the Zodiac XL airframe for certification in different countries. I know of no other S-LSA in the world that has been as thoroughly flight-tested as the Zodiac. I'm not just another salesman, I'm the factory's test pilot – I should know!

When it comes to accidents, scary words and outrageous claims are all too often used to describe them. It is all the more despicable when such sensationalized and misleading exaggerations are intentionally used as a selling tool. Remember this: Not once has an NTSB investigative board ever determined that the cause of a Zodiac accident was due to a shortcoming with the aircraft's design. NOT ONCE! If I were to purchase a new aircraft today, I would sure want my plane to have such a long and enviable history!

It must be noted that aeronautical engineer Chris Heintz recently completed a set of structural load tests, confirming the tough structure of the design. Note that structural testing is not required under the LSA rule. Please follow the following link for a lot of photo's, including photo's of other tests done by others on the Zodiac over the years. http://zenithair.com/zodiac/6-photo-testing.html

Q21: John, you are a test pilot for a Light Sport Aircraft manufacturer; what are the flight testing requirements for S-LSA?

A21: The LSA rule is quite specific on what needs to be checked. There is a special protocol for initial flight testing (prior to certification), and then there are the minimum requirements for on-going production flight tests. AMD (makers of the Zodiac LS S-LSA) bases its Light Sport flight testing procedures on the same flight testing documents and check lists that were developed with the FAA for the FAA type certified CH2000 aircraft. There is nothing “minimal” about these measures: they are very detailed and confirm that every element and configuration of each aircraft’s flight envelope is checked. What other LSA manufactures are checking, I do not know. Again, there is no FAA involvement. You may find it interesting to note that the SLA rule does not specify what level of experience or qualifications a test pilot needs to have.

Q22: If flight testing by foreign manufacturers and with S-LSA start-ups is unknown, can you tell me more about AMD’s processes?

A22: First, our production manager completes a detailed ground test. This includes running up the engine, testing all the systems, working-in the brakes, operating the controls, etc. Once complete, the aircraft moves on to the quality control area.

There, AMD’s chief Quality Assurance inspector completes a thorough pre-flight inspection (20+ pages of check lists). After all assemblies have been verified and the aircraft is declared airworthy, documents are signed and the production test-pilot (me) is now authorized to start the flight test.

Each aircraft is flight tested a minimum of 2 hours. During this time, the aircraft may land and take-off many times. Each time the plane lands, the relevant controls and/or systems are adjusted and fine-tuned. This is a critical process that only the factory (an ASTM-compliant manufacturer – according to the rules) may (and must) undertake. I often wonder, as a US-based test pilot, how many imported S-LSA undergo these procedures before shipment from their own factories (some manufacturers are not even located on an airport!)? Remember, the LSA rule only exists/applies in the US. In that light, don’t you wonder, too, in what category these aircraft were even registered (in their respective countries), in order to be test flown legally? As the new owner of such an import, would you receive copies of a temporary foreign registration and the appropriate de-registration documents?

Every Zodiac S-LSA I test-fly has been duly registered with the FAA and comes with a legitimate Certificate of Airworthiness (C of A). AMD’s customers receive a fully tested, FAA-registered and factory-certified S-LSA.

Q23: I see a lot of manufacturers using the LAMA logo on their web sites and advertising. What does that mean?

A23: The Light Aircraft Manufacturers Association (LAMA) is an important organization for manufacturers. Manufacturers that pay a yearly membership fee are entitled to use the LAMA logo (Zenith Aircraft and Zenair Ltd have been members of LAMA since its inception – Zodiac designer Chris Heintz was instrumental in its founding). Use of the logo, no matter how frequent or prominent, does not indicate LAMA approval or endorsement of a specific design in any way, shape or form, or that the Association has performed any type of inspections or tests on it. It simply indicates that the manufacturer is paying its membership dues (and in some cases, additional advertising fees as well).

Q24: What about speed. I see different speed specifications all over the place. Some manufacturers advertise a cruise speed very close to 138 mph. What am I missing?

A24: You are right. The LSA rule is very specific about Light Sport Aircraft speeds: 138 mph is the top speed allowed. This means the aircraft should not be able to exceed 138 mph when in straight and level flight at full throttle. It is impossible for a LSA to “cruise” at 138 mph (or even close to that). “Cruise” is typically calculated or measured at 75% of the available H.P. So if you do take a demo flight in an aircraft and cruises close to 138 mph, it does not comply as a LSA.

Many LSA have a ground adjustable propeller. Note that a range of approved blade pitches must be specified in the aircraft manuals and that it is against the law to change the setting to an unapproved pitch, as the aircraft will not perform within the specified limitations described in the POH. On the Zodiac, we use a Sensenich fixed pitch propeller. Nothing to worry about.

A25: Over the last few years, many changes were made to the XL aircraft for Europe, AMD and Zenith. We are always striving to make better aircraft. What happened is that the European version of the aircraft started to be quite different than the AMD or Zenith. So it was decided to bring all the best changes into a new design, which is now the CH 650. The most noticeable changes are the canopy and rudder. Other changes includes the repositioning of the main wing trailing edge, more balanced aileron controls, tougher fuselage, roll over protection, and a lot more.

"Hi Garry - I want to thank you and AMD (Terry, John, and Nancy) for the marvelous support given to me during my first year as a Zodiac owner. You were timely and supportive on any and all concerns and forthright on all warranty concerns. I couldn't be more pleased with you and the company. The plane performs as described in the advertisement and has been a great teacher to me in the art of aviation. I now say that I am more comfortable flying that plane on a bumpy day than driving in rush hour traffic. I had three years of experience flying before the Zodiac but I didn't become a pilot until I started flying the Zodiac. I am most pleased with my choice of accessories and instrument layout. Please feel free to mention me as a satisfied customer! With warm regards" Herb Siegel N623HS

To John Degonia and staff at AMD:
"I would like to take a moment to express my thanks for a job well done on the production of my AMD Zodiac CH 650 LS Special Light Sports aircraft. I've had the opportunity to fly a number of larger aircraft in the past and I was impressed with how well the Zodiac flew in comparison. The color scheme and panel presentation is first class and the aircraft proved its excellent flight stability on a rather windy trip home to South Carolina. Although at this point in time I have only made a few flights in the aircraft I feel very comfortable with the response of the controls and I have no reservations about making cross country trips of several hundred miles. The canopy view is quite outstanding offering the pilot a 360 degree scan of the sky making it easier to identify other aircraft in the vicinity. The power of the Continental O-200 engine is sufficient to ensure a steady climb rate in most atmospheric conditions and there is ample power to make altitude and speed adjustments as required. The automatic trim is a nice feature and the plane trimmed out quite well. I am also very happy with the comfort of the cabin.

At 6'2" and 210 pounds I was a little concerned about comfort, but with a 44 inch cabin I did not have any trouble adjusting to the side by side seating configuration and managing the controls. I think the Zodiac is a very well thought out design for the Special Light Sports Aircraft market and it truly feels like you are flying an airplane that you can trust. Thanks again to AMD for all the pride and workmanship displayed in the production of N650KF". Kevin.

"I just wanted to let you know how pleased I am so far with my new Zodiac CH650 LSi (N650GH). Everywhere I go other pilots comment on the styling and high quality workmanship. I am most pleased with how it performs. It climbs at 1000fpm at gross, is very stable in rough air, handles crosswinds better than anything I have flown, and doesn't get "mushy" in slow flight. I have flown two other LSA's, but the Zodiac is much more like a "real airplane" than a typical LSA. John, thanks again to you, Garry, Terry, Nancy, and the staff at AMD for the effort put into my airplane. I look forward to seeing you when my "free" annual is due". Greg Hopkins (Greg purchased the first BRS equipped Zodiac).

Hi John,

Thought I would share some information with you we just learned today. As you know, we had some reservations as to the legal status of the Garmin 430 and the use of the GPS in the IFR environment. Norman Hignite had contacted our local FSDO quite some time ago, and he finally got a return call just within the last week or so. Norman explained our situation with the Zodiac S-LSA CH650 LSi having the Garmin GNS 430 and our concern over it being an FAA acceptable installation and ok for use as primary navigation (GPS) in the IFR environment. Norman directed the FSDO tech. guy to your web site, where he could see a picture of our panel, and took the liberty of sharing the letter you supplied to us for the POH. He call Norman back today to inform him, the installation is perfectly legal……...Interestingly, the FAA guy also asked if we had an auto pilot in the aircraft. Norman gave him the make and model of our A/P and he didn't take any exception to it. Our interpretation, it's ok to use when flying IFR! Again I thought you might find all this interesting, and good to know for other Zodiac CH 650 LSi GNS 430 installations, as well as the need for a separate OBS receiver head for the SL 30 if it is to be used for primary IFR navigation.

By the way, if I didn't already tell you the Bogi-Bar Tow bar from Bogert International works great!

I saw the picture on you web site of the Zodiac that copied our paint scheme, good looking plane! I must admit his tail number broke my heart "650GH", not that I ever will be able to afford my very own Zodiac.

Best Regards,

Greg Halderman, Dayton Pilots Club, up in Ohio

Wow, N650GH - has a nice ring to it!

"I took delivery of my Zodiac in September 2006. This is the easiest aircraft I've ever learned to fly since I received my license in 1979. AMD's service has been nothing short of perfect. My Zodiac has given new life to my flying and has allowed me to share my passion with my sons. I did a lot of research into the different S-LSA's and found that the Zodiac was the least expensive to insure and operate. Keep up the good work!!" "Sincerely, Phillip Stacy, N602BS

"I just love my little Zodiac, It flies beautifully and it is loads of fun" Dr. Herb Segal, DDS of Kansas, N623HS

"I want to let all of you ( Mathieu, John, Garry, Terry and Nancy) know how much I appreciate the quality effort you put into my Zodiac LS. I am totally delighted with the airplane! From the demo flight with John I knew it would handle well but I was quite surprised to witness the high quality workmanship in the my finished product and the cooperation in tailoring to my specific preferences (black panel)" Ted Haller (N620TH).

"I accepted delivery of my new Zodiac LS S-LSA on 11/01/06. I was more than pleased with the color scheme, workmanship and flying quality. I have flown F-86, F-100 jet fighters, Comanchies, Skyhawks, Taylorcraft, Aeronica Champs, J-3 Cubs, RV-4 and RV-8 but the Zodiac is the most stable of any I have flown. It is virtually impossible to get the Zodiac into an unsafe situation. the paint and decal work are better than any I have seen recently, the AMD staff was very helpful in deciding on a color scheme. Pride in workmanship is evident from every AMD employee. I was very pleased with all the employees offering to help with explanations on construction details. I looked at many Light Sport airplanes at Sun and Fun this year but none could compare with the Zodiac on price and quality. I was excited to get back home to Sanford, N.C. so I could show off my sporty looking "Yellow Bird".

The above answers are the opinions of John Degoina, which do not necessarily reflect the opinions of AMD and others mentioned.

ZODIAC Q&A