The surprises to me are: -no need of CS-VLA for Night-VFR
You mean you can fly nvfr in a LSA? This is new to me. Any reference (from EASA) ?
from Pipistrel webpage “Virus 121 is an EASA type certificated aircraft that can be used for Part FCL flight training and airwork. It is the only EASA LSA aircraft with an autopilot and spin approvals. It is also approved for NVFR.”
And for the Viper SD4 CS-LSA, see here: http://vipersd4.sk/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/Certificate_ViperSD4-Night_VFR.pdf
At this point I do not understand if CS-VLA has even a single advantage over CS-LSA.
Ha, indeed NVFR is possible in a LSA according to this.
EASA web page.
mancival wrote:
At this point I do not understand if CS-VLA has even a single advantage over CS-LSA
LSA is still restricted to 600/650 kg max, while VLA is 750 or 850? But I read a few days ago that the newest CS-VLA has been merged with CS-23, so maybe there are no more CS-VLA from now on?
Anyway, it certainly makes the SW-121 and the SD-4 stand out somewhat; Chute and NVFR.
updating the list moving the Sportstar up among the rotax-powered with BRS certified for Night-VFR.
CS-LSA:
Virus SW 121 (NVFR) – BRS
Evektor Sportstar (NVFR) – BRS
Tomark Viper SD-4 (NVFR) – BRS
PS28 Sportcruiser (RTC) – BRS
CTLS-ELA (RTC) – BRS
Breezer 600 (RTC) – BRS
WT9 (RTC) – BRS
CS-VLA:
Aero AT3 R100
Aquila AT01
Diamond DA20
Tecnam 2002
Tecnam 2008
Tecnam P92
D4 Fascination (DayVFR only) – (BRS?)
CS-23:
Tecnam 2002 (IFR)
According to many posts here over the years, all of the above will be destroyed by students very fast, and a Cessna 150/152 is the only option 
Could it be that is the case only in the UK?
Many flight clubs and schools in Germany use the Aquila as primary trainer. My feeling is that it is replacing C150/C152 as aircraft of choice for that purpose, although I have no data to back this up.
The school I mainly rent from has one of the early model A210s, about 20 years old, and they don’t seem to have problems with students “breaking” it…
Edit: they had problems with the oil temperature being too high for some time though. Apparently the air intake on the older models is prone to that. During my PPL training I flew a 2011 model, later a 2016 A211 and we always had the opposite problem of the oil temperature taking rather long to reach the 50°C recommended before takeoff…
MedEwok wrote:
we always had the opposite problem of the oil temperature taking rather long to reach the 50°C recommended before takeoff
That’s what duct tape is for. Seriously, these Rotax engines have no thermostats on the cooling like car engines have (although there are after marked mods). In the winter they usually run too cold, and the heat exchangers must be blocked accordingly, just like we did with cars in the old days. Cardboard using strips works better than duct tape though The WT9 has a manual gate for the oil cooler with a lever in the cockpit. This helps a lot to get the oil temp up, but it’s also very easy to forget it in closed position…
Peter wrote:
Cessna 150/152 is the only option
The C-150 is a cramped, underpowered, anemic contraption compared with a new LSA/VLA. It flies nice enough though, the 152 Aerobat is fun, but simply not comparable to a WT9 for instance. Remember, we use a WT9 to tow gliders, and with the “big bore” kit, it’s almost as good as a Pawnee with a 540 (well, a heavy two seat glider with two males in the 100 kg class is better done with a Pawnee, but on average a WT9 is just as good )
I didn’t write “Cessna 150/152 is the only option”, BTW.
LeSving wrote:
The C-150 is a cramped, underpowered, anemic contraption
Its a cramped anemic contraption that has a zillion hours in night VFR (as required for US private certificate) and IFR operations. Cramped is what seems to me to have driven US schools to the C172.
The Cessna 150 is a great training aircraft. That can teach day, night, IMC/ir and certain models aerobatics as well. The crosswind limit is 15mph and it handles that easily.
None of the plastic fantastic can do that.
In the UK no extension is allowed on the Rotax 912 TBO. Also the TBO is based on running time not airborne like the C150/152. So as much as I like the rotax engine as things stand at present the end result is the continental/Lycoming powered aircraft are cheaper to operate.
Part M light will hopefully change this.
