I should clarify that I was referencing guessing on Rotax and other S-LSA industry trends and motivations. The exponential pricing seems to indicate that they don't worry too much about the increased price and CV props are fairly popular in Europe where the rules are different.

My budget is below S-LSA prices but sufficient enough to avoid hand propping J3/7AC. I won't go with a 915+CV but I doubt the LSA rules will ever allow for a three lever config. "pilot's improper use of the mixture control" is pretty common on crash reports. So I doubt that adding a 3rd lever will happen for S-LSA. Note that is a guess and not based on any knowledge.

I don't own a car without a clutch pedal and haven't for decades so I get the sentiment about simplicity.

While I have no experience with CV props and can't even comment on that topic. On the subject of the rotax ignition. A shift in complexity can actually lead to less complexity for the system as a whole.

While my opinion won't be true for everyone. IMHO it would be easier for me to troubleshoot the 912/15iS than the 912ul(s) Ducati "Dual Capacitor Discharge Ignition". Despite being "electronic" it is not digital and while it may have a lower part count it is not necessarily simpler.

The magneto generator stator assembly is complex and the e-boxes are hard to test and the shared nature of components makes things challenging IMHO. Like a typical CDI system it is mostly passive components which sounds simpler until you have multiple functions on one stator and two potted black boxes without enough connectivity to fully test the thyristor circuit.



While the value obviously needs to be evaluated by each user the increase number in sensors on a computer controlled system can be easier to test in isolation.

With simple dual coil packs and hall effect crank sensors I wouldn't even need a schematic to troubleshoot the major components on a 912is/915is. Which is a good thing because I don't think Rotax has release a schematic but that is partly because they don't have to.

Obviously this is dependent on a builders preferences, budget, and experience. Personally I would find the shift in complexity of a computer controlled ignition to actually result in a lower overall complexity compared to the 912ul(s) dual Ducati DCDI system.

I wouldn't back away from a newer flyEFii or SDS system on a traditional aero engine but people will want to understand fuel maps etc...which does pose an additional barrier.

Your mileage may vary.

It is really cool to have the ability to build it the way YOU want.