About ten years ago, Quicksliver developed a certified version of their
two-seat ultralight. IIRC, its selling price then was about $30,000. I don't
know how much the price has gone up since, but ten years of inflation should
have brought it up a bit. New Cessna prices have gone up quite a bit, since
they returned to the market in the late '90s.

The prices for the Special Light Sport aircraft will go down in either of two
ways: Either demand will be so great that it becomes a very competitive market,
with the need to undercut the competition's price, or there won't BE any demand,
and the companies cut prices out of desperation.

The vast middle ground consists of a long drawn-out struggle between numerous
companies at various proximity to bankruptcy. They *can't* lower prices and
stay in business; the sale of even one airplane keeps them afloat for a while.

We come, then, to the question of market: How much demand *is* there for these
things?

As far as I can tell, an SLSA is perfectly legal for Private Pilot training.
Part of the issue, then, is which is more cost-effective for the typical FBO:
Buying SLSAs, buying new Standard-category trainers like Diamonds, buying used
Cessna 172s or Piper Warriors, or buying new Cessnas or Pipers.

There's no question that the SLSAs will be not only the cheapest to buy of the
*new* aircraft, and the cheapest to operate of *any* of the aircraft. Lower
fuel burn, less complex airplanes (cheaper to maintain).

However, they do have the drawbacks, from the FBO's point of view. First, while
the parts costs will probably be lower than the Cessna or Piper equivalents, an
FBO can be reasonably sure that Piper or Cessna parts will still be available
next year. No way to tell how permanent these LSA companies are.

Second, the used or new Pipers and Cessnas have four seats, not two. They're
more likely to get rented out for personal use.

Third...well, I haven't seen a lot of these production LSAs up close, but the
cockpits *do* look small. Much of the pilot population today is middle-aged or
older, and the "spread" involved will bias renters away from the smaller planes.

Finally, we come to what is probably the largest factor to make FBOs reluctant
to add SLSAs to their rental line: The unknown. If they buy a used or new
Cessna, they have a good idea what it'll cost and how popular it will be to
rent. An SLSA? Who knows? They might put *one* on the line, just as an
experiment, but with only one plane available, it always remains just a
curiosity.

A kicker, though, might be the rising cost of fuel. A 4 GPH rate gets to be a
LOT more attractive than an 8 GPH one, when the fuel prices are nearing
$5/gallon.

The other half of the equation is the SLSAs to be purchased by private
individuals. As of right now, the ownership advantages of SLSA vs. an older
production airplane aren't that pronounced. The SLSA owner can have someone
with a Light Sport Maintenance Repairman Certificate maintain his airplane and
perform the annual inspection, and persons can get the LS-M certificate a lot
easier than an A&P. But it's moot, since I don't believe anyone's offering an
LS-M course, yet (two sessions of LS-I have been held, but they only apply to
Experimentals). So the SLSA owner has to pay the local A&P to work on his
plane, as well.

The reliability of these old production planes is lower, and the parts can
sometimes be harder to find...but then, the $30,000 or so the buyer saves when
he opts for a Luscombe vs. a brand-new LSA buys a lot of parts.

So... how popular are the production LSAs likely to be? There's no real way of
telling, but there is a rather unfortunate hint in recent history.

Earlier, I mentioned how Quicksilver had received certification in their GT-500.
These could have found the same use on the FBO rental lines as the SLSAs of
today.

How did they do? Checking the FAA rolls, I find only ten Quicksilver GT-500s,
none manufactured later than 1996. And four of them are listed as
Amateur-Built.

Yet...yet...the GT-500 is not a conventional aircraft. Its ultralight
antecedents are obvious. Not a worry to us EAAers, but it likely was too much
for the conservative flight-training industry.

The resolution of the SLSA cost vs. popularity question is likely to be only
obvious in hindsight. About sixty years go, the General Aviation industry
*knew* that all the pilots coming back from WWII would want their own airplanes
to fly. They cranked out of ton of airplanes. So many, in fact, that 60 years
later, there are more planes on the FAA rolls manufactured in 1947 than *any*
other year.

And, of course...it was a bust.

The bust had its advantages to the ordinary pilot, in that all these airplanes
eventually reached the market at fire-sale prices, and were the primary fuel for
the used market for decades.

Will the SLSA world go the same way? Stay tuned....

Ron Wanttaja