![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Nathan Young" wrote in message ... On Wed, 03 Nov 2004 01:45:22 GMT, "Mike Rapoport" wrote: I agree with you that higher fuel and insurance will negatively impact the market but I think that the glass cockpit airplanes are a big deal. How would you like to be the last guy to buy a 206 without the G1000? That announcement cost him at least $50,000. Lets face reality, used machinery generally depreciates both because of wear and because the current product generally improves. Airplanes have been stagnant for years, but now Cirrus, Diamond and Lancair have delivered genuine improvements in terms of speed per dollar. Soon there will be diesels with significantly longer TBOs, single lever control and much better economy. An old airplane is simply not going to hold its value when the new ones go 50% faster on 70% of the fuel and the engines last half again as long. It is about time that GA started moving forward again! The Cirrus, Lancair, and Diamond 'glass' aircraft are a huge step forward for GA. Faster and more fuel efficient. That's the bottom line when we're trying to get someplace. These planes should (and do) command a higher asking price because they offer more performance than the existing GA spamcan. Sarcasticly speaking - I wouldn't have been the last guy to buy a 2003 C206 because I would have been buying a 1970s 206 instead, and saving myself $200k+. In my view, the planes were essentially the same. Your point is dead on for the recently mfg'd used planes vs the new glass panels. Anyone who has the cash to buy a $300k C182 or C206 is going to spend the extra $50k to get the glass paneled version. Hopefully a retrofit market will popup to service the thousands of steam-gauge Piper/Cessna/Beeches. That would help bridge the gap between old and new. Anytime there are that many dollars at stake, you can bet an entrepreneur will give it a go. I wonder how much owners would be willing to pay to 'glass-panelize' their older spamcan? -Nathan What is interesting, but hasn't come into play yet is that the G-1000 is cheaper (to Cessna) than the instruments it replaces. At some point manufacturers will stop charging a premium for glass. My guess is that it will happen in the next two years. Mike MU-2 |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
How to License Your Homebuilt Aircraft | [email protected] | Home Built | 0 | January 26th 05 04:11 PM |
Questions about the new Sports Pilot license | G EddieA95 | Home Built | 0 | September 5th 04 09:07 PM |
Legality of owning ex-military intercontinental aircraft. | Bill Silvey | Military Aviation | 71 | October 15th 03 09:50 PM |
Radio License Question | Tom Nery | Owning | 4 | September 22nd 03 03:52 PM |
Radio station license re-application? | Mike Noel | Owning | 4 | August 13th 03 09:40 PM |