![]() |
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 |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Gordon,
I think that there is alot of price gouging going on around the sport pilot qualified planes. Have you checked the recent asking price of 415 C ercoupes? Last year you could buy all you wanted for 12 to $15,000. They have one listed now at Barnstormers for $34,000 most are in the 22 to 27,000 range. Frank M.Hitlaw Jakarta,Indonesia |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]() wrote in message oups.com... Gordon, I think that there is alot of price gouging going on around the sport pilot qualified planes. Have you checked the recent asking price of 415 C ercoupes? Last year you could buy all you wanted for 12 to $15,000. They have one listed now at Barnstormers for $34,000 most are in the 22 to 27,000 range. Frank M.Hitlaw Jakarta,Indonesia I think the phrase price gouging may be a little harsh. It's called supply and demand. If LSA class planes are bringing a premium then the EAA was right in their belief that there were a bunch of folks out there that didn't want to or couldn't get physicals and still want to fly. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Hype or not, I think the problem is going to be self-correcting. Thirty years ago, Kurt Vonnegut wrote a short story called "Harrison Bergeron," about a future where those with better-than-average capabilities had to be handicapped to make them no more able than everyone else. (http://instruct.westvalley.edu/lafave/hb.html) This is the situation we're at with SLSAs. The restrictions of the category limit the abilities of the aircraft so that there's no special difference in performance between different LSAs. After all, how are airplanes traditionally marketed? 1. "Our airplane cruises faster than the competition" 2. "Our airplane carries more payload than the competition" 3. "Our airplane has a longer range than the competition" 4. "Our airplane carries more passengers than the competition" LSA marketers can't use #1...after all, they're limited to 120 knots, flat-out. LSA marketers will find little use out of #2... gross weights are limited to 1320 pounds. Depending on how they can squirrel down the empty weight, they might get a 50 or 100 pound improvement over the competition, but that's not really enough to hang a marketing campaign on LSA customers aren't likely to use range as a selection criteria. These planes aren't really intended for long cross-countries. And LSAs are limited to just two seats. So...when no plane can exhibit superior performance over its competition, how are buyers going to chose? Simple. With little else to choose between competing LSAs, customers are going to pick the one that sells at the lowest cost. Why buy a $90,000 SLSA when a $85,000 one gives the same capability? Why buy that $85,000 one, when you can get practically the same thing from another company for $80,000? I realize things are slightly more complex. Some planes may be more attractive in appearance, others might have more cabin room, some purchasers may be willing to pay more for a more-familiar engine, some may want niche abilities such as STOL, and there's of course the taildragger/milkstool decision. But my guess is that a $20,000 lower selling price will overcome any casual preferences. In short: the LSA market is going to be dominated by price. I suspect we're going to see some pretty good sales going on by next Sun-N-Fun. If a company *can* produce a $50,000 SLSA like Gordon insists is possible, they will *own* the market. Without the ability to show a clear advantage for the money, competitors will have to either match prices or get out of the business. Ron Wanttaja |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Ron Wanttaja wrote: Hype or not, I think the problem is going to be self-correcting. Thirty years ago, Kurt Vonnegut wrote a short story called "Harrison Bergeron," about a future where those with better-than-average capabilities had to be handicapped to make them no more able than everyone else. (http://instruct.westvalley.edu/lafave/hb.html) This is the situation we're at with SLSAs. The restrictions of the category limit the abilities of the aircraft so that there's no special difference in performance between different LSAs. After all, how are airplanes traditionally marketed? 1. "Our airplane cruises faster than the competition" 2. "Our airplane carries more payload than the competition" 3. "Our airplane has a longer range than the competition" 4. "Our airplane carries more passengers than the competition" LSA marketers can't use #1...after all, they're limited to 120 knots, flat-out. LSA marketers will find little use out of #2... gross weights are limited to 1320 pounds. Depending on how they can squirrel down the empty weight, they might get a 50 or 100 pound improvement over the competition, but that's not really enough to hang a marketing campaign on LSA customers aren't likely to use range as a selection criteria. These planes aren't really intended for long cross-countries. And LSAs are limited to just two seats. So...when no plane can exhibit superior performance over its competition, how are buyers going to chose? Simple. With little else to choose between competing LSAs, customers are going to pick the one that sells at the lowest cost. Why buy a $90,000 SLSA when a $85,000 one gives the same capability? Why buy that $85,000 one, when you can get practically the same thing from another company for $80,000? I realize things are slightly more complex. Some planes may be more attractive in appearance, others might have more cabin room, some purchasers may be willing to pay more for a more-familiar engine, some may want niche abilities such as STOL, and there's of course the taildragger/milkstool decision. But my guess is that a $20,000 lower selling price will overcome any casual preferences. In short: the LSA market is going to be dominated by price. I suspect we're going to see some pretty good sales going on by next Sun-N-Fun. If a company *can* produce a $50,000 SLSA like Gordon insists is possible, they will *own* the market. Without the ability to show a clear advantage for the money, competitors will have to either match prices or get out of the business. Ron Wanttaja Ron, I agree with everything that you have written here. I would add that there are a couple of more areas where one LSA aircraft might differ from another. Safety features and ease of maintenance. Having been on the inside of this area for sometime, I am fairly certain that we will never see factory-built, ready-to-fly, certified S-LSA aircraft with modern engines in the $50,000 price range. The fact that the engine itself costs $20,000.00 (firewall forward with equipment and accessories) just about makes it impossible to reach that price point. Gordon's comparison to the Part 23 certified American Champion is out of order. The key point that he missed is that you cannot fly the Champion without a medical or with a Sport Pilot license. Regards, Rick Pellicciotti LightSportFlying.com |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]() On 28 Sep 2005 12:24:08 -0700, "rpellicciotti" wrote: Ron, I agree with everything that you have written here. I would add that there are a couple of more areas where one LSA aircraft might differ from another. Safety features and ease of maintenance. Having been on the inside of this area for sometime, I am fairly certain that we will never see factory-built, ready-to-fly, certified S-LSA aircraft with modern engines in the $50,000 price range. The fact that the engine itself costs $20,000.00 (firewall forward with equipment and accessories) just about makes it impossible to reach that price point. I guess my question to you is why a 1930's technology engine built using consensus standards is going to cost $20,000? Jim http://www.unconventional-wisdom.org |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Jimbob wrote:
I guess my question to you is why a 1930's technology engine built using consensus standards is going to cost $20,000? Because their not built using consensus standards, they're built using 1930's technology. That is a guy standing in front of a maching, grinding and cutting parts. I choked when I read in an AOPA magazine, just a couple years ago, that Lycoming was harping and stroking themselves for buying some CNC equipment. That is, arguably the leader in aviation engines is just now moving up to the quality control and automation that the even the most basic machine shops expect. -- This is by far the hardest lesson about freedom. It goes against instinct, and morality, to just sit back and watch people make mistakes. We want to help them, which means control them and their decisions, but in doing so we actually hurt them (and ourselves)." |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Thu, 29 Sep 2005 02:17:12 GMT, Ernest Christley
wrote: Jimbob wrote: I guess my question to you is why a 1930's technology engine built using consensus standards is going to cost $20,000? Because their not built using consensus standards, they're built using 1930's technology. That is a guy standing in front of a maching, grinding and cutting parts. I choked when I read in an AOPA magazine, just a couple years ago, that Lycoming was harping and stroking themselves for buying some CNC equipment. That is, arguably the leader in aviation engines is just now moving up to the quality control and automation that the even the most basic machine shops expect. Ugh, That's scary. Without the barriers to entry, i.e. FAA certifcation, I should expect some competitors to enter the market. More competition means pressure to use more effective means of manufacturing. These proces should drop. Jim http://www.unconventional-wisdom.org |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I was referring to "modern engines". The Rotax 912 S, 100HP engine
along with the exhaust system, radiator, and other bits costs nearly $20,000.00. That only leaves you $30,000 for everything else. The materials for a small, 2 place, all metal airplane from the firewall back costs nearly $20,000.00 (aluminum is going through the roof prompting Boeing to switch to carbon for the 787). That only leaves $10,000.00 for labor and profit. Doesn't look likely to be doable. Rick |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"rpellicciotti" wrote in message
oups.com... The materials for a small, 2 place, all metal airplane from the firewall back costs nearly $20,000.00 Reference please??? All of Van's two-place kit prices are below that number. Some artful scrounging should drop it to $10,000. Buying in volume should do the same. Rich S. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Thu, 22 Sep 2005 07:42:40 -0700, Ron Wanttaja
wrote: So...when no plane can exhibit superior performance over its competition, how are buyers going to chose? Simple. With little else to choose between competing LSAs, customers are going to pick the one that sells at the lowest cost. Why buy a $90,000 SLSA when a $85,000 one gives the same capability? Why buy that $85,000 one, when you can get practically the same thing from another company for $80,000? lots snipped Ron Wanttaja I agree with your thoughts to some extent Ron the reducing prices are really just a wind back of excessive insurance and liability BS. the rewards being there for anyone who finds away to remove those costs from the final sale price. There is one area you missed. handling quality. out in my back shed is a half complete wooden single seater which is a 1950's design. it isnt really aerobatic but it is by far and away the sweetest flying little aeroplane anyone has ever come up with. it is an absolutely first class little weekend summer flyer with open cockpit, not much range and bugger all luggage space. I'm building it as a bit of stress relief because I have wanted to experience the flying qualities for myself. should finish it next year. the poms write really rapturous articles about the flying characteristics of the turbulents. It looks like building for less than the price of an Icom A200 radio using epoxy on Queensland Hoop Pine and hoop pine plywood and a VW1600cc engine that I'll convert myself. basically spruce substitutes. Aerodynamically there are lots of things with the design that everyone poo pooh's as antiquated but they work really well together. mine is a Druine D31AT Australian Turbulent btw. if anyone was to produce an LSA that held to reasonable prices and had the handling characteristics of either the druine turbulent or the druine turbi they would have a good solid future ahead of them. these two old aircraft designs really *do* stand out in the handling characteristics. I've flown a turbi and have never encountered anything since as good. Stealth Pilot Australia |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
High Cost of Sportplanes | Gordon Arnaut | Home Built | 110 | November 18th 05 10:02 AM |
Bogus Weather Hype | Jay Honeck | Piloting | 57 | January 9th 05 08:00 PM |