More Sportplanes Hype

Well I just came across another piece of advertising masquerading as an
article in Private Pilot magazine.

The author goes up on a short hop in a Sting Sport, another plastic topy
ariplane from the Czech Republic and he's raving about it like it's the
biggest thing since sliced bread. He even managed to paraphrase the famous
Neil Armstrong quote about "small steps for man...giant steps for mankind."
Man oh man.

And this "giant step" of a sportplane has a price that starts at $89,900.

Just for comparison, you can go out an buy a fully certified American
Champion Citabria for $90,900. This is a real airplane with none of the
restrictions that apply to the toy sportplanes. It has a real Lycoming O-235
that has a TBO of 2400 hours. It has a gross weight of 1750 pounds, which is
500 pounds more than this plastic toy sportplane.

Yet this sportplane is supposed to be some kind of bargain? How is it that
American Champion can build a certified airplane in the US at the same price
as a sportplane, if building a small airplane is so expensive?

I rest my case. If anyone really thinks these sportplanes are a great deal
and not way overpriced I have nothing further to say.

Regards,

Gordon.

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

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.

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 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

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

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

Ron Wanttaja wrote:

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.

I think you could build an Ercoupe for that easily if you built them
in pretty good quantity. You would need a powerplant considerably
cheaper than the Continental or Lycoming goes for currently. What are
the engine certification rules under LSA? Can you use general purpose
engine components without traceability back to the raw metal and
fabrication processes? If so then an auto derivative is the only
possible choice. And avionics...

I think the Czech Republic is probably a pretty good place to build,
if you are willing to work metric and learn, if not Czech, at least
German, depending on the whereabouts of the plant. Russia is out,
because they are all stone drunks.

Gordon Arnaut wrote:
Well I just came across another piece of advertising masquerading as an
article in Private Pilot magazine.



Gordon, remind us again what it is that you have built or fly or own?

Jerry

This isn't about me, Springer.

It's about the price-gouging we're seeing in the sportplane business -- and
the cheerleading we see from the magazines.

But since you are interested in me personally -- I strongly considered
buying a new Tecnam. I decided not to because as nice a plane as it is, I
don't think it is worth anywhere near $100,000.

So I will probably build something myself that I can fly from my farm strip
north of Toronto. I've been looking at several different designs and have
spent a bit of time at the drawing board myself.

I have no desire to get involved in any kind of entrepreneurial venture --
airplanes or otherwise. I think there are people out there with viable
businesses and lots of experience who are well-positioned to enter into such
a venture if they desire. I think we will see that happen and I really think
we will see some very attractively priced sportplanes down the road.

I've put this issue up for discussion because I believe there are lots of
people interested in this -- and indeed many here have expressed interesting
opinions and observations. (And only a few sour grapes posts attacking the
messenger).

Regards,

Gordon.





"Jerry Springer" wrote in message
...
Gordon Arnaut wrote:
Well I just came across another piece of advertising masquerading as an
article in Private Pilot magazine.



Gordon, remind us again what it is that you have built or fly or own?

Jerry