LSA instructor?

I'm just back from OSH late last night as well. Had a good time, got
totally sunburned and enjoyed the show. A couple of questions came up,
and everyone I asked seemed to have a different opinion (which happens
when you don't have the FAR/AIM books at hand out on the Flight
line)....
1. I thought the LSA "mall" was a great idea at show center. My first
plane was an Ercoupe, and even thought I've moved "up" to a 172, the
LSA type airplanes are really pretty cool. What I've been trying to
figure out is this new LSA instructor thing. Can one really just take
the "fundamentals of instruction" (FOI) test and then the written for
the LSA instructor (and then the practical)? Without getting a
commercial and then insturment, like a traditional CFI?
2. I was oogling the new Czech "Mermaid" amphibian as well. My wife was
keen on that idea. Now with this, is there going to be a seperate
LSA-single engine seaplane rating (LSA-seaplane???)? If one already has
PP-SEL, does one just add SES on to it and then be qualified to fly the
thing?

I'm already a relatively active pilot, but I truly hope this LSA thing
really takes off and we start seeing these planes out at the FBO's!

Ryan
Madison, WI

Ryan,
I hope the sport thing takes off as well. There are alot of naysayers
that will do whatever they can to throw a monkey wrench into it all for
everyone. Like most "new" things done by any government agency there are
quirks that have to be worked out. One I am working on is the Catch 22 of
the 87 knot endorsement.
One rule says a sport pilot may train in single engine plane , even if
it is not light sport category, but must solo and take a check ride in the
light sport aircraft. The 87 knot endorsement requirement states a
certificated sport pilot may train and get an endorsement in a plane that
cruises over the 87 knots. Hmmm if you already have time training in a
Cherokee as a student why can't you get the 87 knot endorsement? The
training is the same...just one of those tricky little wording things that I
would guess got messed up by someone along the way.
As the FAA guy told me," Welcome to the FAR's" I sure wish I could
have made it up to the big event at OSH but driving was out of the question
for me. I would have loved seeing the sport planes. Fill us in if you
would!?

Patrick
student SPL
aircraft structural mech
wrote in message
ups.com...
I'm just back from OSH late last night as well. Had a good time, got
totally sunburned and enjoyed the show. A couple of questions came up,
and everyone I asked seemed to have a different opinion (which happens
when you don't have the FAR/AIM books at hand out on the Flight
line)....
1. I thought the LSA "mall" was a great idea at show center. My first
plane was an Ercoupe, and even thought I've moved "up" to a 172, the
LSA type airplanes are really pretty cool. What I've been trying to
figure out is this new LSA instructor thing. Can one really just take
the "fundamentals of instruction" (FOI) test and then the written for
the LSA instructor (and then the practical)? Without getting a
commercial and then insturment, like a traditional CFI?
2. I was oogling the new Czech "Mermaid" amphibian as well. My wife was
keen on that idea. Now with this, is there going to be a seperate
LSA-single engine seaplane rating (LSA-seaplane???)? If one already has
PP-SEL, does one just add SES on to it and then be qualified to fly the
thing?

I'm already a relatively active pilot, but I truly hope this LSA thing
really takes off and we start seeing these planes out at the FBO's!

Ryan
Madison, WI

Ryan, I think one of the big roadblocks to LSA is economics. Insurance
companies won't insure classic taildraggers for student solo, so someone
(FBO, student, flying club) is going to have to buy/lease a trike
geared LSA for training. That means one of the new planes which seem to
have a base price of 80,000 buckeroos. For that kind of money, you could
get a decent 182! And don't forget checkouts for the instructor, parts
inventory (which should be relatively small for such new planes), and
maybe even metric tools (1)

If someone is limited to SP, then yeah, 80 grand might seem like a good
idea, or they could go experimental, but you'd still have to find an
instructor to give lessons in a homebuilt...after you get the phase one
flown off, of course.
I really liked some of the new LSA's, and I hope it takes off...I'd like
to fly some of these planes.

John

(1) The week before Oshkosh, I dropped by the FBO hangar where there was
a NEW Katana (not the FBO's). The guys in the shop had to buy metric
tools cause they didn't have any! This was a FBO that had been around
for 75 years!

IMHO,
If sport pilot gets to the every plane costs 80G it will die. Other than
a few rich fellows that are going to lose their medicals the people that
sport pilot was intended to target to add to aviation will be left out in
the cold.
Not all, but in alot of cases people into ultralights are there because
they can not afford a certified aircraft,...a smart plane or kit builder
could make those ultralighters sport pilots which would be a great
percentage of their biz, or they can choose to cater to the rich and only
get 3 to 4 % of the biz.
You are correct in the dwindling number of taildraggers available for
rent because of ridiculas insurance. There are a few places left but you
really have to look for them. Insurance companies will always find a way to
screw people ..so this is just par for the course for those leeches.
A sport plane at tops should be in the 20-40 G range, if a company could
make one lower all the better. Why would it cost 60 G for a place to make a
new Cub or Champ? Simple GREED....and as long as that mentality prevails GA
will die. Yes a company needs to make a profit but not 200%-300% from every
sale.
The metal to build a 601 or Sonex will run in the 3000-4000 price range,
figure an engine to be 10 G , and there is nothing to building one of these
planes so labor SHOULD not be a boatload. But I have seen these sell for
40-60G , and it's highway robbery. 25G would be good , and 30G probably not
unreasonable. Hey they are not building 777's , just a small plane. I speak
from experience in production of aircraft, from MD-80's to Learjets.
A greedy company that wants to sell a 25G plane for 50G may sell
100...if he sold them for 25G he has the potential of selling 500, simply
because it opens the market for more people. All I can fly is sport category
and I WILL NEVER pay as much for a light sport plane as a 172, etc. I would
simply build my own plane before that happens, or even a certified old
project plane that meets the sport category. I realize some may not have the
know how or tools to do that..they will find ultralights very cheap in the
next few years if the sport category really takes off. Or they can surely
check with a local EAA group and probably gets tons of help building their
own light sport plane. When we "poor boys" HAVE to build one, it's one less
they can sell at a trumped up price, one less that will be rented on the
flight line. Just my take on it anyways

Patrick
student SPL
aircraft structural mech
"John T" wrote in message
...
Ryan, I think one of the big roadblocks to LSA is economics. Insurance
companies won't insure classic taildraggers for student solo, so someone
(FBO, student, flying club) is going to have to buy/lease a trike geared
LSA for training. That means one of the new planes which seem to have a
base price of 80,000 buckeroos. For that kind of money, you could get a
decent 182! And don't forget checkouts for the instructor, parts inventory
(which should be relatively small for such new planes), and maybe even
metric tools (1)

If someone is limited to SP, then yeah, 80 grand might seem like a good
idea, or they could go experimental, but you'd still have to find an
instructor to give lessons in a homebuilt...after you get the phase one
flown off, of course.
I really liked some of the new LSA's, and I hope it takes off...I'd like
to fly some of these planes.

John

(1) The week before Oshkosh, I dropped by the FBO hangar where there was a
NEW Katana (not the FBO's). The guys in the shop had to buy metric tools
cause they didn't have any! This was a FBO that had been around for 75
years!

So let's do the math. If the metal is $4k, the engine is $10k, another $3k
for incidentals like tires, wires, and the like, and $5k in labor to build,
the out-door cost is $22k. Sell it for $25k and you've made a whole $3k,
times 500 customers is $1.5mil.

Sell it for $50k and you've made $28k times 100 customers and you've made
$2.8 mil, not to mention the headaches involved with another 400 customers
and the service that entails.

Like the man said, DO THE MATH.

Jim



The metal to build a 601 or Sonex will run in the 3000-4000 price
range, figure an engine to be 10 G , and there is nothing to building one
of these planes so labor SHOULD not be a boatload. But I have seen these
sell for 40-60G , and it's highway robbery. 25G would be good , and 30G
probably not unreasonable. Hey they are not building 777's , just a small
plane. I speak from experience in production of aircraft, from MD-80's to
Learjets.
A greedy company that wants to sell a 25G plane for 50G may sell
100...if he sold them for 25G he has the potential of selling 500, simply
because it opens the market for more people.

Well DUHHHH JIM,
There are variables for every kind of plane, the estimated cost of a
Tatcher CX4 is 8,000 with engine. Do you need to sell it for 50 G too? Take
the blinders off!!!!!!

Patrick

"RST Engineering" wrote in message
...
So let's do the math. If the metal is $4k, the engine is $10k, another
$3k for incidentals like tires, wires, and the like, and $5k in labor to
build, the out-door cost is $22k. Sell it for $25k and you've made a
whole $3k, times 500 customers is $1.5mil.

Sell it for $50k and you've made $28k times 100 customers and you've made
$2.8 mil, not to mention the headaches involved with another 400 customers
and the service that entails.

Like the man said, DO THE MATH.

Jim



The metal to build a 601 or Sonex will run in the 3000-4000 price
range, figure an engine to be 10 G , and there is nothing to building
one of these planes so labor SHOULD not be a boatload. But I have seen
these sell for 40-60G , and it's highway robbery. 25G would be good , and
30G probably not unreasonable. Hey they are not building 777's , just a
small plane. I speak from experience in production of aircraft, from
MD-80's to Learjets.
A greedy company that wants to sell a 25G plane for 50G may sell
100...if he sold them for 25G he has the potential of selling 500, simply
because it opens the market for more people.

In the U.S. we don't price products this way. In the U.S. we look at
what the market is willing to pay for the product. If we can make a
profit off of that we go for it. Those damn socialists get so hung up
with what it costs to produce the product when they price. It makes no
difference. My costs are none of your concern, your only concern is
whether or not you are willing to pay my asking price.

-Robert

Not to mention then you can sell parts and such to 500 customers instead of
100, Jim you should understand how that works you are in biz. Lots of
variables but the main point is companys are to greedy. Look at the greed
our auto industry has gotten into( from their own and the greed of their
workers). When things cost less you sell alot more, period.

Patrick

"RST Engineering" wrote in message
...
So let's do the math. If the metal is $4k, the engine is $10k, another
$3k for incidentals like tires, wires, and the like, and $5k in labor to
build, the out-door cost is $22k. Sell it for $25k and you've made a
whole $3k, times 500 customers is $1.5mil.

Sell it for $50k and you've made $28k times 100 customers and you've made
$2.8 mil, not to mention the headaches involved with another 400 customers
and the service that entails.

Like the man said, DO THE MATH.

Jim



The metal to build a 601 or Sonex will run in the 3000-4000 price
range, figure an engine to be 10 G , and there is nothing to building
one of these planes so labor SHOULD not be a boatload. But I have seen
these sell for 40-60G , and it's highway robbery. 25G would be good , and
30G probably not unreasonable. Hey they are not building 777's , just a
small plane. I speak from experience in production of aircraft, from
MD-80's to Learjets.
A greedy company that wants to sell a 25G plane for 50G may sell
100...if he sold them for 25G he has the potential of selling 500, simply
because it opens the market for more people.

The Polish say that this is ****ing in the soup. You get more soup, but it
doesn't taste anywhere near as good.

Jim



"W P Dixon" wrote in message
...

Not to mention then you can sell parts and such to 500 customers instead
of 100, Jim you should understand how that works you are in biz. Lots of
variables but the main point is companys are to greedy. Look at the greed
our auto industry has gotten into( from their own and the greed of their
workers). When things cost less you sell alot more, period.

W P Dixon wrote:
Not to mention then you can sell parts and such to 500 customers instead
of 100, Jim you should understand how that works you are in biz. Lots of
variables but the main point is companys are to greedy. Look at the
greed our auto industry has gotten into( from their own and the greed of
their workers). When things cost less you sell alot more, period.

The flaw in this argument is that it assumes unlimited demand. Sure, you *might*
sell 500 the first year, but not so many the next. Five years down the road,
demand is satiated and you're out of business. You need to price things high
enough that some people have to wait to buy them.

George Patterson
Give a person a fish and you feed him for a day; teach a person to
use the Internet and he won't bother you for weeks.