A few notes for SDMB pilots and interested parties:
[ul][li]The Champ is back. American Champion have started making the venerable Champion again. The latest iteration of the Aeronca classic, which was first introduced in 1945, has a Continental O-200 and has a maximum speed of 108 mph. Cruise speed is 94 mph and range is 190 sm. Price is $85,900.[/li][li]RotorWay to build type-certified helicopters. There are more than 900 RotorWay helicopters flying. The company will pursue European certification first, and then apply for FAA certification. The factory-built model will likely have more power and changes to make it easier to maintain.[/li][li]Tiger Aircraft to be sold. Tiger Aircraft took over from Grumman American, Gulfstream American and American Aviation in the manufacture of the AA-1 Yankee and AA-5 Traveler/Cheetah/Tiger. They have declared Chapter 7 bankruptcy and their assets are up for sale.[/li][*]Diesel Cessnas. [From AOPA, Wiki link mine] ‘The FAA awarded a supplemental type certificate on March 12 for installation of the new 135-hp Centurion 2.0 kerosene piston aircraft engine in Cessna 172-series aircraft. It applies to Cessna series 172F to -S (in the United States) and F172F to F172P models (in Europe). The engine burns Jet A1 or diesel fuel, and Thielert Aircraft Engines, the engine’s manufacturer in Lichtenstein in Germany, claims a fuel burn for the engine of 4 to 5.3 gallons per hour.’[/ul]
Looking at all these links, the planes seem to be all in what I’d call the “quaint” category. No offense.
The first production models of the Cessna 172 were delivered in 1956. There were many changes over the years such as replacing the turtledeck with a rear window, sweeping the vertical stab., changing engines, changing from flat spring main gear to tubular, better soundproofing, etc; but it’s still basically the same aircraft. Put a white-painted mid-'70s Skyhawk next to a new white-painted one and from a distance most people wouldn’t be able to tell the difference. While there have been many changes, the design is still over 50 years old.
The AA-1 is a little younger, having first flown in 1963 (as the Bede BD-1 kitplane prototype), and having gone into production in 1969. The AA-5 is the same design only bigger, and went into production in 1971.
The thing about airplane makers is that they tend to be conservative. When planes crash, people sue. So they tend to like to stick to proven designs. It seems to me that the innovators are the new companies rather than the Big Three (and the rest). It’s not surprising that the aircraft look old, as they’re pretty much decades-old designs. What they lack in ‘modern styling’ they make up for with better engines (even if they’re decades-old designs as well), quieter cabins, more comfortable seats, better avionics packages, and (in some cases) stronger structures.
But then there’s the Champ…
Part of the problem with flying today is that it’s so bloody expensive. In 1976 my dad bought a six-year-old Cessna 172K Skyhawk for $10,200. Today I saw an eight-year-old 172S for $90,000. At their peak in the late-1970s airplane makers were turning out as many as 15,000 per year. The volume is nowhere near that now, and that drives up the prices of used aircraft.
Many pilots have been calling for an ‘inexpensive’ airplane. One way to keep an airplane ‘cheap’ is to make it simple. Another way is to not re-invent the wheel, but to put an older design back into production. This also saves on certification because the design already has a type certificate. The Champ is one example. There are at least three companies making Piper Cubs now, not to mention the various copies that can be built from kits (in the Experimental category), and I think there are Taylorcrafts as well. These aircraft won’t get you very far very fast, but they’re relatively inexpensive to buy and ideal for punching holes in the sky on a sunny day. In addition, a lot of pilots yearn for the bygone era when flying was simpler. Whether they learned in an old rag-wing, or they want a taste of how thier grandfathers flew, many pilots like the notsalgia factor of flying a fabric covered airplane. And then there’s the Sport Pilot certificate. Old designs like the Champ allow sport pilot certificate holders to fly a ‘real airplane’.
Found aircraft creates Expedition aircraft.
“Found Aircraft announced the beginning of its new division - Expedition Aircraft. Along with the creation of this new company, Found also announced that it is in the final stages of certification for two new piston aircraft, the E350 and the E350XC. Both aircraft will utilize the same rugged, four door, four seats (with optional 5th seat) design. Both aircraft will be equipped with the proven 315hp Lycoming IO-580 engine, offering customers industry leading horsepower, performance and payload.”
Or at least that’s what the press release says. It’ll be nice to see a new aircraft designed for the bush.
I’m afraid that the paranoid Homeland Security types are going to squeeze small private aviation as too high a safety/security threat.
What do you think a small private plane like one of these SHOULD cost, in a reasonable world?
Well, remember that I’m a Cheap Bastard. I don’t think a Skyhawk with standard avionics should cost more than $100,000. But the GA manufacturers would have to ramp up to 1970s production numbers for that to happen; which it won’t, because airplanes are too expensive for that many people to buy them. And if those numbers of people were buying, then that would show that the market will bear the price.
Someone will be along presently to point out that I’m wrong, and will tell you why. But IMHO I don’t think a 122-knot airplane should cost a quarter of a million dollars.
I sure hope the Grumman planes find a home - they’re too good to allow to fade away.
I owned an AA1-B for years, and just loved that airplane. It handled like a sports car. Way faster than a Cessna of equivalent power, and really responsive. I wish I had it back.
What should airplanes cost? No more than a luxury car. Why don’t they? Mainly because the industry isn’t large enough to sustain big enough numbers to be able to implement mass production techniques and amortize R&D and infrastructure over a large enough sales volume. When you only make a few hundred of something a year, each one is going to be expensive.
Why is the market so small, when it was so much bigger in the 1960’s and 1970’s? Lots of reasons. Product liability. Government regulation. But mainly (in my opinion) because the new planes came under increasing competition from the used market. Airplanes don’t fall apart like cars do. They are maintained in such a way that they can essentially live on forever. And the high cost of regulation meant that airplane manufacturers couldn’t afford to design and produce new models every year like the auto industry does. As a result, a used Cessna was virtually identical to a new one, and a fraction of the cost. Competition from their own used models drove down sales, which drove up costs per unit, which made them even less competitive with used airplanes. Add in product liability costs, and you had an industry-wide death spiral that landed us where we are today, with new airplanes being made and sold only to the rich or to commercial operations, while everyone makes do with the used market.
A year or so ago, a Cessna salesman told me the new 172SP’s with G1000 panels are $230,000 - and, of that, $40,000 was just for insurance.
But you don’t need to spend that, and you don’t often even need all the airplane a 20-year-old 172 with steam gauges and an IFR rack is. If you’re going to be doing serious flying, you need more, and if you just want to cruise over across the state for a burger, you don’t need that much, and when’s the last time you filled both back seats even if you could?
A 60’s 150 will run about $20-$30K, and a new, similar plane like the Cessna Light Sport shouldn’t be much more than twice that.
My first five logged hours (when I was 14 or 15) were in an AA-5B. N5801L. The number has been deregistered and has been reserved. (I lost that first logbook a couple of years later. Bummer.)
When Cessna stopped production of piston engine singles in the '80s, someone told me that half the cost of a new plane was insurance. Or maybe I read it. I don’t have a cite, and I don’t know if it’s true. This was when aircraft manufacturers were liable for every airplane they’d ever built.
I probably wouldn’t fill the seats, but I definitely would carry bulky and somewhat heavy gear. And I like the extra speed and range of the 172 over the 152. I’d definitely want an IFR panel (glass would be good, but I’ve only ever used steam gauges) for up here. One of my goals when I start flying again is to get my IFR rating.
That’s what I mean. A '60s or early-'70s (say, up to a 172K) Skyhawk goes for $40,000 to $50,000 or so. IMO a new one shouldn’t be much more than twice that.
Cessna is testing a light-sport aircraft now that is like the 150 but the cabin is bigger. The prototype is very attractive and the final plane could be flown with just a sport pilot license and no medical exam. Cessna hasn’t made up its mind but it should cost less than $100,000 if they decide to make it.
I was psyched to see the Champ announcement. I’ve flown the original – a 1946 model – and it’s still the most fun I’ve had in an airplane. Side door off, warm day, working the rudder for that perfect tailwheel touchdown…
“Quaint” or not, if I had a spare 75k lying around I’d probably buy one.
Do you have a link? Anything on performance figures?
Would that be the plane mentioned in this news release?
Yes, that is it. It is impressive to me (and to a lot of people) because it shouldn’t be all that expensive (if 100K isn’t considered expensive) and it looks like they are going to take the idea of the 150 and greatly improve it while keeping it in the light sport category. That means that lots of people that aren’t eligible to fly as PIC now will be able to with just a driver’s license and training time can be significantly reduced over a Private Pilot license. Cessna won’t say much about it but it looks like a modernized 150 and it is prettty attractive and clean looking.
They also haven’t realized performance figures but it will probably have a 100 hp Rotax and that is nothing to sneeze at in a plane that light and clean.
Performance figures are pretty well set by the Light Sport Aircraft rules, anyway.
The plane (can we call it the 158 yet, after the prototype’s tail number?) is also likely to replace the 150/152 fleet in FBO’s, which are getting older and more beat up every year, as primary trainers. There’ll be new, attractive (read: confidence-inspiring) planes for neophytes to learn in instead, with the biggest name in light aircraft behind them. That fact may also help break the insurance logjam - AIG and Avemco have been reluctant to expose themselves to the rash of Czech garage-shop LSA’s now dominating what there is of the LSA market. There doesn’t seem to be much question that Cessna is going to do it, too.
Burt Rutan has received a patent for SpaceShipOne.