-
There seems to be an uptick in Political comments in recent months. Those of us who are long time members of the site know that Political and Religious content has been banned for years. Nothing has changed. Please leave all political and religious comments out of the forums.
If you recently joined the forums you were not presented with this restriction in the terms of service. This was due to a conversion error when we went from vBulletin to Xenforo. We have updated our terms of service to reflect these corrections.
Please note any post refering to a politician will be considered political even if it is intended to be humor. Our experience is these topics have a way of dividing the forums and causing deep resentment among members. It is a poison to the community. We appreciate compliance with the rules.
The Staff of SOH
New Piper LSA
- Thread starter Piglet
- Start date
Dynamic would be a great addition to our hangars. 
Rimshot
Charter Member
Incidentally I came across this post again, only to read you're building a Dynamic, Bill. Great news! I take lessons in the one below. It's a fantastioc little airplane with impressive performance. Let me know if I can help in any way 
View attachment 810
View attachment 811
View attachment 810
View attachment 811
W
Wing Nut
Guest
pardon for sidelining this thread but the commercial for that Cirrus jet really caught my eye. Anybody know anything about it?
K
Ken Stallings
Guest
I agree that the Piper aircraft is aesthetically superior to the Cessna LSA.
However, I am concerned with the prices of these two LSA's and also by the reduction in domestic construction. When it was originally announced in concept, the Cessna 162 was to be domestically constructed and priced in the $50,000 to $60,000 range. That is why peoples' excitement was so high, and why so much disappointment was aired throughout the industry with the final result.
Instead, the Cessna 162 is priced at $140,000 and made in the PRC.
Piper is doing much better on the price with an expected cost of about $100,000. However, this still puts the aircraft slightly outside the cost structure most middle income people are willing to plunk down. I fully realize there is a vast difference in required training (and therefore training costs and time) involved, but to put this into comparison, a new Piper LSA costs only $10,000 to $30,000 less than a 1970's to 1980's vintage used high performance twin engine aircraft, and about $50,000 more than a 1980's and even early 1990's vintage Cessna 172SP.
Airplanes well cared for last a very long time and the prices I quoted are for high quality (well maintained) used aircraft. That $50,000 to $60,000 cost structure would have offered a real revolution in personal aircraft ownership. It would have put a 15 to 20-year loan in the range of an average new car payment. Combined with the new aircraft depreciation option, it would have leveraged an undertapped market. The resulting expansion of the GA market would have applied cost pressures to lower prices of avionics and likely have increased the pool of maintenance and avionics shops.
I'm certainly not privvied to the spreadsheets of Cessna and Piper, but I must conclude that there is too much excess cost built into these two LSA's. When I think of the technologies in these two designs I cannot come to any other conclusion but that the two designs are still over priced for their intended markets. I'm not sure what must be done, but on a purely objective consideration, I refuse to believe it is impossible for an establish US-based aircraft company to build a $50,000 to $60,000 LSA and construct it within the nation to keep our aviation industry healthy and vibrant.
Further, I am more convinced that if that barrier were broken, that it would realize advantages elsewhere that are truly underappreciated by nearly the entire aviation industry.
Cheers,
Ken
However, I am concerned with the prices of these two LSA's and also by the reduction in domestic construction. When it was originally announced in concept, the Cessna 162 was to be domestically constructed and priced in the $50,000 to $60,000 range. That is why peoples' excitement was so high, and why so much disappointment was aired throughout the industry with the final result.
Instead, the Cessna 162 is priced at $140,000 and made in the PRC.
Piper is doing much better on the price with an expected cost of about $100,000. However, this still puts the aircraft slightly outside the cost structure most middle income people are willing to plunk down. I fully realize there is a vast difference in required training (and therefore training costs and time) involved, but to put this into comparison, a new Piper LSA costs only $10,000 to $30,000 less than a 1970's to 1980's vintage used high performance twin engine aircraft, and about $50,000 more than a 1980's and even early 1990's vintage Cessna 172SP.
Airplanes well cared for last a very long time and the prices I quoted are for high quality (well maintained) used aircraft. That $50,000 to $60,000 cost structure would have offered a real revolution in personal aircraft ownership. It would have put a 15 to 20-year loan in the range of an average new car payment. Combined with the new aircraft depreciation option, it would have leveraged an undertapped market. The resulting expansion of the GA market would have applied cost pressures to lower prices of avionics and likely have increased the pool of maintenance and avionics shops.
I'm certainly not privvied to the spreadsheets of Cessna and Piper, but I must conclude that there is too much excess cost built into these two LSA's. When I think of the technologies in these two designs I cannot come to any other conclusion but that the two designs are still over priced for their intended markets. I'm not sure what must be done, but on a purely objective consideration, I refuse to believe it is impossible for an establish US-based aircraft company to build a $50,000 to $60,000 LSA and construct it within the nation to keep our aviation industry healthy and vibrant.
Further, I am more convinced that if that barrier were broken, that it would realize advantages elsewhere that are truly underappreciated by nearly the entire aviation industry.
Cheers,
Ken
K
Ken Stallings
Guest
Wow!
Based on the conversion rate I found online, that's a cool $140,000!
That's substantially more that what Piper's charging for essentially the same aircraft!
And I thought $100,000 was bad! :isadizzy:
If I recall correctly, the original price of a 1977 C-172N was $22,300. Inflation and cost of living have increased about three fold since then. So that means talking apples to apples, that Skyhawk in 1977 should be priced around $67,000 today. This for a 160hp, four-place aircraft.
So, this is why I believe if the concerted effort were made that an LSA should, and can, be sold for $50,000 to $60,000.
Looked at another way, in 1977 an average annual family income was right at the sale price of a Skyhawk. Today, it should be only $45,000. So, that's another measure which shows how things have gotten so out of kilter.
Anyway, I'm jousting windmills, standing upon a soapbox, spitting into the wind, tugging on Superman's cape ... all that sort of stuff. :mixedsmi:
Ken
Based on the conversion rate I found online, that's a cool $140,000!
That's substantially more that what Piper's charging for essentially the same aircraft!
And I thought $100,000 was bad! :isadizzy:
If I recall correctly, the original price of a 1977 C-172N was $22,300. Inflation and cost of living have increased about three fold since then. So that means talking apples to apples, that Skyhawk in 1977 should be priced around $67,000 today. This for a 160hp, four-place aircraft.
So, this is why I believe if the concerted effort were made that an LSA should, and can, be sold for $50,000 to $60,000.
Looked at another way, in 1977 an average annual family income was right at the sale price of a Skyhawk. Today, it should be only $45,000. So, that's another measure which shows how things have gotten so out of kilter.
Anyway, I'm jousting windmills, standing upon a soapbox, spitting into the wind, tugging on Superman's cape ... all that sort of stuff. :mixedsmi:
Ken
I had sit in one at a recent local airshow...not bad...now if only had a spare $NZ200,000 ...
They are a nice looking little plane. No doubt. They have some cool little storage boxes in the wings.
Ken,
I know what you mean on costs... Who will be able to afford that. But at least we have some new planes coming out.
Dad, years ago, bought a 172 and then a 152 new, ordered them from the factory. Back then, they were about 20K. The 152 was one awesome little plane new. Too bad it was just a two seater. I was a little young to remember our 172. The new 182 is just awesome. At 120 knots, you push that throttle in and she presses you back in the seat until you max out at about 140 to 150 knots. The old 172's sure cant do that, lol...
Bill
Sundog
SOH-CM-2025
If you're looking for affordability, think Sonex. Depending on what you put into it, you could build one for as little as $20K. Although, with everything I would want, it would be $30K. Of course, the version I want wouldn't qualify as an LSA because it would be too fast.
Of course, there is also the Tailwind Lionheart modeled, which is one of my favorites. As well as the RV series. But in terms of performance for cost, the Sonex is hard to beat.
Of course, there is also the Tailwind Lionheart modeled, which is one of my favorites. As well as the RV series. But in terms of performance for cost, the Sonex is hard to beat.