Half Fast
Touchdown! Greaser!
Supposedly they're designed for a higher weight, so that if MOSAIC goes through it's just a paperwork thing to give them a decent useful load. Or so I was told by the Vashon rep at SNF a couple of years ago.
Why has Vashon sold so few Rangers, and will MOSAIC turn that around?
- Thread starter MountainDude
- Start date
Supposedly they're designed for a higher weight, so that if MOSAIC goes through it's just a paperwork thing to give them a decent useful load. Or so I was told by the Vashon rep at SNF a couple of years ago.
Uh, Cirrus targets almost exactly that demographic, just a broader age range. We have Cirrus flight school that puts together 4-6 person partnerships, puts their order on the books, then runs all four to six thru PPL and Instrument in SR20s. By the time all is said and done, if there’s a wait for a delivery, it’s not that long.
Half Fast
Touchdown! Greaser!
Good point; I shouldn’t have said “nobody.”
And Cirri are selling better than anything else, validating my view that there’s benefit to pursuing old buzzards.
Baked Potato
Line Up and Wait
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2022
- Messages
- 925
- Display Name
Display name:
Baked Potato
I was wondering about that! I'm curious as to how many other airframes have a higher practical useful load and are just artificially set to meet 1320 max gross per the regs. Heck, even an extra 30 lbs or so would go pretty far in my case.
Half Fast
Touchdown! Greaser!
There are others. The Jabiru LSA flies as a 4-seater overseas.
Here's the video, the bearded guy in the background is John Torode of Dynon/Vashon. Now, the video is a few years old so who knows if the project fizzled out.
FancyG
Pre-takeoff checklist
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2020
- Messages
- 383
- Display Name
Display name:
FancyG
That's a long way to go to get a Rotax 912.
FancyG
Pre-takeoff checklist
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2020
- Messages
- 383
- Display Name
Display name:
FancyG
That's awesome. And probably works out great as 1/4 or 1/6 of a plane is about the right amount to own.
Those of us in the sticks can barely find a clapped 172 or instructor to get our licenses. And the experience is so terrible you basically have to own your own after ppl to schedule further training.
Flying club? Slim chance, and if there is one its run by a guy that uses the club to fly for free.
StraightnLevel
Line Up and Wait
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2023
- Messages
- 514
- Display Name
Display name:
StraightnLevel
Right - I spoke with the local Cirrus dealer yesterday, and that’s almost exactly what he was pitching (a lease-back deal, but the principle is the same).
Cirrus is #1 in single-engine props and small jets because they are selling to people who buy new planes. Until and unless the over-stock of old planes from the 60s and 70s finally start to be consumed, there’s really not much market for a $100-250K new single. It’s just too easy to grab an older Mooney, Bonanza or Saratoga at those price points.
Put another way, if you look at the hourly depreciation on a new $1M SR22, assuming it’s got a usable life of 20,000 hours it’s $50/hour. $1M sounds like a lot, but it’s really not terrible compared to paying $250K for a plane with 14K TT.
Half Fast
Touchdown! Greaser!
Furthermore, new singles that can be offered in that price range are LSAs with nowhere near the capability of those older planes.
How about compared to paying $24k for a plane with about 3500TT?
StraightnLevel
Line Up and Wait
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2023
- Messages
- 514
- Display Name
Display name:
StraightnLevel
Find me one that has a 1,000NM range and 180 kt cruise, and it will be comparable. Yes, you might be able to buy a 150 for that, but that's not a reasonable comparison to a new SR22 or M-350.
Newer certified planes have life limits, e.g. I believe cirrus is 12k hours.
StraightnLevel
Line Up and Wait
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2023
- Messages
- 514
- Display Name
Display name:
StraightnLevel
Today, yes. What will it become over time as more experience is gained with them? If I understand correctly, the SR22T has already been increased from the initial 4,500 hours to the same 12,000 as the SR22.
wanttaja
En-Route
Got curious about the typical lifetimes of GA aircraft. Took my 1998-2021 Cessna 172 accident database and determined the percentage of accidents for a given total time.
Same plot over a shorter total-time range:
There are about 2500 172 accidents that reported aircraft total time. Twelve of them exceeded 20,000 hours, about 300 exceeded 10,000 hours. Median was 4,758 hours, average was 5,674. The least was 15 hours.
Suspect a 12,000-hour life limit is not going to be much of an effect. 175 accidents over the ~23-year period, just 7% of the total.
As ever, this is dependent upon accurate reporting in the NTSB record. The highest total time recorded was 89,118 hours, over a lifetime of 33 years (model was 1977, accident was in 2010). That's about 2,700 hours a year; the plane would have had have averaged over seven hours a day. Interesting case ... ERA11LA071. Two others were listed as having about 50,000 hours.
Ron Wanttaja
Same plot over a shorter total-time range:
There are about 2500 172 accidents that reported aircraft total time. Twelve of them exceeded 20,000 hours, about 300 exceeded 10,000 hours. Median was 4,758 hours, average was 5,674. The least was 15 hours.
Suspect a 12,000-hour life limit is not going to be much of an effect. 175 accidents over the ~23-year period, just 7% of the total.
As ever, this is dependent upon accurate reporting in the NTSB record. The highest total time recorded was 89,118 hours, over a lifetime of 33 years (model was 1977, accident was in 2010). That's about 2,700 hours a year; the plane would have had have averaged over seven hours a day. Interesting case ... ERA11LA071. Two others were listed as having about 50,000 hours.
Ron Wanttaja
hindsight2020
Final Approach
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2010
- Messages
- 6,726
- Display Name
Display name:
hindsight2020
yabut that cuts both ways. They could also be reduced. It has happened in the past (ADs et al).
12k is fairly boilerplate part 23 number. As always, the market will self-limit, timed-out Cirri will have zero market value. No different than anything else really, metal or composite. Caveat emptor as always.
Aircraft certified under Part 23 were required to address structural fatigue limits by either a hard life-limit or in-depth repetitive inspections. It fell to the OEM which path to follow. For example, Cirrus went with a hard life-limit but Diamond went with a major structural inspection every X-number hours or X-calendar time. With the rewrite of Part 23 a few years ago, the specific regulation requiring the structural limitations was dropped and the requirement was added to one of the dozen ACs now used to certify aircraft under Part 23.
Half Fast
Touchdown! Greaser!
I was willing to settle for 740nm max range and 123kt max cruise. Not a 150; a Beech B23. Four seats, large luggage compartment, 60gal fuel capacity, slightly under 1000lb useful load. I think that’s a lotta bang for the buck.
But my real point was that a new plane with the same capabilities does not trade well against used options, at least in some cases. Show me something new that comes close for less than 10x the price.
Salty
Touchdown! Greaser!
10x might be a little high. 5x probably works though.
Half Fast
Touchdown! Greaser!
4-seat EAB? Yeah maybe. A Sling Tsi kit would come close. New certificated 4-seater for <$120k? Enlighten me.
Salty
Touchdown! Greaser!
Apparently I have no idea what you are saying. What’s 10x what? You’re not getting a used 4 seater for 12k.
Half Fast
Touchdown! Greaser!
No, I got a used 4-seater for $24k. I'm saying you can't touch that in a new plane for way more than 10x the price, more like 20x.
Salty
Touchdown! Greaser!
I was reading you backward. Agreed.
Half Fast
Touchdown! Greaser!
But, the Sling is pretty amazing at its price. Done as a quick-build it looks like a bargain. https://slingaircraft.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/Sling-TSi-Brochure-2022-1.pdf Or the Sling 4, if you don't need quite as much speed. https://slingaircraft.nz/aircraft/sling-4/
I looked hard at the Sling 4vs RV-10 and eventually ruled it out. At the end of the day, it’s a 160-hp 2+2.
Todd82
Line Up and Wait
The Ranger with the Continental's weight and therefore LSA limited payload is basically just another Skycatcher, and at least the Skycatcher had the Cessna name behind it until they disavowed themselves of it. The Skycatcher never sold well, so it makes sense the Vashon does even worse.
I looked at them briefly, I could write a list of planes I'd buy over that for $160k, and unlike most of POA I'm not biased against LSA whatsoever. It's like they took the worst of a 150 and made it into a "new" plane.
I looked at them briefly, I could write a list of planes I'd buy over that for $160k, and unlike most of POA I'm not biased against LSA whatsoever. It's like they took the worst of a 150 and made it into a "new" plane.
SoonerAviator
Final Approach
- Joined
- Jul 21, 2014
- Messages
- 9,354
- Location
- Broken Arrow, OK
- Display Name
Display name:
SoonerAviator
Heck the GoGetAir 750 is the same thing (160HP 2+2) and sells new for $280K. Sling has to be competitive there.
Salty
Touchdown! Greaser!
Where have you seen a bias against LSA on this site? Your post is about the most negative one I’ve seen.
Todd82
Line Up and Wait
There are plenty of anti-Rotax snobs on here. Hell, there are snobs on here anti-anything that isn't a Bonanza*
If I was in the 2 place market I'd happily buy a factory built RV12 or some of the Evektor models for example so I'm definitely not negative about LSA. Alot of LSA's beat the pants off a 60 year old C150.
*And everyone knows a Mooney beats a Bonanza
idahoflier
Pattern Altitude
- Joined
- Jul 21, 2017
- Messages
- 1,611
- Display Name
Display name:
idahoflier
For me, and as others have mentioned, the O-200 burning 100LL resulting in a lower useful load and higher operational costs led me to another aircraft. While I have never flown one, I like the Ranger and seriously considered it. MOSAIC will probably fix the useful load issue but then you're still stuck with an engine that is 2x the cost of a Rotax 912 burning 100LL which will someday be unobtainable.
There is definitely some bias, but it's mostly from a few select people whose opinion about anything else I don't value, either.
Ed Haywood
En-Route
There is some bias against the LSA rules. Some, including me, feel the FAA was too risk averse and wound up hamstringing the LSA market. Hence numerous threads hoping MOSAIC will relax the rules a bit and allow more room for commercially viable new aircraft to emerge.