And so it begins.....

That's a lot of money for a plane with only a 574 pound useful load. I paid less than half that for a used Maule with 1,017 pounds of useful load and a LOT more baggage space. I also have a faster climb rate, higher top speed, more range (9 hours at 108 knots economy cruise) and a higher service ceiling. I also get off the ground and land in less pace. My plane is faster, lands just as slow, and hauls more camping gear to the backcountry strips I enjoy. The Ranger might be just right for some folks, but it certainly doesn't fit my mission, or my budget.
Stuart.Island.jpeg
 
Flyhound said:
That's a lot of money for a plane with only a 574 pound useful load. I paid less than half that for a used Maule with 1,017 pounds of useful load and a LOT more baggage space. I also have a faster climb rate, higher top speed, more range (9 hours at 108 knots economy cruise) and a higher service ceiling. I also get off the ground and land in less pace. My plane is faster, lands just as slow, and hauls more camping gear to the backcountry strips I enjoy. The Ranger might be just right for some folks, but it certainly doesn't fit my mission, or my budget.
View attachment 153664
Click to expand...

Nothing personal, but that has been the same mentality that plagued GA, why buy a new plane when I can get a 50 year old airplane cheaper. Its not a fair comparison. You have to compare new to new, its an entire different market. $241k for a brand new certified airplane with better than LSA capability is amazing. Remember folks were buying up LSAs at $100-140k with very limited capability. And this is just the beginning.

And these new airplanes will age and depreciate, helping replenish the diminishing marketplace of cheap 50 year old airplanes.
 
so, a $240K** 2026 date of manufacture C-150, and not even BRS. yipee....

(**pricing start, it's a 300K airplane when optioned to look like something less spartan than some EAB "yahoo" in his garage built it. So we're already gaslighting on the pricing front)

I mean if Textron wanted to, they could crank 152s at the same clip/price point. Of course they don't want to, and there's a reason for that.

I used to own a C-150, so I'm not even being dismissive of the limited capability, even though I outgrew the airplane the day I bought it, the Warrior became a much more useful to me as a solo commuter. A brake-enclosed-wheel pant C150 with 48 gallons and an O-320 would have been a monster, make it an Aerobat and you can shut up and take.my.money.

Point being, 120K and you have my attention. But you can't touch that price point, cuz stupid-arse avionics and powerplants have this hobby hung-start. Even if we stipulate these lawnmowers have to be hand assembled like some Lego set, it's the powerplants what's inverting the economic proposition. We need pricing relief on the FWF front. Rotax went OPEC on us, price colluding with the direct drive dinosaurs. They're not a solution.
 
hindsight2020 said:
I mean if Textron wanted to, they could crank 152s at the same clip/price point. Of course they don't want to, and there's a reason for that.
Click to expand...
Because they'd rather sell you their Voyager instead?
www.aopa.org

Textron announces Pipistrel Voyager

Textron on July 20 announced the Pipistrel Voyager two-seat training aircraft at EAA AirVenture Oshkosh in Wisconsin.
www.aopa.org
 
unsafervguy said:
I’m sure there are a few 180/185 pilots that will disagree with you
Click to expand...

Undoubtedly, and they're great planes! I very nearly bought a 170 but just couldn't get past the yoke/tailwheel combination. Tandem seating, with right hand on stick and left hand on throttle is the only thing that feels right in my head for a taildragger. I guess I could flex to side-by-side seating if pushed. Haha!
 
AvNavCom said:
Undoubtedly, and they're great planes! I very nearly bought a 170 but just couldn't get past the yoke/tailwheel combination. Tandem seating, with right hand on stick and left hand on throttle is the only thing that feels right in my head for a taildragger. I guess I could flex to side-by-side seating if pushed. Haha!
Click to expand...
none of it counts anyway unless there is a big round motor up front!
 
Half Fast said:
Pro tip - I've found that @hindsight2020 ’s posts are more intelligible if I rap them.
Click to expand...
Pilots got bankroll, peasants stay parked,
I earned my wings -- now I’m mad in the dark.
Government-issued chip on my shoulder,
Droppin’ forum salt like a bitter flight soldier.
 
schmookeeg said:
Pilots got bankroll, peasants stay parked,
I earned my wings -- now I’m mad in the dark.
Government-issued chip on my shoulder,
Droppin’ forum salt like a bitter flight soldier.
Click to expand...

...I'm savin' on rent, while you fight my shadow,
2-circle around ya, while you find the-sau-rus.
 
Spittin' signal through the static,
My boy is polysyllabic.
He's staring to the rear,
and his vision's crystal clear.
Surrounded by those blue suits,
He rocks a mental zoot suit.
Diss those online gatekeepers,
who makin' the cost way steeper.
Got razor obfuscation,
for the aviation nation.
Lead voice in the chorus,
to mock your lycosaurus.
 
Hindsight takes off plane
Clouds part ways to let him through
Lawn mower quits cold!
 
Interesting, looking forward to more new offerings
 
Flyxaos said:
John Torrode says one of his mistakes was not making it Rotax powered. He is working on a solution though. He seems like a good guy.
Click to expand...
Why would a Rotax be better than a simple legacy engine?
 
Flyxaos said:
John Torrode says one of his mistakes was not making it Rotax powered. He is working on a solution though. He seems like a good guy.
Click to expand...
Catfish47 said:
Why would a Rotax be better than a simple legacy engine?
Click to expand...
Rumor has it that there's some difficulty in the Continental relationship. Apparently the "working on a solution" is the Admiralty engine project mentioned here:
avbrief.com

Oshkosh Is the Place To See New Products - AvBrief.com

A roundup of innovative products featured in the small tents at Oshkosh.
avbrief.com avbrief.com
 
asicer said:
Rumor has it that there's some difficulty in the Continental relationship. Apparently the "working on a solution" is the Admiralty engine project mentioned here:
avbrief.com

Oshkosh Is the Place To See New Products - AvBrief.com

A roundup of innovative products featured in the small tents at Oshkosh.
avbrief.com avbrief.com
Click to expand...
Thanks for that article link. A small Lyc with EFI, EI, knock sensing, ... very cool! Hope they are successful.
 
unsafervguy said:
none of it counts anyway unless there is a big round motor up front!
Click to expand...
My Cessna 195 had a wheel. No big deal.
DeHavilland Beaver and Otter do too!
Heck, the P-38 Lightning had a wheel! Why....I have no idea.
 
For everyone complaining about the price, as I get more and more into boats, I have begun to understand that COST IS NOT THE ISSUE when it comes to the slow death of GA.
 
AA5Bman said:
For everyone complaining about the price, as I get more and more into boats, I have begun to understand that COST IS NOT THE ISSUE when it comes to the slow death of GA.
Click to expand...
Cost is definitely the main issue for many people.
 
AA5Bman said:
For everyone complaining about the price, as I get more and more into boats, I have begun to understand that COST IS NOT THE ISSUE when it comes to the slow death of GA.
Click to expand...
Lack of interest and declining utility for piston GA are ahead of cost. Expect slow death will accelerate but local flying, backwoods flying, etc. will survive and even grow.
 
Lack of interest is a big factor I believe.
When I was a kid, we used to fly model airplanes in our neighborhood. We had hobby shops.
We would go to the local small airports and watch the planes and chat with the owners. There was lots of activity on a weekend.
I started flying lessons at 17.

All of that has changed. Try to fly a model in a city and you'll likely be told that's not allowed. Ride your bike to an airport and you'll hit a fence long before you get to any planes.
There is little encouragement for the next generations to embrace aviation.
 
737steve said:
Lack of interest is a big factor I believe.
When I was a kid, we used to fly model airplanes in our neighborhood. We had hobby shops.
We would go to the local small airports and watch the planes and chat with the owners. There was lots of activity on a weekend.
I started flying lessons at 17.

All of that has changed. Try to fly a model in a city and you'll likely be told that's not allowed. Ride your bike to an airport and you'll hit a fence long before you get to any planes.
There is little encouragement for the next generations to embrace aviation.
Click to expand...

The lack of interest goes much further. Why go to an airport, rent a plane and have to put in the work to achieve a license when all one needs to do is get on the computer and play a flight simulation game? All done in the comfort of home. No studying, no test, no scary turbulence, no risk, etc.

Times change, interest change. Aviation is no different.
 
Doc Holliday said:
Times change, interest change. Aviation is no different.
Click to expand...
Aviation is staying around. GA by regular people is rapidly going away, particularly as a means of transportation. Basically only the Cirrus serves as a going places machine being built today and it's 0.5 to 1.4M; the 210s and Bonanzas are mostly getting long in the tooth, though the latter has a cadre of shops and support that have kept it going a bit longer.

This was done to ourselves by ourselves as far too many GA pilots balled up machines over the past 60 years for anyone sane to trust them to take them somewhere. Can't land, can't navigate, can't communicate, can't fly VFR or IFR worth a damn. And another family perishes. And yet after every tragedy there's some relator, often amazingly a family member speaking in direct contravention of recent facts, that "he or she was a fantastic pilot."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top