Icon Spirals In

That sucks! It looked like a fun little plane
 
That article lost me at "Company’s mission of revolutionizing personal aviation...".
A super expensive plane with very poor capability will not revolutionize anything.
 
One has to wonder, though.
They (pretty much) all tried and failed to introduce flashy and expensive aircraft to market. It's almost like they don't want to learn from each other's mistakes.
The concept of economies of scale seems to be foreign to most of them. They all want to be makers of hand-built Rolls-Royces.
There's almost no attempt to introduce a new Model T Ford of aviation to market.
 
AV8R_87 said:
They all want to be makers of hand-built Rolls-Royces.
There's almost no attempt to introduce a new Model T Ford of aviation to market.
Click to expand...
In fairness to them, stupid rules and fiefdoms always get in the way. When it's not fac-built GAMA syndicate of bad faith actors low-key sabotaging the market until it's nothing but kerosene burners, it's the self-importants over on homebrew land with that 51% purity testing potato. So these startups have nobody else to cater to but the odious bunch that considers price exclusion the feature, not the bug.

From where i see it, assembly assist it's probably the only way to 'split the baby' in a hobby space that will never attain the economies of scale necessary to attain pricing parity with what these things have always been functionally: de facto automotive/motorsport subspeciation.
 
Last edited:
AV8R_87 said:
There's almost no attempt to introduce a new Model T Ford of aviation to market.
Click to expand...

There isn’t? See Vashon Ranger thread - it ain’t doing so great either.
 
AV8R_87 said:
The concept of economies of scale seems to be foreign to most of them. They all want to be makers of hand-built Rolls-Royces.
There's almost no attempt to introduce a new Model T Ford of aviation to market.
Click to expand...
Where do you expect the scale to come from?

The highest sales volume GA plane in the US is the Cirrus SR22/22T, and it sold 439 last year. Porsche sold 11,000 911s, and that's generally seen as a mid-volume build-to-order enthusiast's car.

You'd need about 100 times as many people buying planes to get to economies of scale that would really move the needle.
 
Yep...too bad for sure!
I always thought it looked like a fun little thing, but never much tickled my interest.
When I looked at it from the perspective of
"is this something I would love to have? do I want to daydream about owning one?"
The answer is always "almost".
The amphib aspect is really interesting to me and it's hard for me to pin down the "why"
but apart from the price, I think maybe it has to do with capability.... too slow, too 'VFR", so it doesn't seem like a capable traveling machine...

I was thinking about this thing just a few weeks ago when I came across the Flying magaizine's raffle.... choose an Icon or some other little LSA low wing...I've forgotten the type. Anyway, which would I choose? I had to go with the other LSA as much as having a plane and boat combined seems like it could be fun....
 
AA5Bman said:
There isn’t? See Vashon Ranger thread - it ain’t doing so great either.
Click to expand...

I mean, put 160hp and make it acro for 150k, give me the inspect authority (LSRM or LSRI if paper convertible to ELSA), and I'll put my money where my mouth is and put an order in right now. The RV-12iS was optioned over 200K, garbage bang/buck. Otherwise, looks like me and 12 of my filipino friends working under the table after they're done uneffing Van's LCP parts in Oregon, is the only prescription to get from here to there as a non-builder in this blasted hobby. :D


NorthEast Ohio said:
That’s because Vashon put the wrong engine on it. *cough rotax cough*
Click to expand...
I don't disagree rotax is a better engine, but I don't see the O-200-D selection itself being an inflection point. For me the fact it only has 100hp is the inflection point, but I stipulate they were working under the garbage LSA limits in the first place.
 
hindsight2020 said:
...these startups have nobody else to cater to but the odious bunch that considers price exclusion the feature, not the bug.
Click to expand...
Why would you call them "odious"?

Without the high-rollers who buy the new, expensive aircraft to being with, they would not exist for everyone else to buy 20 years later.
 
StraightnLevel said:
Why would you call them "odious"?

Without the high-rollers who buy the new, expensive aircraft to being with, they would not exist for everyone else to buy 20 years later.
Click to expand...
None of these will still fly 20 years after they roll off the line.
 
Pity. It is an excellent flying aircraft. But for what it doesn't, the price is unjustifiable for almost all.
 
hindsight2020 said:
I mean, put 160hp and make it acro for 150k, give me the inspect authority (LSRM or LSRI if paper convertible to ELSA), and I'll put my money where my mouth is and put an order in right now. The RV-12iS was optioned over 200K, garbage bang/buck. Otherwise, looks like me and 12 of my filipino friends working under the table after they're done uneffing Van's LCP parts in Oregon, is the only prescription to get from here to there as a non-builder in this blasted hobby. :D
Click to expand...
Why under the table? As the RV-12 is an ELSA, there is no requirement for it to be amateur built. No "51% rule". Buy the kit and pay someone to assemble it. There has been at least one place (other than the Van's contractor) building RV-12s for sale; I've flown one.
 
DaleB said:
Why under the table? As the RV-12 is an ELSA, there is no requirement for it to be amateur built. No "51% rule". Buy the kit and pay someone to assemble it. There has been at least one place (other than the Van's contractor) building RV-12s for sale; I've flown one.
Click to expand...

Indeed, you're correct on the rv-12; I was making that quip in reference to my hypothetical 160hp acro Ranger.
 
Duplicate thread.

www.pilotsofamerica.com

Icon Spirals In

https://www.avweb.com/aviation-news/icon-files-for-chapter-11-bankruptcy-protection-pledges-transparency/ Gee, who woulda thunk?
www.pilotsofamerica.com www.pilotsofamerica.com

Ron Wanttaja
 
StraightnLevel said:
Where do you expect the scale to come from?

The highest sales volume GA plane in the US is the Cirrus SR22/22T, and it sold 439 last year. Porsche sold 11,000 911s, and that's generally seen as a mid-volume build-to-order enthusiast's car.

You'd need about 100 times as many people buying planes to get to economies of scale that would really move the needle.
Click to expand...
You can build 100 airframes (or kits) a year in a one-by-one fashion, with no optimization, or have a great build plan in place that maximizes the use of your machinery and churns out two a week at half the cost.
I have personally seen the effects of poor planning in an operation dealing with a couple hundred airframes a year and the benefits that could be realized if smart people were allowed to thoroughly optimize the production process.
AA5Bman said:
There isn’t? See Vashon Ranger thread - it ain’t doing so great either.
Click to expand...
That's why I said "almost". I consider Zenith and Sonex to be more successful in the E-AB or E-LSA market.

hindsight2020 said:
The RV-12iS was optioned over 200K, garbage bang/buck.
Click to expand...
That's the big thing. If a manufacturer/kit maker wants to succeed, they need to get the fly-away cost for a basic VFR airframe comfortably under 100k. And if they're a kit maker, optimize their kit for rapid building. Time is a lot more valuable these days, you can't realistically expect a sustainable number of people to invest five years bucking rivets and such. And better/cheaper engine options need to be available.
 
AV8R_87 said:
You can build 100 airframes (or kits) a year in a one-by-one fashion, with no optimization, or have a great build plan in place that maximizes the use of your machinery and churns out two a week at half the cost.
I have personally seen the effects of poor planning in an operation dealing with a couple hundred airframes a year and the benefits that could be realized if smart people were allowed to thoroughly optimize the production process.

That's why I said "almost". I consider Zenith and Sonex to be more successful in the E-AB or E-LSA market.


That's the big thing. If a manufacturer/kit maker wants to succeed, they need to get the fly-away cost for a basic VFR airframe comfortably under 100k. And if they're a kit maker, optimize their kit for rapid building. Time is a lot more valuable these days, you can't realistically expect a sustainable number of people to invest five years bucking rivets and such. And better/cheaper engine options need to be available.
Click to expand...
$100k is unrealistic. Is $200k the new $100k?

Then we circle back into used aircraft and the new entries to market fail.
 
FancyG said:
$100k is unrealistic. Is $200k the new $100k?

Then we circle back into used aircraft and the new entries to market fail.
Click to expand...
In 1960 a Cessna 150 would sell for $7000 (basic model) to 8500 (top of the line). That's $74k/90k in 2024 money.
A 1970 150K Commuter would sell for $11500 ($92k in 2024).

Today, I don't need a hall full of forming presses and dies to manufacture airframe parts. I have a 2'x4' CNC in my basement that I built from off the shelf parts for the cost of a couple cylinder overhauls. Process optimization to minimize expensive labor should be used to drive manufacturing costs down. 3D printers can be used to create molds for complex parts to be made out of fiberglass or carbon fiber. And so on.

I stand by my initial statement, the goal has to be 100k or less for a basic VFR model. More for advanced features and creature comforts. But that would require some compromises and out of the box thinking. The market might not like the looks of the finished product, even if it has a good performance/price ratio. That's where a good trade study and market survey helps, if done properly and with a large enough sample size.
 
Same-subject threads merged.
 
AV8R_87 said:
In 1960 a Cessna 150 would sell for $7000 (basic model) to 8500 (top of the line). That's $74k/90k in 2024 money.
A 1970 150K Commuter would sell for $11500 ($92k in 2024).

Today, I don't need a hall full of forming presses and dies to manufacture airframe parts. I have a 2'x4' CNC in my basement that I built from off the shelf parts for the cost of a couple cylinder overhauls. Process optimization to minimize expensive labor should be used to drive manufacturing costs down. 3D printers can be used to create molds for complex parts to be made out of fiberglass or carbon fiber. And so on.

I stand by my initial statement, the goal has to be 100k or less for a basic VFR model. More for advanced features and creature comforts. But that would require some compromises and out of the box thinking. The market might not like the looks of the finished product, even if it has a good performance/price ratio. That's where a good trade study and market survey helps, if done properly and with a large enough sample size.
Click to expand...
Correct me if I'm wrong, but no general aircraft manufacturers use DFSS anywhere along the way.

They're boutique builders that eventually reach a production volume under which their organization collapses.

I can't reconcile a $100k plane with a $22k 912 Rotax.

That leaves $78k to build and make a profit. To make 20%, you'd have to finish the rest of the plane for $58k, parts and labor.
 
FancyG said:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but no general aircraft manufacturers use DFSS anywhere along the way.

They're boutique builders that eventually reach a production volume under which their organization collapses.
Click to expand...
And that needs to change. Work smarter, not harder. It might sound like a corporate cliché, but there needs to be a lot of thinking outside of the box to make this viable.
FancyG said:
I can't reconcile a $100k plane with a $22k 912 Rotax.

That leaves $78k to build and make a profit. To make 20%, you'd have to finish the rest of the plane for $58k, parts and labor.
Click to expand...
Why does it have to be a $22k Rotax? I think they need some good competition at a lower cost. Something like this (https://aeromomentum.com/am15-117hp-to-147hp/) for half the price. And most engine makers will give you a discount if you're an airframe or kit builder, especially if you have production numbers higher than one a month.
Material costs are pretty much fixed, so labor optimization is the key.
 
FancyG said:
$100k is unrealistic. Is $200k the new $100k?

Then we circle back into used aircraft and the new entries to market fail.
Click to expand...
When the Vashon Ranger came out it was sub 100k. Now it's 160k.

But really, what is the LSA market? What was ICON's market? It's a 400k toy. A jet ski for the price of a yacht. Without a massive MOSAIC change that would close the gap to TC'd planes I don't see the market. And that change won't be happening with GAMA in the way and lobbying. Might get incremental increases but not enough to matter.
 
Racerx said:
A jet ski for the price of a yacht.
Click to expand...

I take it you haven’t priced yachts recently.

The LSA reality is that folks clamored for really basic, cheap LSA’S. I think that was the original vision for Light Sport. But when it’s time to buy, the same folks tend to opt for multiple glass screens and autopilots and virtually every bell and whistle imaginable. Which ain’t cheap.
 
FastEddieB said:
I take it you haven’t priced yachts recently.

The LSA reality is that folks clamored for really basic, cheap LSA’S. I think that was the original vision for Light Sport. But when it’s time to buy, the same folks tend to opt for multiple glass screens and autopilots and virtually every bell and whistle imaginable. Which ain’t cheap.
Click to expand...
I atill haven’t been able to figure what the point is of having all that glass, complexity and redundancy for a VFR-only, slow plane.
 
ateamer said:
I atill haven’t been able to figure what the point is of having all that glass, complexity and redundancy for a VFR-only, slow plane.
Click to expand...
It's an expensive toy. Buyers who opt for a new one will almost always opt for the "latest and greatest", as to some degree expensive toys like planes, sportscars, and boats are mechanical jewelry.

Similarly, you might be surprised at the number of guys racing race-prepped Miatas who have full data collection systems and expensive software packages, and similarly street motorcycles with 3-way adjustable shocks and titanium hardware.

The point of it has nothing to do with whether the functionality is required or even beneficial.
 
Domenick said:
ChiComs might buy them for what they are owed:
www.aopa.org

Icon Aircraft files for bankruptcy, seeks buyer

After delivering more than 200 amphibious light sport A5 aircraft since the summer of 2016, Icon Aircraft petitioned for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection on April 4.
www.aopa.org
Click to expand...
Good Lord! How many airplanes do you have to sell to break even on a 170 million dollar debt?!
 
Racerx said:
Good Lord! How many airplanes do you have to sell to break even on a 170 million dollar debt?!
Click to expand...

A lot - more than almost anyone not named "Cirrus" is selling. From the linked article:

An affidavit filed in support of the petition notes that the company needs to produce and sell eight to 10 aircraft per month to break even.
Click to expand...

They would have to become one of the highest-selling GA manufacturers in North America in order to reach profitability significant enough to cover that debt.

My question is this: What did they do with the $93M in Chinese funds? Is that legitimate development and testing expense and capital, or were they paying themselves "tech exec" comp packages in preparation to take the money and run?
 
ateamer said:
I atill haven’t been able to figure what the point is of having all that glass, complexity and redundancy for a VFR-only, slow plane.
Click to expand...
Back when LSA was still a new thing, it seemed it was mostly the (almost) retired airline pilots who wanted the cockpit of their LSA to resemble the 757 they were flying. I was involved with an LSA maker at the time and a good chunk of them were asking for Dynon 100-series screens in them (bleeding edge tech at the time).
 
FastEddieB said:
I take it you haven’t priced yachts recently.

The LSA reality is that folks clamored for really basic, cheap LSA’S. I think that was the original vision for Light Sport. But when it’s time to buy, the same folks tend to opt for multiple glass screens and autopilots and virtually every bell and whistle imaginable. Which ain’t cheap.
Click to expand...
You can buy a SeaRay Sundancer 320 for under $380K brand new. Yacht certified. Lots of boats 26' and above are "yacht certified".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top