New Cessna LSA roomier than 152

ApacheBob

ApacheBob

Cleared for Takeoff
Joined
Jul 7, 2006
Messages
1,088
Location
Chicago
Display Name
Display name:
ApacheBob
I am glad to see that the LSA has a 48" cockpit. The Cessna 152 was just too snug for me.:blueplane:
ApacheBob
 
The Cessna LSA is 48" wide and looked to have good leg room. I saw it when I was at Osh this year.
 
ApacheBob said:
It was posted on Aero-News.net (I hope it is legal to give you the link).:

http://www.aero-news.net/index.cfm?ContentBlockID=6ed16770-6e8b-4aac-9d0b-41f2db907947&

:blueplane:
ApacheBob
Click to expand...

Loved the line:

"Gross weight of 1,320 feet "

We're calculating weight now in quarter miles??? :confused:

:no: :no: :no:

(edit) Hmmm .... I thought that LSA were supposed to be "affordable" so that the general public would be enticed to learn to fly, and purchase them ! The inference, was that they'd begin at somewhere below 100K.
They call that affordable?? Why buy that when for "a few dollars" more you can get
a new 4 px 172... Same hangar space needed...
 
Last edited:
Chache said:
(edit) Hmmm .... I thought that LSA were supposed to be "affordable" so that the general public would be enticed to learn to fly, and purchase them ! The inference, was that they'd begin at somewhere below 100K.
They call that affordable?? Why buy that when for "a few dollars" more you can get
a new 4 px 172... Same hangar space needed...
Click to expand...

That is why Cessna has not yet committed to actually making the LSA. They won't do it if they can't get the price below $100K.

Yeah, $100K is a lot, but a 172 is not "a few dollars" more, it's almost twice as much. This would be a significant drop in the price of entry, it would legitimize the sport pilot/LSA category, and would give flight schools a much better "cheap" option than a ratty old 152. Plus, the performance and styling is way better than a 152. :yes:

Is it cheap enough to have one parked at every house in your neighborhood? No. :no: But ask yourself... Is that what you really want? I think the Cessna LSA would be a significant step for the industry (and I mean the entire industry, not just the LSA segment).
 
flyingcheesehead said:
That is why Cessna has not yet committed to actually making the LSA. They won't do it if they can't get the price below $100K.

Yeah, $100K is a lot, but a 172 is not "a few dollars" more, it's almost twice as much. This would be a significant drop in the price of entry, it would legitimize the sport pilot/LSA category, and would give flight schools a much better "cheap" option than a ratty old 152. Plus, the performance and styling is way better than a 152. :yes:

Is it cheap enough to have one parked at every house in your neighborhood? No. :no: But ask yourself... Is that what you really want? I think the Cessna LSA would be a significant step for the industry (and I mean the entire industry, not just the LSA segment).
Click to expand...
Well sais Kent, I saw it at Oshkosh and I belive Cessna will build it and it will sell very well.

Regards Mike
 
What do I know, but....

I think the real meat of the market for LSAs won't be for ownership but for training fleets. Why buy, for example, a Diamond Eclipse for, say, $180k, when you can have a Cessna LSA for maybe $100k-ish? And in that case, why even think of buying a Warrior? LSAs will have 2 seats, low fuel burn, be easy to fly and maintain, and can even be certified for IFR, which the Diamond never will (unless Diamond spends $$$ getting it lightning certified). Note, a 2 seater is less attractive on the rental line outside of training, so there should still be a market for 4 seat rentals.

I think the new LSAs make sense as trainers. As single-owner new buys, it's a little harder for me to see (although clearly, they are selling). As with any new market there will be a shakeout.

We'll see what happens.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top