When will we start seeing MOSAIC (Sport Aircraft 2.0) planes?
- Thread starter pilotmichael
- Start date
The builder assist, quick build TSIs I’ve seen run ~$300K and most of those were fully optioned with an IFR setup and chute. Paint seems to be the biggest common variable.
Wagondriver
Line Up and Wait
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2020
- Messages
- 809
- Display Name
- 375Taylor
I will admit I do not know much about MOASIC. But, I fail to see how it will result in new airplanes coming to market that are cheaper. It costs what it costs to build and airplane, Rotax 916 is about $50k or more, an O-360 is probably $40k, how does a manufacturer build an airplane around that and keep the cost under $250k?
Just look at the new RV15, projected kit cost I've read is about $170k, plus paint, avionics, and labor.
Seems to me that the bigger market is that now the sport pilots can fly legacy airplanes with sport license. I just ferried a TriPacer from Montana to Michigan for a guy doing just that. So many people out there look down their noses at 50 to 70 year old airplanes, but those are the only ones that people can afford. And, guess what, they are great airplanes to fly.
Why / how would some manufacturer produce a new airplane for the new rules and it be any cheaper than what has been produced so far in the LSA market? Wouldn't a bigger airplane need a bigger engine, bigger airframe? Bigger to me means more expensive.
Just look at the new RV15, projected kit cost I've read is about $170k, plus paint, avionics, and labor.
Seems to me that the bigger market is that now the sport pilots can fly legacy airplanes with sport license. I just ferried a TriPacer from Montana to Michigan for a guy doing just that. So many people out there look down their noses at 50 to 70 year old airplanes, but those are the only ones that people can afford. And, guess what, they are great airplanes to fly.
Why / how would some manufacturer produce a new airplane for the new rules and it be any cheaper than what has been produced so far in the LSA market? Wouldn't a bigger airplane need a bigger engine, bigger airframe? Bigger to me means more expensive.
I always thought this subject was interesting. Unviable due to up front costs, or unviable because no or limited ROI on those costs? As to legacy Part 23 costs this was known prior to the launch of LSA in 2004 and partly was the reason behind the FAA LSA move. So afterwards, they went forward with a complete rewrite of Part 23 where over 1000 prescriptive regulations were deleted and replaced by consensus standards listed in various Advisory Circulars to address those costs.
However, even before the rewrite, with some after, a number of OEMs still initiated new Part 23 aircraft designs. For example, I can think of half of dozen new aircraft in this period that went through the Part 23 process to include one about to emerge from it. So, if it was so cost prohibitive, why did these OEMs spend that Part 23 money on them? And were talking about Cessna, Beech, Tecnam, etc. Granted it was a mix of commercial, mix-use, and private aircraft markets, but they clean-sheeted new designs nonetheless.
Last edited:
Ed Haywood
Final Approach
Both. Net = Revenue - Cost. The lower the up front cost, the less the expected ROI necessary to justify the risk.
The FAR left a gap between LSA and part 23 which overlapped the mainstay of GA ... 4 seat airplanes with enough performance to justify flying vs driving and cost less than a house.
Hopefully the new rules lower the perceived financial risk of bringing new designs to market. But that is not going to happen overnight. Give it 20 years and we'll see. I'm optimistic.
Do you see MOSAIC having an impact on eVTOL? I was under the impression that was part of the impetus.
Last edited:
hindsight2020
Final Approach
what has posterity done for me lately?
Except rules do not define risk. Market does. For example, one of the new Part 23 aircraft I mentioned above took the risk on a new single turbine (and engine) whose sole market only covers about a 2000 aircraft fleet that took 30 years to build. What did the OEM see in that small defined market that they didn't see in the Part 91 private, rec market with a fleet numbering in the tens of thousands?
No. But I see eVTOLs having an impact on MOSAIC.
Not that I’ve seen or read. eVTOLs were barely a NASA prototype at that time. But if you dig deep into the origins of the Certification Process Study/Aviation Rulemaking Committee for the Part 23 rewrite you find discussions on a Primary Non-Commercial aircraft category. If anything, IMO, it was the P-NC discussion that was the impetus to MOSAIC.
pfarber
Pattern Altitude
- Joined
- Jun 20, 2021
- Messages
- 1,653
- Display Name
- pfarber
OK, but will that drop the price from $400k to $100k?
Even a bare bones RV is still a $150k effort (with new engine an low end glass) and that's with NO labor costs.
SP is to limiting. My bad analogy is do you want to ride a motorcycle or drive a car? Sure it may solve a medical issue or two, but you're not getting the 'take the family to X,Y,Z' bang for the buck.
GA doesn't need MOSAIC or LSA. It needs engine that don't cost $40k to overhaul or $60k+ new. Price out a new IO-520.
Another way of looking at is mosaic if your a mfg and can make a plane that seats 4 same useful load same speed add on all the extras cirrus sr22 has for cost of $650-700k that’s 1/2 the cost of new cirrus with a more modern reliable motor like new rotax 916s you could steal 1/2 of there market
How many cirrus sr were sold last year?
How many cirrus sr were sold last year?
Clip4
Touchdown! Greaser!
I am kinda of interested, what do you believe the price difference is between a Rotax 916 and a comparable Lycoming / Continental 160 HP engine?
It’s less than 5% of the cost of a new plane.
pilotmichael
Pre-Flight
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2013
- Messages
- 45
- Display Name
- PilotMichael
It needs both. And one might help the other. One down...
- Joined
- Jan 28, 2010
- Messages
- 1,681
- Location
- Central Florida
- Display Name
- jbarrass
- Home Airfield
- 06FD
Retail, a Factory new Rotax 916 IS is $51,398 and a factory new Continental O-300 (145 HP standard; ~160 HP with STC) is ~$100K and is very hard to get, (You'd most likely need to get a core somewhere and a factory overhaul as a practical matter. Not sure that would be optimum for a new plane.)
Half Fast
Touchdown! Greaser!
- Joined
- May 7, 2016
- Messages
- 21,271
- Location
- Central Florida
- Display Name
- Half Fast
- Home Airfield
- KGIF
No, but with MOSAIC, you're getting "load the luggage into the 172 and take the spouse to XYZ for a week" bang for the buck, and for many of us that ain't too bad.
Cirrus delivers about 550-600 SR-series annually. Cessna and Piper battle over the 141 fleet market with ~150 airframes each.
This ain’t a market that scales well; each new MOSAIC airframe will simply cannibalize the legacy and E-AB portion. Cirrus is focused delivering -22s as a stepping stone to their jet and jets to 135 operators, not unlike B/C/P did half a century ago.
Ed Haywood
Final Approach
IMO the MOSAIC target market is those of us nursing 60 year old Skyhawks and Cherokees along because a new one is half a million bucks. And also those of us willing to dedicate several years of our life to making our own plane to save $$. And those of us who bought 2 seat sport planes because that's all the law allowed.
Half Fast
Touchdown! Greaser!
- Joined
- May 7, 2016
- Messages
- 21,271
- Location
- Central Florida
- Display Name
- Half Fast
- Home Airfield
- KGIF
All true, but for me to be a buyer in the MOSAIC market the plane would have to be only slightly more than I can get by selling my 1969 wagon, and if new planes were only slightly more than my plane's value, there'd be no market for my plane.
Any benefit I receive from MOSAIC will be either (1) letting me continue flying a vintage plane should I be unable to renew my Basic Med, or (2) providing more capable used planes within my financial reach 10 or 15 years from now.
I don't expect MOSAIC to put me into a new airplane.
Dana
Final Approach
Cirrus is doing ok because they're producing a modern design, unlike Cessna, Piper, and Beech. C/P/B survive because the development costs are long amortized. If modern MOSAIC planes can be priced even a little less than the legacy designs, they'll own that business. Depending on how much less, they may even eat into the used market. And the more new planes can be sold, the less they'll cost.
As optimistic as I want to be, have you priced a Scalewings SW51? A JMB VL3 is in that same range. So’s a Carbon Cub or derivative.
I’ve spent the last year running the numbers on sole ownership of everything from an RV-6 to a C-310. For my mission for the next decade, it’s putting getting airborne in south central Texas and and making whatever CONUS post our son & his family is at in less time than doing a minimum two leg + drive trip for a 3-/4-day weekend.
Ironically, a time capsule C-310 pencils out best in that regard; none of the TSIs or equivalents come close because of range to Tacoma or Watertown.
I’m stuck with my current equity club, NTTAWT and we’re actively searching for a 182 since a 201 is uninsurable for us. I’ve looked at a few Bo/201/SR-22 partnerships that want six figures between five dudes on a 10-week a year schedule that just doesn’t make sense.
Now, 10-20yrs down the line things could and likely will be different, especially WRT TEL. That’s the 800-lb gorilla the legacy owners are avoiding.
Give me a twin 916is bird and I’ll buy it tomorrow, kit or not.
Ed Haywood
Final Approach
MOSAIC might do that. Not tomorrow, but someday.
Well looks like these guys are going to give it try! Like to see if they will ever make it to market
Click here
Click here
Last edited:
Kiddo's Driver
Pattern Altitude
$82,000 when I checked last month, plus a core. Yes, there is a core fee for a new Lycoming.
Whiskey Sierra
Filing Flight Plan
- Joined
- Jan 15, 2024
- Messages
- 7
- Display Name
- Whiskey Sierra
I see new MOSAIC aircraft as falling into two broad categories: existing aircraft designs and new designs.
There are a number of existing LSA aircraft designs (already ASTM compliant in Europe or USA) that will see gross weight and potentially power increases as a result of the lifting of the 1320 lb LSA weight limit and allowance for retracts and constant speed propellers. These should be available July 2026. Examples would be Cubcrafters UL/FX Cubs in the USA and the JMB or TL aircraft from Europe. There could also be existing kit built designs available as factory built, e.g., the Sling TSI (already available factory built in South Africa).
The existing certified aircraft manufacturers may also have aircraft ready pretty quick if their markets warrant producing the existing designs as MOSAIC Sport Aircraft. There appear to be maintenance benefits to owners and users in doing so. As mentioned above, this would be a business decision.
All new designs will take time, probably 3-5 years for fly-away. But there is opportunity in this area for aircraft with modern unleaded gas or Jet A burning engines whether single or multi.
On cost, new aircraft are likely to be $200K+. For example, the Vashon Ranger was designed to be a low cost trainer type aircraft, and loaded it runs just under the $200K mark. Most of the Euro 2 seaters are $200-300K today. The company that makes a decent 4 seater in the $300-500K range should do pretty well if they get the size and speed correct (e.g., the Sling TSI and Sling High Wing). A factory built RV-10 with a modern engine in that price range would be an awesome machine (and probably eat into Cirrus’s niche).
Long post for someone who generally is mostly in read only mode. Should be fun to see how the marketplace responds over the next few years.
There are a number of existing LSA aircraft designs (already ASTM compliant in Europe or USA) that will see gross weight and potentially power increases as a result of the lifting of the 1320 lb LSA weight limit and allowance for retracts and constant speed propellers. These should be available July 2026. Examples would be Cubcrafters UL/FX Cubs in the USA and the JMB or TL aircraft from Europe. There could also be existing kit built designs available as factory built, e.g., the Sling TSI (already available factory built in South Africa).
The existing certified aircraft manufacturers may also have aircraft ready pretty quick if their markets warrant producing the existing designs as MOSAIC Sport Aircraft. There appear to be maintenance benefits to owners and users in doing so. As mentioned above, this would be a business decision.
All new designs will take time, probably 3-5 years for fly-away. But there is opportunity in this area for aircraft with modern unleaded gas or Jet A burning engines whether single or multi.
On cost, new aircraft are likely to be $200K+. For example, the Vashon Ranger was designed to be a low cost trainer type aircraft, and loaded it runs just under the $200K mark. Most of the Euro 2 seaters are $200-300K today. The company that makes a decent 4 seater in the $300-500K range should do pretty well if they get the size and speed correct (e.g., the Sling TSI and Sling High Wing). A factory built RV-10 with a modern engine in that price range would be an awesome machine (and probably eat into Cirrus’s niche).
Long post for someone who generally is mostly in read only mode. Should be fun to see how the marketplace responds over the next few years.
The problem here is volume, or more specifically lack of volume. There were 1,772 new piston airplanes delivered by GAMA members last year. Of those, 180 were twins. Add to that, 1000 or so E/ABs are registered each year. That wouldn't be one day's production at an auto manufacturer's engine plant.
Looks like an EAB that they plan to convert. The current kit is $160k for the airframe, add $90k for a Garmin G3x setup and a Chinese Rotax knockoff, $30k to upgrade to a 185hp modified 916iS and $70k for build assist. They are advertising 800 hours build time.
Half Fast
Touchdown! Greaser!
- Joined
- May 7, 2016
- Messages
- 21,271
- Location
- Central Florida
- Display Name
- Half Fast
- Home Airfield
- KGIF
The roads aren’t filled with 1960s vintage cars, but the skies are filled with 1960s airplanes. To achieve any sort of meaningful volume, manufacturers must compete against a large used market. When those used aircraft can be upgraded with glass panels and OH’d engines for far less money than a new plane costs, manufacturers will struggle to achieve volume.
The problem is compounded by having too many manufacturers slicing up a small market.
Last edited:
Economies of scale. A Rotax costs $50k because they have to amortize the overhead costs over a far smaller number of units sold.
That's why a Mopar Bendix designed for a 1930's tractor, available at Nat'l Aircraft Parts Assoc., costs $250; but the yellow tagged version approved for aviation use costs $2,500. In fact, in many cases we've passed the point where aircraft can benefit from bending the rules on parts sourcing, because in many cases we're the only market still using the damn things. Lower volume, higher costs (not development any longer, but distribution network among others).
FormerHangie has it right, above.
Ed Haywood
Final Approach
Maybe if you knew more about MOSAIC, you would see how it will result in cheaper airplanes?
OK sorry, obligatory PoA-style passive-aggressive insult accomplished. /S
Right now there are two legal ways to build and sell a light GA airplane: LSA and Part 23. Part 23 has higher regulatory standards, and thus costs more to certify and produce. LSA has lower regulatory requirements and thus costs less, but LSA mission capability has been hamstrung by performance limits.
MOSAIC raises the performance limits of LSA. That means more capable aircraft can be produced under a less expensive regulatory framework.
The most obvious example is the most common GA configuration, the 4 seat single engine utility/trainer airplane. The 172 and PA28 are the two most produced GA airplanes in history. Pre-MOSAIC, you could only produce an aircraft with equivalent mission capability under Part 23. Now you can produce it under LSA.
Half Fast
Touchdown! Greaser!
- Joined
- May 7, 2016
- Messages
- 21,271
- Location
- Central Florida
- Display Name
- Half Fast
- Home Airfield
- KGIF
Learned well, you have.
In addition, it opens the US market to existing foreign-production aircraft that previously could not be sold in the US, or had their performance artificially reduced for US legality (the Jabiru LSA is one such example). These planes will probably make it to market very quickly after the new rules take effect since there's no new development required. In fact, much of the support for MOSAIC came from such manufacturers wishing to enter the US market.
Ed Haywood
Final Approach
I also forgot the cardinal rule of aircraft ownership, which is that the purchase cost is just a small part of the overall cost.
MOSAIC also means those 4 seat airplanes can be maintained by their owners after obtaining an LSRM. Huge cost advantage over a 172 or PA28.
MOSAIC also means those 4 seat airplanes can be maintained by their owners after obtaining an LSRM. Huge cost advantage over a 172 or PA28.
Curious. What percentage of owners do think will want to fully maintain their own aircraft after a 15 day course?
Doc Holliday
En-Route
MauleSkinner
Touchdown! Greaser!
hence the 15-day course.Don't they just need to know how to sign off the paperwork?
Dana
Final Approach
For one's own aircraft, it's only a two day class. The 15 day class lets you work on other people's aircraft.
pilotmichael
Pre-Flight
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2013
- Messages
- 45
- Display Name
- PilotMichael
I think what we're going to see is a high percentage of "hybrid" maintenance being done on 2.0 planes. Many hobby owners, like myself, might take the course in order to legally do a LOT more than one can do today as an owner. But still utilize a 3rd party LSRM or A&P for "heavy maintenance".
Ed Haywood
Final Approach
More than zero, but less than 100%.
Kind of like cars, people will probably do what they think they can handle and find a shop for the rest. Billy Bob drops his transmission for the fun of it, while Mary Sue has her wiper blades replaced at the dealer.
For an S-LSA aircraft... yes, the 2-day class allows you to perform the annual condition on your aircraft and as an owner you can perform the listed prevent mx items in the AMM. However, to perform any other maintenance the owner must have a maintenance rating, ie, the 15 day course. Been that way since day one. Hence the reason a number of S-LSAs were converted to E-LSAs. MOSAIC only expanded the LS repairman privileges to E/AB annual condition inspections with the mx rating allowing one to sign off other E/AB aircraft.
And that will be the interesting part. In some processes, the SLSA paperwork and sign off can be more complex than on a TC'd aircraft. I wonder with the new 2.0 LSA if there will still be a path to E-LSA as with the old versions? I think after a year of LSR-M rules like on a TC'd aircraft some maybe looking to go back to easier times???
Well, based on my experiences with my owner-assist years, and owners performing prevent mx, I think it will be closer to 30% in the S-LSA category but not linear across all owners.
I think this is closer to the mark but will still be interesting how the "heavy" side will work out after an owner preforms "a lot more" on the aircraft. Another thing interesting is the guidance for the Part 65 previous experience requirement for LSR mechanics is a bit different than for A&P mechanics. What I see in the near future is that in addition the 15 day LSR-M rating there will be factory maintenance courses offered so you can actually perform the mx per Part 65.
Maybe during those 15 days I will learn that I am in over my head.More than zero, but less than 100%.
Kind of like cars, people will probably do what they think they can handle and find a shop for the rest. Billy Bob drops his transmission for the fun of it, while Mary Sue has her wiper blades replaced at the dealer.
Ed Haywood
Final Approach
Me neither. But I try to consider "me" generically in this case, not personally. I think/hope the new rules improve things for a lot of me's, especially the younger ones.
Half Fast
Touchdown! Greaser!
- Joined
- May 7, 2016
- Messages
- 21,271
- Location
- Central Florida
- Display Name
- Half Fast
- Home Airfield
- KGIF
Oh, I think it probably will, in time. Of course, many other things will happen in that time, the economy will do whatever it does, interest in aviation may wax or wane, young people will pursue careers and have families, etc., etc. Too many variables to be sure.