Major LSA Ceases Sales and Production...

[bexrbetter]

Agreed, it's a lot of money so it may be worth looking at in more detail. As for silly prices, anyone who manages to get 8,700 aircraft into the air (only about 300 of which are LSA's, btw) must be doing something right apart from just marketing.

Apparently starts at shows where interested parties are gathered and actually assemble small parts of a Vans at the show firstly to gain their confidence that they can actually build a plane themselves at home. Then they are encouraged to purchases in stages starting with usually a cheap tail kit for beginners or a wing kit for the more adventurous and so on from there.

 

The parts are all lovely to look at and shiny (I'm serious) and of course first impressions, last.

 

It's very simple but takes a lot of man power and organising to achieve and not everyone has the tenaciousness or the personality to achieve it, as I said a bloody credit to Vans himself for it getting there.

 

Vans sells about 1800 kits a year but that could be as simple as a tail kit etc. and the next year's 1800 kits might include a wing kit to the same person so the figures are falsely inflated but still moving a lot of product compared to some manufacturers who move a half dozen planes per year. - those kit figures are real too, info was gotten through the American IRS (Tax Dept).

 

Still way too expensive regardless of how it's justified and at the end of the day most just don't have that sort of cash to throw down.

 

 

[rgmwa]

There are lots of hands-on introductory building classes and practical demonstrations at most of the air shows in the US - not just sheet metal and rivets, but also welding, fabric, timber, glass, etc. Vans do have a couple of little kits - a toolbox or small cross section of a wing - to put together if you want to have a go at home. As far as I know, they don't run classes themselves and I think the ones at air shows are generally organised by the EAA. They do run factory tours and give demo flights both there and at air shows for those who are interested. There are around three times as many tail kits started as ever become flying aircraft, so there's a fair drop-out rate, and that wouldn't apply just to Vans either. Interestingly, Vans say their biggest competition is not from other manufacturers, but from the trade in second hand RV's. I guess that's one measure of success.

 

rgmwa

 

 

[bexrbetter]

oops oops oops

 

There, there's the require 10 characters.

 

 

[bexrbetter]

Ok, appreciate that extra detail.

 

https://www.vansaircraft.com/public/construction-classes.htm

 

I think they are burning people horribly exorbitantly priced and I think I can do better, much better, and by the end of the month I hope I'll have more to say about that.

 

 

[jeffd]

i

 

Using this intensely crappy phraseology in another language is not direct either!

im not insulted cause i dont know what it means

 

 

[rgmwa]

Ok, appreciate that extra detail.https://www.vansaircraft.com/public/construction-classes.htm

I think they are burning people horribly exorbitantly priced and I think I can do better, much better, and by the end of the month I hope I'll have more to say about that.

Fair enough, Bex.... well at least as far as the classes go. I'm all in favour of cheaper ways to get into aviation, so I'll await your posts with interest. If you can do it better and cheaper than the others, we'll all be better off and thank you for it.

rgmwa

 

 

[Oscar]

The 'cost' of an aircraft is not a simple matter of the $$ out of the wallet. You have to consider - if you are being realistic - a whole lot more factors.

 

Just for a start, what do you require of your aircraft? Load capacity? Cruise performance? STOL capability? Access to airspace and airfields? $$ out of the pocket vs time invested? Operational cost factors (insurance, storage, engine life, consumables/hour, self-maintenance vs paid professional maintenance etc?) Primary /secondary safety? Resale value? The ability to use for training / put on the hire line vs. personal use only?

 

A quick look at the ads. in any Sport Pilot will show you that there are things that can get you into the air from probably around $10k to upwards of $120k (or $180K for a Carbon Cub!..) For, let us say, $35K, which is sort of around the median price of a useful, reasonable new family car you can buy a half-decent older small Jab., or build a Sonex if you're prepared to spend the 700 - 900 or so hours working on it, or get a fairly beaten-up C15x or Piper high-wing if you don't mind flying just solo, or probably a very schmick Drifter.. there's plenty of choice, they all offer a different equation for the $$ and many of them are really quite good aircraft.

 

Then look through the magazine at the new aircraft ads. For somewhere in the $100 - $130 or so bracket there is a very considerable choice; if the market were not there for these aircraft, they wouldn't exist. If there were a simple way to make a comparable aircraft and sell it profitably for say $75k - someone would have done that and cornered the market.

 

It's ever-so-easy to look at an LSA aircraft and say: 'I can't see why it costs so much, it should be cheaper'. Perhaps that is so, but what you are looking at on the airfield isn't by any stretch of the imagination the sum of all the cost parts that have gone into it being there in the flesh. Every manufactured aircraft has in-built costs that are not represented by the metal / fibreglass / fabric etc. that sits there to be inspected.

 

If there is a silver bullet for costs for a comparable aircraft that allows it to be profitably manufactured and sold at a price that way undercuts everything currently available off the shelf - great: the world is waiting. However, I suspect that it's going to be a way longer row to hoe than just looking at the cost of the 'raw materials' - all those things that are necessary to make the airframe and the engine and put them all together into something that can fly - and actually having a marketable aircraft that meets the regulations etc.

 

 

[fly_tornado]

Ok, appreciate that extra detail.https://www.vansaircraft.com/public/construction-classes.htm

 

I think they are burning people horribly exorbitantly priced and I think I can do better, much better, and by the end of the month I hope I'll have more to say about that.

You say that every month.

 

 

[bexrbetter]

The 'cost' of an aircraft is not a simple matter of the $$ out of the wallet. You have to consider - if you are being realistic - a whole lot more factors.

There's a case for planes (or cars or especially boats) being so expensive that people justify going to further expense to maintain an equal level of fitment throughout and that if the base price is cheap then the fitout will also be cheaper, win win.

 

If there is a silver bullet for costs for a comparable aircraft that allows it to be profitably manufactured and sold at a price that way undercuts everything currently available off the shelf - great: the world is waiting.

It's called China - if it can be done properly.

 

You say that every month.

No, I have never previously indicated my plane plans in public anywhere, hope that helps.

 

 

[facthunter]

The Skyfox Gazelle was about $72K when it went on the market. How much would that be in today's money? nev

 

 

[johnm]

wikipedia says Skyfox Gazelle was introdiced 1989

 

......... using a published building construction index (probably not that appropriate !) if you had $ 127 in 1989 then that would be worth $ 271

 

271 / 127 = 2.13

 

$ 72 k x 2.13 = $ 153 k .............. crikey - give or take a few bob

 

 

[Oscar]

The Gazelle is a fundamentally dangerous aircraft both from an aerodynamic and a structural POV. However, it is a major improvement on its progenitor - the Kitfox. It is one of those devices that is delightfully benign until pushed, when it turns into a killer. A bit like an early Volkswagen Beetle: fine until it all goes wrong, when it spins out and wraps you around a light-pole and catches fire and incinerates your mangled body.

 

The Gazelle would NOT be certified under today's rules. Do you really WANT to fly in something that, if it hits a decent gust in a turn, may well throw a wing away? The engineering work that went into getting the original Gazelle to actually meet the regs, at the time was very considerable; amongst the problems of the Kitfox was aileron binding and aileron flutter. The engineers who managed to get the damn thing to pass the regs. minimum requirements were pushed (how would YOU like to experience 10 seconds of aileron flutter in a test flight?)

 

 

[Oscar]

There's a case for planes (or cars or especially boats) being so expensive that people justify going to further expense to maintain an equal level of fitment throughout and that if the base price is cheap then the fitout will also be cheaper, win win.It's called China - if it can be done properly.

 

No, I have never previously indicated my plane plans in public anywhere, hope that helps.

Well, you certainly have our attention! To what standard will your machine be certified?

 

 

[fly_tornado]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_lcJ3WyBjVk

[Oscar]

The biggest light aircraft company in the WORLD sells 188 aircraft manufactured in China - with all its competitive advantage - into the LSA market. A small establishment in Bundaberg using people in their garages to produce their bits, sells more than 10 times that number, worldwide. What a damn shame we are crippled with such terrible union-led high wages, wildly uncompetitive costs of production, the tyranny of distance from component suppliers, a venal government/public service that stifles enterprise etc. etc.

 

Hell, without all those disadvantages, we could have been a competitor...

 

 

[fly_tornado]

You should do something about those bloody unions, why not talk your fellow Australians into taking a pay cut?

 

 

[Oscar]

Work smarter.... it's possible. You don't need to be paid less to produce the same if you can be paid the same to produce more... just takes management savvy.

 

 

[bexrbetter]

The biggest light aircraft company in the WORLD sells 188 aircraft manufactured in China - with all its competitive advantage - into the LSA market. A small establishment in Bundaberg using people in their garages to produce their bits, sells more than 10 times that number, worldwide. .

It's a laff a minute watching Americans trying to cope in China, they just don't get it that everything isn't done their way and the Chinese politely nod their heads and take them to the cleaners - I strongly suspect that's what happened to Cessna while saving "$71,000 per plane". I would like to put a laughing smiley after that but it's a bit sad really and I'm sure Cessna just chose to close it all up rather than make it public and fire themselves (upper management) as they deserve to be.

 

Well, you certainly have our attention! To what standard will your machine be certified?

A little early for that just yet.

 

 

[Oscar]

A little early for that just yet.

Bex, you can't be serious. You cannot design a plane and then shop around for a standard that it fits. You HAVE to design to a standard. Go ask the Australian owners of Ibis aircraft what happens if you buy an aircraft that isn't demonstrably compliant with an acceptable standard.

 

The 'web is full of 'breakthrough' aircraft with fancy CAD drawings and splashy sites, that promise a revolution in aircraft design. They are the aeronautical equivalent of Nigerian princes offering untold wealth because you are a good mate...

 

Bex, give us something to hang your bona fides on.

 

 

[gandalph]

The Gazelle is a fundamentally dangerous aircraft both from an aerodynamic and a structural POV. However, it is a major improvement on its progenitor - the Kitfox. It is one of those devices that is delightfully benign until pushed, when it turns into a killer. A bit like an early Volkswagen Beetle: fine until it all goes wrong, when it spins out and wraps you around a light-pole and catches fire and incinerates your mangled body.

Hey! Go easy on Volkswagens! Next you'll be saying that that the Road safety feds will be taking action behind the scenes.......

 

 

[bexrbetter]

Bex, you can't be serious. .

Just like Vans, Amateur Built class initially.

 

and don't call me Shirley.

 

The 'web is full of 'breakthrough' aircraft with fancy CAD drawings and splashy sites, that promise a revolution in aircraft design. They are the aeronautical equivalent of Nigerian princes offering untold wealth because you are a good mate...

If you think I am going to offer anything but a robust, safe and very, very simple design (and of course cheap) onto the market while wearing the "Made in China" monkey on my back you would have rocks in your head, i.e. the very mistake Cessna made. Now please send me your account details so I can start the transfer of $84 million dollars to you.

 

 

[Oscar]

Hey! Go easy on Volkswagens! Next you'll be saying that that the Road safety feds will be taking action behind the scenes.......

I go easy IN Volkswagens (well, I did in the early Beetles, that's why I'm still alive.That and cussedness, really.)

 

 

[rgmwa]

Is the aircraft a completely new design or are you adapting an existing design to suit your new engine? It seems to me that developing both a new engine and designing and testing a new airframe to go with it would be a pretty ambitious undertaking.

 

rgmwa

 

 

[fly_tornado]

what do the chinese know about design? copy of a copy?

 

 

[bexrbetter]

It seems to me that developing both a new engine and designing and testing a new airframe to go with it would be a pretty ambitious undertaking.

Did you say that about Jabiru at the time? They scratch built everything whereas I am taking considerable shortcuts in comparison.

 

Is the aircraft a completely new design or are you adapting an existing design

Meh, it will use 2 wings, a cockpit, a fuselage and a tail so it will look like something and that should be enough ammunition for copying accusations, right FT?

 

what do the chinese know about design? copy of a copy?

Excusing your historical ignorance, the Chinese (with a high case 'C') have nothing to do with it. I have mentioned before today that all my things are Australian by Australians except for location.