What's new
Van's Air Force

Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.

Will this change anyones mind?

It's huge. LSA, I don't think, could've survived if Cessna had said "no." There are so many Cessna training centers that to have the company in the business, makes it much more likely that light-sport aircraft and light-sport-aircraft CFIs will be available to do what we want the project to do.

To me, it's a huge step toward making LSA something other than a "I'm-too-old-to-fly-on-a-medical" program. It may actually get people in the air who otherwise wouldn't be.
 
...and it may get new life to flight training and flight schools. You can do your private training in an LSA. Most new Skyhawks coming out of Wichita are > $200K. If Cessna can get their LSA on the market it will be huge for flight schools. Half the acquisition costs, maybe 2/3rds the operating costs equals a huge savings to student pilots. Many folks are turned off when you tell them they have to pay > $100/hour for the airplane plus $35.00/hour for an instructor.
 
Jamie said:
...and it may get new life to flight training and flight schools. You can do your private training in an LSA. Most new Skyhawks coming out of Wichita are > $200K. If Cessna can get their LSA on the market it will be huge for flight schools. Half the acquisition costs, maybe 2/3rds the operating costs equals a huge savings to student pilots. Many folks are turned off when you tell them they have to pay > $100/hour for the airplane plus $35.00/hour for an instructor.
Click to expand...
I agree with this statement. However, the real question will then become whether the flight schools will reduce the prices they charge for renting aircraft. If the prices do not go down at the point of consumer contact, the decreased purchase cost of the aircraft to the flight school will not prove beneficial to anyone, not even the flight school. Interested individuals will still be frustrated with high prices that will drive them off or keep them from taking the plunge if the schools do not decrease that $100 rental fee.

Too many times we see prices to the consumer stay the same (or in some instances rise) when a major break through provides a measure of increased profitability for a business that provides a consumer good or service. This is one of the reasons I believe there was no big rush from consumers to go out and buy up all these current LSA's. The companies in the industry have priced themselves and all of those potential consumers right out of the market.

I further believe that is why Cessna will take over and dominate the LSA market with this aircraft. Whatever they set their price at for this aircraft they have already stated it will be "far south of $100,000". They recognize that in order for their LSA to be successful they will have to 1) rely on their powerful industry leading name, 2) provide a good product at a price that will attract customers who have never thought of owning a new airplane before. This would include all of those pilots out there flying 30, 40, 50, 60 year old airplanes because that is all they can afford to fly, in addition to those new to the aviation world. There is no one providing a product for that market right now. Perhaps this airplane will do that. I guess we may soon find out.
 
Insurance on a new $100k LSA vs your typical training Cessna 150 worth $15-20k...I bet the rental prices will remain the same.
 
Yep, it's different

Jim,
The new news is that Cessna has now stated that they are proceeding forward with their LSA program paving the way for full scale production. According to Avweb details are to be released at this year's Oshkosh. Up until yesterday, Cessna had not commited to the LSA progam and the prototype was nothing more than a proof of concept.
 
It has to be a good thing

Cessna knows how to make airplanes and they know how to make a market. As RVfolk we know that most of their small aircraft are slow, ugly and handle poorly. But those old 150s and 172s are great for training. They are hard to bruise and relatively easy to maintain. They make money for the schools that operate them and that's the key.

As Cessna makes the market happen, all of the new students who become wise to aviation will become aware of alternative aircraft. The Rans, Thorpes and RVs of the world will survive only if there are pilots trained and comfortable in light aircraft. That's what Cessna will do for them. And that's what Cessna will do for the rest of the LSA industry.

This is very, very good.
 
This changes the LSA landscape quite a bit. Until this point, LSAs were the domain of mostly foreign manufacturers, the largest of which is on pace for selling ~200 airframes this year.

Cessna brings to the mix a reputation for sturdy, easy to fly airplanes and financial stability that no other LSA maker has. The reputation will, at least initially, lead to more widespread acceptance of LSA. Even now, most pilots give LSA a snicker and the cold shoulder, although that is changing slowly. The financial stability will allow them to (hopefully) get the manufacturing issues resolved and get airplanes to people who want to buy them (anyone try to buy a LSA in the last 12 months?).

What they will struggle with are the inherent limitations of the LSA class. Cessna has indicated that the airplane's structure will be aluminum unless absolutely necessary. This may be good for longevity and ease of repair but will cost weight. Consider that the venerable 150/152, very much a LSA-type performer, had MGTWs around 1600lb.

The other issue is making it easy to fly. There has been a lot of discussion about other LSA being more challenging, particularly those that aim towards speed. Cessna has a history of stable (boring?) airplanes and this will likely transfer over to the LSA.

It certainly adds credibility to the LSA idea, that's for sure.
 
Personally, I don't see why a flight school would invest in Cessna LSA's over say... Diamonds DA-20's. Unless for the purpose of promoting the LSA cert. I just don't see LSA going anywhere unless they can WAY undercut the prices and fuel consumption of said Diamond.
 
GTechRV said:
Personally, I don't see why a flight school would invest in Cessna LSA's over say... Diamonds DA-20's. Unless for the purpose of promoting the LSA cert. I just don't see LSA going anywhere unless they can WAY undercut the prices and fuel consumption of said Diamond.
Click to expand...
Cessna states they want to bring the LSA in under $100K. According to their website, a DA-20 runs about $175K. So... a whole LOT of reasons for a flight school to buy Cessna.

As we are all aware, there are hundreds of tired out 150's, 152's and 172's in the training fleet. The Cessna LSA finally brings a replacement for the 152 that is (relatively) cheap, roomier and faster. The flight school in my area is anxiously awaiting their release and hopes to pick up a couple ASAP. They will be initial trainers - whether you are interested in LSA, or a full PPL.

I think that rental rates will be a bit higher than the old 152's but less than the 172's. But the marketing angle of being able to advertise "be a pilot in as little as 20 hours for only $X,XXX.00") will hopefully get a lot of folks thinking "I can afford that" - who up until now just wistfully looked at the sky and thought flying was only for the rich and elite.

Ultimately if we hope for aviation to accelerate - it will be this kind of catchy marketing that will be necessary. Print adds in the Sunday Paper. Beautiful TV commercials extolling the fun and reach-ability of aviation... much like the "Go RVing" commercials over the past couple years promoting camping vehicles. They were paid for by a consortium of Recreational vehicle manufacturers.

I think what helps aviation... helps all of us.

DJ
 
LSA Class Weight

Yes, Cessna is up against the gross weight problem. It would have been alot better if the LSA class took a C152 minus 50 lbs and went with that. Then the standard air cooled engines could be incorporated within the gross weight limitation.

The weight restriction level as it is now just adds risk to the whole LSA question.
We are supposed to be a community that is very risk adverse. But how did we come up with the 1320 lb limit?

A 1500 lb limit sure would be nice on a crosswind takeoff with an air cooled engine. Plus a higher limit would allow for engine alternatives. Don't forget, we may have a passenger aboard in the LSA class. Having the possibility of using a DA20 or RV9 as an LSA would only increase safety.

My 2 cents.
 
It was all a conspiracy to use Rotax 912s from the start. Using the O-200 will cost you 50-75 lbs. of something- payload, lighter structure etc.

For one thing, Rotax has been unable to keep pace with demand for 912s worldwide to date. No doubt this is some factor in certain LSAs switching over or using to the new O-200 from the start.
 
Cessna LSA and Thielert Diesel?

Today I read on a Dutch aviation website (www.luchtvaartnieuws.nl) Cessna is going to work together with German Thielert Aircraft Engines GmbH on the production of their LSA and details about the use of the Centurion diesel engine are expected shortly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top