Aircraft and parts prices out of control

T

turbosuper

Pre-Flight
Joined
Aug 3, 2021
Messages
91
Display Name
Display name:
turbosuper
Has anyone else noticed that the cost of aircraft and parts has dramatically increased over the last ~15 years? For example:

Cessna starter relay: 2006 cost $529, 2021 cost $2268 is a 329% increase
Cessna Facet heater fuel pump: 2010 cost $497, 2021 cost $1,312 is a 164% increase
New Beech 58 Baron: 2001 cost $750,000, 2021 cost $1,600,000 is a 113% increase

I think someone is trying to price us out of aviation.
 
Someone is trying to price us out of aviation. They are called attorneys! Until we change the laws in the US to match most of the world on filing lawsuits it’s only going to get worse.
 
Also the more people that leave aviation means less products sold and higher prices. Maybe fuel prices started this chain.
 
Cessna would like to see their twin fleet gone, so they keep raising prices yet there is no affordable replacement.
 
How many of those parts are they making today compared to 15 years ago? How many Barons is Beech selling these days? For how many decades after production ends should a manufacturer be expected to keep making parts?
 
ateamer said:
How many of those parts are they making today compared to 15 years ago? How many Barons is Beech selling these days? For how many decades after production ends should a manufacturer be expected to keep making parts?
Click to expand...
I don't blame Cessna for not wanting to support 50+ year old aircraft, but if they want to get people into new aircraft they need to make it affordable.
 
It just seems the only path is to keep the old aircraft flying.
 
Skyknight320 said:
I think someone is trying to price us out of aviation.
Click to expand...
Jeff767 said:
They are called attorneys!
Click to expand...
Given tort litigation and the pandemic shortages have increased GA parts prices, it's mostly a shrinking market that is to blame. And that from the people I buy parts from which has them concerned in the long term. For comparison the rotorcraft market (private/commercial) while having its ups and downs as never dropped to the point of the private GA airplane side percentage-wise regardless of tort implications, insurance costs, etc. They never stopped producing small helicopters and every other year another 3rd party parts providers opens shop. And where one manufacturer stopped production of a small 5 place turbine model, another mfg'r developed and brought to market a new model to cover that requirement. So long as fewer people enter private aviation it will only get worse as it is the same reason LSA and other variants never took off either. So I doubt even a new owner-maintained category will save private aviation. No one wants to fly as before or now prefer drones.
 
And here I thought it was COVID that drove people to get into GA in turn driving GA aircraft market through the roof, and then in turn driving parts through the roof. I met a couple of guys that said if they could restore old cars from the 60's how hard could it be to restore an aluminum airplane and flip it? They wanted me to partner with them so I can cover the paperwork and sign all the return to service documents. I passed. I'll wait until the entire GA market implodes like the housing market did and then I'll pick up the pieces like a scavenger.
 
Bell206 said:
So long as fewer people enter private aviation it will only get worse as it is the same reason LSA and other variants never took off either. So I doubt even a new owner-maintained category will save private aviation. No one wants to fly as before or now prefer drones.
Click to expand...
The future of GA does not look good. I think allowing owners to do more maintenance and even annual inspections would help, but that still leaves the problem of high part prices.
 
George Mohr said:
Notice those examples are all Textron....
Click to expand...
Historically, Beech and Cessna were willing to are a little bit ta hit on parts to support the older airplanes. Textron needs the balance sheets to work out for everything.
 
I've been told that the FAA is not opposed to something like a O-M category, it is the maintenance shops that lobby against it...
 
I think someone is trying to price us out of much more than aviation. Prices are crazy on almost everything.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
That's crazy. I had no idea.

The high-end starter relay (B&C) for my experimental aircraft costs $49. How does a pilot with even a medium combined income of say $100K to $150K really afford a basic certificated aircraft? I would be living in constant fear of keeping my certificated aircraft flying.
 
EAB is the future of GA. With the RV 15 I won't Vans offer more piston aircraft than Piper and Cessna combined?
 
Skyknight320 said:
Could a Cessna twin be put into the O-M category?
Click to expand...
Not in Canada. Single piston engine, four seats max, fixed gear and prop with a very few exceptions to the last two.

CAR Standard 507:

  1. (e) An aircraft type and model may be included in Appendix H of this Standard, Aircraft eligible for a Special Certificate of Airworthiness - Owner-maintenance”, where:
    (amended 2002/03/01)
    1. (i) the aircraft is of a type certified in accordance with Chapters 522 or 523 of the Airworthiness Manual, or an equivalent foreign standard;
    2. (ii) the aircraft type certificate does not authorize more than four occupants;
    3. (iii) the maximum certificated take-off weight (MCTOW) of the aircraft does not exceed 1,814 kg (4,000 pounds);
    4. (iv) the aircraft is of a type and model that has not been manufactured during the 60 months preceding the date of application;
    5. (v) fewer than 10% of Canadian aircraft of the type and model concerned are operating in Canadian commercial air service at the time of application;
    6. (vi) the aircraft type and model is powered by a single, normally aspirated, piston engine, and is unpressurized; and
    7. (vii) except for gliders, powered gliders or aircraft with airframes of wooden construction, the aircraft type and model has a fixed landing gear and a fixed pitch propeller.
That covers an awful lot of the GA singles here. As far as "fewer than 10% of the type and model in commercial service," that means that "later" model Cessna 172s might not be eligible, but older models would. The list in Appendix H lists up to the 172H as being eligible. 150s up to the K model are eligible. The list includes a lot of old, obscure airplanes, too. https://tc.canada.ca/en/corporate-s...l-certificate-airworthiness-owner-maintenance
 
Lndwarrior said:
That's crazy. I had no idea.

The high-end starter relay (B&C) for my experimental aircraft costs $49. How does a pilot with even a medium combined income of say $100K to $150K really afford a basic certificated aircraft? I would be living in constant fear of keeping my certificated aircraft flying.
Click to expand...
They cannot, that is why GA is almost dead.
 
Skyknight320 said:
Has anyone else noticed that the cost of aircraft and parts has dramatically increased over the last ~15 years? For example:

Cessna starter relay: 2006 cost $529, 2021 cost $2268 is a 329% increase
Cessna Facet heater fuel pump: 2010 cost $497, 2021 cost $1,312 is a 164% increase
New Beech 58 Baron: 2001 cost $750,000, 2021 cost $1,600,000 is a 113% increase

I think someone is trying to price us out of aviation.
Click to expand...
What Cessna takes a $2200 starter contactor? I see that the starter contactor for an early '70s 172 is around $175, which is a big jump from the $35 I used to pay 12 or 15 years ago, but still a long way from $2200. Maybe this is for a 24-volt restart model?
 
The majority of GA aircraft can be considered antique at this point.

Cessna, Piper, Beech, Mooney, etc never counted on these planes being around over twenty years or so, but yet 50+ years here they are.

GA began dying out in the mid eighties, had a small resurgence a decade or so later, and is now dying out again.

There’s not that much money to be made supporting 50 year old airframes.
 
I could repeat my commentary for the last 8 years, but I won't (OP you can do a search). It's been said already. The whole thing jumped the shark a while ago. EAB is the only affordable and sustainable avenue for those outside of 10 years from the country's medical-holding age expectancy, and not otherwise anointed with the magic pass-go-collect-$200 (AP/IA). My only bone to pick with EAB is it doesn't have affordable avenues for family flyers, but that's more a reflection of the market demographic than a technical hurdle.

Skyknight320 said:
I've been told that the FAA is not opposed to something like a O-M category, it is the maintenance shops that lobby against it...
Click to expand...

No, not the mx shops.... the OEMs. Mx shops don't make a living on recreational piston anymore (see mine and others' threads on AOG for case and points writ large on here), they couldn't care less. The OEMs on the other hand, have a vested interest in mothballing the legacy fleet right yesterday. Having aftermarket support keep the fleet alive by virtue of a resurgence in interest in maintaining said fleet flying via regulatory relief (O-M, primary non-commercial categories, et al) is not in the interest of their bed-down plans. That's why that regulatory captured cohort of airline-industry-centering, federal petty functionaries doesn't push for said regulatory relief.
 
Skyknight320 said:
I think allowing owners to do more maintenance and even annual inspections would help, but that still leaves the problem of high part prices.
Click to expand...
I don’t. Letting people who have a very limited knowledge of aircraft maintenance perform work on their aircraft is a bad idea. Not to mention the fact that a lot of them don’t take care of maintenance items when they need to be done anyway. Doesn’t sound like a good idea.
 
Adam Weiss said:
You beat me to it. E/AB is the future.
Click to expand...
If Vans aircraft numbers are to be believed this is literally true. If true, there are far more experimentals being born than certified in the piston GA category.
 
RyanB said:
I don’t. Letting people who have a very limited knowledge of aircraft maintenance perform work on their aircraft is a bad idea. Not to mention the fact that a lot of them don’t take care of maintenance items when they need to be done anyway. Doesn’t sound like a good idea.
Click to expand...

So you're against the EAB category as presently allowed then. Nothing wrong with being enemies on this front, but you can't have the cake and eat it too.

In present circumstances, both paradigms are allowed to fly in the same airspace over the heads of the same non-participating members of the non-flying public, and for the same economic end no less (non-revenue RECREATION). Thence, there's a fundamental credibility problem with your position, whilst allowing EAB mx rules to exist concurrently.

Now, if you are in fact against the existence of EAB in present form (wrt to mx allowances), then I take your argument as consistent and you may disregard my response. If you are ok with EAB as is, then your position is rank hypocrisy.
 
Doc Holliday said:
GA began dying out in the mid eighties,
Click to expand...
This right here. At it's peak there were over 800k active pilots in the US. Now there are just above 600K active pilots however a much lower percentage of private GA pilots than back in the 80s due to the increase in airline/commuter slots. So until the private GA community can create/interest 200k more people to pursue their private pilot certificate this year, it will never return to the glory days. Same goes on the maintenance side and on the airport side as dozens of both leave/close from the private GA market. They've been discussing these numbers for years yet there has been zero growth in the private sector. LSA was supposed to be the savior but it fell flat because people don't want to learn how to fly. And while E/AB is showing growth its more existing pilots/owners moving from the TC world to the E/AB world. So you can blame the OEMs all you want but the facts point straight to a lack of desire by the public to learn how to fly. Last I read there will be a requirement for an additional 700K pilots globally in the next cycle and I'll bet none of those will remain as only a weekend warrior in the private sector.
 
Dan Thomas said:
Not in Canada. Single piston engine, four seats max, fixed gear and prop with a very few exceptions to the last two.

CAR Standard 507:

  1. (e) An aircraft type and model may be included in Appendix H of this Standard, Aircraft eligible for a Special Certificate of Airworthiness - Owner-maintenance”, where:
    (amended 2002/03/01)
    1. (i) the aircraft is of a type certified in accordance with Chapters 522 or 523 of the Airworthiness Manual, or an equivalent foreign standard;
    2. (ii) the aircraft type certificate does not authorize more than four occupants;
    3. (iii) the maximum certificated take-off weight (MCTOW) of the aircraft does not exceed 1,814 kg (4,000 pounds);
    4. (iv) the aircraft is of a type and model that has not been manufactured during the 60 months preceding the date of application;
    5. (v) fewer than 10% of Canadian aircraft of the type and model concerned are operating in Canadian commercial air service at the time of application;
    6. (vi) the aircraft type and model is powered by a single, normally aspirated, piston engine, and is unpressurized; and
    7. (vii) except for gliders, powered gliders or aircraft with airframes of wooden construction, the aircraft type and model has a fixed landing gear and a fixed pitch propeller.
That covers an awful lot of the GA singles here. As far as "fewer than 10% of the type and model in commercial service," that means that "later" model Cessna 172s might not be eligible, but older models would. The list in Appendix H lists up to the 172H as being eligible. 150s up to the K model are eligible. The list includes a lot of old, obscure airplanes, too. https://tc.canada.ca/en/corporate-s...l-certificate-airworthiness-owner-maintenance
Click to expand...

If I lived in North Dakota or Montana could I own and fly a Canadian registered aircraft? Being close to the border, I could travel to Canada for any required inspections or regulatory reasons.
 
Dan Thomas said:
What Cessna takes a $2200 starter contactor? I see that the starter contactor for an early '70s 172 is around $175, which is a big jump from the $35 I used to pay 12 or 15 years ago, but still a long way from $2200. Maybe this is for a 24-volt restart model?
Click to expand...
A Cessna 320 28volt system
 
I might be just a dumb pilot, but all this complaining sounds like opportunity to me. If prices have gone way up, it’s time for new suppliers to get into the market.

I believe the proper response to legal risk is simply to not hold much in assets - build a disposable company while protecting yourself as much as possible. If you take Island Express as an example (Kobe Bryant crash), they simply don’t have much in the way of assets to be seized. If the company has nothing and the owner has little to their name, there isn’t much for anyone to take if it’s determined that say, your starter relay was the cause of an accident.
 
RyanB said:
Not to mention the fact that a lot of them don’t take care of maintenance items when they need to be done anyway.
Click to expand...

Well, since you did mention it, I’m not sure how that makes your case.

What practical difference does it make whether maintenance items not performed are not performed by an owner or not performed by an A&P?

Anyway, I’ve been doing maintenance and Annual Condition Inspections on my E-LSA Sky Arrow since 2010. Though not formally trained in “aircraft maintenance”, I think I have enough basic mechanical know how to get the job done. And, as important, I think I know my limitations and when it’s best to ask for help.
 
3393RP said:
If I lived in North Dakota or Montana could I own and fly a Canadian registered aircraft? Being close to the border, I could travel to Canada for any required inspections or regulatory reasons.
Click to expand...
Nope. Only Canadian citizens, or foreign entities (corporations), may hold Canadian aircraft registration. The foreign entities must report all flights weekly, and 60% of the flight hours in any six months must be within Canada. Furthermore, O-M aircraft are not permitted to enter the US, since the US has no equivalent registration category. You need to prevail on the FAA to create that.

O-M airplanes have been flying here for nearly 20 years. No unusual accident rate has been noted. Most owners are responsible enough to get a mechanic to fix the stuff they have no clue about. No doubt there are a few doing some really sketchy stuff on their O-M airplanes, but those guys are the same sort that do the same sketchy things on their certified airplanes anyway.

If I bought another airplane it would be an older type eligible for the O-M category, even though I'm a licensed AME (equivalent to US AP/IA). By older type I mean a tube-and-rag affair that has no complicated castings in its airframe, so that I can make or repair any part of it. Most all-metal airplanes use castings or forgings in their landing gear attachments, strut fittings, and so on. Difficult to remove and replace or repair. Expensive, too. I can machine and weld. I enjoy fabric work. I can do upholstery, but I'm no pro at it.
 
benbell4140 said:
I think someone is trying to price us out of much more than aviation. Prices are crazy on almost everything.
Click to expand...

House prices are following inflation or have historically excluding the past 2 years. If minimum wage had followed inflation it would be $22.00; imagine what the median income wouldhave been.

Instead, wage growth the last 20 years is flat. Inflation is running at 3%. 28% of people work a 2nd job by necessity. Exactly who is supposed to be buying those new planes? People working 3 jobs?

It ain't aviation that's killing itself, it's the current economic situation.
 
bflynn said:
but all this complaining sounds like opportunity to me. If prices have gone way up, it’s time for new suppliers to get into the market.
Click to expand...
Why not give it a try? With your aviation and business experience you should be able to carve out a small niche. Maybe just sell to PoA'rs to start? Perhaps start a separate thread to get the most popular P/Ns you would need to stock. What have you got to lose?;)
 
Shepherd said:
At some point you have to stop blaming the lawyers and start blaming the greed of the manufacturers and retailers.
Click to expand...

That's what I thought too, until I visited the American Champion factory a few weeks ago. After seeing the the machinery it takes to run an aircraft production line, I'm surprised they can keep the doors open even at the prices they charge.

The hard truth is it is nearly impossible to achieve any sort of economy of scale in the aircraft industry. Vans and Cirrus are about the only manufacturers to get anywhere close to true production line efficiency. Everybody else is custom building.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top