Cessna/Textron commitment to small GA.

[Tantalum]

They innovated not only with the planes themselves but the overall message. No one else in the piston market has done that, which is why everyone else is struggling.

They have some great swag. You don't see that from anyone else. They sell the image of an exclusive lifestyle. Consumers soak that up. Incredible that in today's day and age none of the other piston manufacturers have figured out how to market their product to the contemporary buyer

 

[kyleb]

If I had an extra 10 million kicking around this would be by far the plane I would buying

I was kind of hoping you'd spend it on hookers and blow for all your friends who attend Bry-venture next year.

 

[Tantalum]

I was kind of hoping you'd spend it on hookers and blow for all your friends who attend Bry-venture next year.

... all part of the budget

 

[Dan Thomas]

If I had an extra 10 million kicking around this would be by far the plane I would buying

You'd need way more than that. When people ask me, as an old guy, a CPL, and a mechanic, how much airplane they can buy with their $XXX, I tell them to spend half on the airplane and they'll need the other half for maintenance, repairs, insurance, fuel, and other stuff. See way too many guys spend the whole thing on the airplane then find out they can't cover the other stuff. Especially if it's a used airplane, and even if it's a lowly Champ.

I met a fellow who had bought a nice P-40, back when they were just old airplanes and sort of affordable, but he couldn't afford to fly it. The insurance and fuel burn were obscene. It sat in a museum. He'd have been a multimillionaire if he had sold it when I met him in the early '90s. It had very few hours on it.

 

[GRG55]

Oh, and agree with the comments on the selling of the lifestyle / brand. I guarantee had I bought a 182 or Archer or whatever, the wife and kids would not have embraced flying nearly as much as they have. Cirrus did nail it there. They innovated not only with the planes themselves but the overall message. No one else in the piston market has done that, which is why everyone else is struggling.

1. Not everyone else is struggling.
2. You're trying to tell us a 182 or Archer customer is the same cohort as an SR-22.
Cirrus might be the Lexus dealer of the light GA world, but we don't see Chevy trying to sell the exclusive lifestyle schtick do we.

 

[MetalCloud]

1. Everyone else is not struggling.
2. You're trying to tell us a 182 or Archer customer is the same cohort as an SR-22.

1. You’re right. Mooney is kicking sooooo much ass. I forgot. Huge waiting list for bonanzas. Silly me.

2. And don’t take my comparison too literally. Just an example brah. But it’s still to the point. The interiors of those suuuucckkk and haven’t been innovated at all in how many years?

 

[GRG55]

1. You’re right. Mooney is kicking sooooo much ass. I forgot. Huge waiting list for bonanzas. Silly me.

...

Think of the Bonanza as an Pontiac and Mooney as an Oldsmobile. Both brands not long for this world.
Doesn't mean every airplane buyer out there is interested in or can be sold on the "plastic life".

 

[tspear]

Think of the Bonanza as an Pontiac and Mooney as an Oldsmobile. Both brands not long for this world.

rofl, likely so true

Tim

 

[hindsight2020]

Cirrus production numbers are a joke compared to the legacy OEMs in the 70s, and that's the number that literally allows me to even participate (1974 owner). Putting cup holders and LED lighting on new manufacture ain't gonna change the chart below.



So it's not some jab at Cirrus for the sake of itself. If legacy support for my 1974 contraption didn't exist, I'd be SOL. Sure, Cirrus buyers don't care about that, but they're still the minority in the personal owned market. I'm not a builder nor a 2-seater empty nester, so I can't yet rely on that market to keep me flying. I'd love to patronize manufacturers like Cirrus or Tecnam, but the production bathtub of the 80s and 90s put a serious dent on my ability to upgrade affordably. I can ask my employer if they'll adjust my pay for inflation indexed to 1970, but I can't promise they'll gain traction . So I have to root for the "anachronistic" option of fleet sales, and ride the coat tails of the flight training market in order to keep the infrastructure in place to support my old can. Nothing against the affluent market, just trying to stay in the game. My point is that this is hardly making a Luddite argument against the likes of the automotive interior crowd and their predilections.

 

[denverpilot]

I believe the rapid increase in the red line is indicative of when the greedy 80s lawyers killed GA. Both the congressional ones who chopped the tax incentives and the liability ones.

The “revitalization act” was a joke. Notice the industry wasn’t actually revitalized. We now have long enough term data to see that.

 

[Z06_Mir]

Agrees. Garmin enjoys a 50-60% gross margin. I doubt they'd have gotten into a business that would erode that.

https://ycharts.com/companies/GRMN/gross_profit_margin

And since this thread is showcasing booths at Oshkosh, it was very noticeable how busy the Garmin tent was. I also went to the Honeywell tent (where I can get a significant discount on already cheaper products) and it was a ghost town. Garmin is keeping up with the times and producing products people want to buy at a premium. Cessna and Piper are alive and well in GA, but like any industry they will follow the money. The money is not in piston singles and their focuses have shifted to more viable GA markets.

 

[Palmpilot]

I believe the rapid increase in the red line is indicative of when the greedy 80s lawyers killed GA. Both the congressional ones who chopped the tax incentives and the liability ones.

The “revitalization act” was a joke. Notice the industry wasn’t actually revitalized. We now have long enough term data to see that.

How about "partially revitalized"? Cessna restarted production of piston singles as a result of that law, and there are quite a lot of 172s and 182s flying around now that wouldn't have been built otherwise.

 

[bnt83]

It really is, it is not just another private jet. the functional innovation they put in that plane, as well as its performance capabilities are absolutely insane. Especially for single pilot certification you basically end up with a remarkably comfortable miniature airliner that will fly in and out of <3000 runways

If I had an extra 10 million kicking around this would be by far the plane I would buying

Kinda looks like just another jet to me lol, even uses the exact same engines as a competitor does.

I am curious if it will be a part 23 or part 25 airplane tho. I would assume part 23 when they are comparing it to CJs and Phenoms.

 

[steingar]

The “revitalization act” was a joke. Notice the industry wasn’t actually revitalized. We now have long enough term data to see that.

I think the only people you can't sue in America are airplane manufacturers if the aircraft involved was over 18 year old. That's the only limitation I know of for our legal system, and I doubt strongly its constitutional. Thankfully no one has yet taken their case that far.

 

[bnt83]

I think the only people you can't sue in America are airplane manufacturers if the aircraft involved was over 18 year old. That's the only limitation I know of for our legal system, and I doubt strongly its constitutional. Thankfully no one has yet taken their case that far.

I think that's close, but if you install a new engine from Lycoming on a 50 year old plane Lycoming is on hook for another 18 years the way I understand it.

 

[steingar]

I think that's close, but if you install a new engine from Lycoming on a 50 year old plane Lycoming is on hook for another 18 years the way I understand it.

I believe you're correct. But they still cannot sue the original airframe manufacturer. That's why all the suits focusing on Lycoming and other aerospace suppliers.

 

[bnt83]

I believe you're correct. But they still cannot sue the original airframe manufacturer. That's why all the suits focusing on Lycoming and other aerospace suppliers.

Downside is everyone gets caught in the crossfire whether it was their equipment that cause it or not.

 

[steingar]

Downside is everyone gets caught in the crossfire whether it was their equipment that cause it or not.

Yes. And unfortunately our system of juris prudence sucks when dealing with technical matters. I suspect juries believe whoever has the biggest hair.

 

[Kenny Phillips]

I think the only people you can't sue in America are airplane manufacturers if the aircraft involved was over 18 year old. That's the only limitation I know of for our legal system, and I doubt strongly its constitutional. Thankfully no one has yet taken their case that far.

We have statutes of limitations on all sorts of things, including crimes and torts. They've been tested, and found to be constitutional. Why should a manufacturer be liable for something that's been out of their grasp for nearly two decades?

 

[Tantalum]

Kinda looks like just another jet to me lol, even uses the exact same engines as a competitor does.

I am curious if it will be a part 23 or part 25 airplane tho. I would assume part 23 when they are comparing it to CJs and Phenoms.

It is already certified did so under part 23. With 2,800 ft field performance and grass / dirt strip ready capabilities plus a 2,000 nm range with a 440 KTAS cruise that's impressive.. I believe with pilot plus 11 passengers it's the largest single pilot certified jet out there. It may look similar but it's packing a lot more punch and versatility with a lot of innovation incorporated

 

[denverpilot]

Yes. And unfortunately our system of juris prudence sucks when dealing with technical matters. I suspect juries believe whoever has the biggest hair.

That’s mostly because juries aren’t really made up of peers.

If you’ve got an aircraft expert on trial for some sort of malfeasance, a housewife isn’t really the expert’s peer.

 

[Tantalum]

That’s mostly because juries aren’t really made up of peers.

Exactly. Applies to a lot of areas, not just aviation. Granted, both lawyers have an opportunity to select jurors.. but at the end of the day I would venture to guess that rarely is a defendant ever actually judged by his or her actual peers

*the whole jury system is suspect in my opinion because of that. The lawyer's jobs should be to present the relevant facts and the judge is there to be the arbiter in those facts. Why we have a group of people in the room with generally zero law education and only a basic 10 minute VHS video knowledgebase of the jury system that can have any input on a guilty or innocent verdict is beyond me. Imagine if a surgeon walked out of the operating room and invited a dozen random people off the street in, had them watch 10 minutes of Magic School Bus, then asked for input on the surgery??

 

[GRG55]

...Cessna and Piper are alive and well in GA, but like any industry they will follow the money. The money is not in piston singles and their focuses have shifted to more viable GA markets.

Cessna, and to a lesser degree Piper, have shifted focus.
However, they are still making money producing <200 hp piston singles. But not by selling them one at a time as lifestyle enhancing baubles to private owners.
Despite the slagging Textron/Cessna is taking on this thread it's arguably the best placed to be the long term survivor in this rather challenging industry of producing GA aircraft.

 

[Z06_Mir]

Cessna, and to a lesser degree Piper, have shifted focus.
However, they are still making money producing <200 hp piston singles. But not by selling them one at a time as lifestyle enhancing baubles to private owners.
Despite the slagging Textron/Cessna is taking on this thread it's arguably the best placed to be the long term survivor in this rather challenging industry of producing GA aircraft.

One of my very favorite flight instructors told me a story from an aircraft dealership in the 1970s (yeah, old story that isn't mine...) The guy would sell a whole bunch of singles, then three to five years later sell a whole bunch of high performance singles, then three to five years later a whole bunch of piston twins. Progression. My students in the 20s and 30s fly because it saves time (and time is money) not because it's the best weekend activity they can think of. Companies need to realize that generation of aviator and act/build accordingly.

 

[GRG55]

Cirrus production numbers are a joke compared to the legacy OEMs in the 70s, and that's the number that literally allows me to even participate (1974 owner). Putting cup holders and LED lighting on new manufacture ain't gonna change the chart below.

View attachment 65896

...

The fall off in the early 1980s was dramatic. The chart you posted ends at the time of the '08/'09 financial crisis.

The point I have tried to make several times on this thread is it's not getting any better. After the drop during the financial crisis, volume flat-lined. We are stuck at 1998 levels (see chart below). Obviously a combination of price inflation, and the mix today which includes more expensive airplanes than it did in 1998 (e.g $800,000 SR-22s ), has help maintain revenues. But what industry can say it's thriving with zero volume growth over two decades? Does anybody really think the outcome would be different if Cessna and Piper had "innovated" (personally I think Piper correctly anticipated where the market was moving with first the Malibu and then the Meridian - both of which have seen the same sort of continuous improvement innovation as some here think only Cirrus is capable of ).

There hasn't been a single year with piston single sales above 1000 units in the last decade. And there's at least 16 companies competing to sell GA piston single aircraft in the USA. So what does the next recession bring? And why in hell would any manufacturer in its right mind want to produce an all new product in the zero growth piston single space?

The inexorable trends the industry is dealing with are in plain view: 1) the flight training industry is shifting to students entering to become professional pilots and away from ab initio students dreaming of flying their own airplane; 2) the national private pilot population has been in steady decline for some time and shows no signs of reversing, and 3) the new personal use aircraft market is tiny, probably cannot support all the cottage industry players in it today, and will likely become even tinier after the next recession.



If you are a fleet buyer for a flight training unit you bid Cessna, Piper and maybe Diamond. If you are buying a high performance piston single for personal use you look at Cirrus, Diamond and maybe Mooney or Piper (Malibu). The rest of us will have to content ourselves that if we have an airplane built between 1975 and 1985, that is "new" by our standards.

 

[UngaWunga]

The experimental market has filled the gap a little. How many experimental aircraft were bought/built/registered in that time period? Those are much more down in the "affordable" range of most.

 

[Warmi]

There are about 35 000 experimental aircraft registered by FAA and about 8 000 light sport.

 

[bnt83]

It is already certified did so under part 23. With 2,800 ft field performance and grass / dirt strip ready capabilities plus a 2,000 nm range with a 440 KTAS cruise that's impressive.. I believe with pilot plus 11 passengers it's the largest single pilot certified jet out there. It may look similar but it's packing a lot more punch and versatility with a lot of innovation incorporated

Sure enough, part 23. http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_G...05648625825600573cba/$FILE/A00072CE_Rev_2.pdf

TCDS shows 8 pax plus crew.

 

[NordicDave]

Oh, and agree with the comments on the selling of the lifestyle / brand. I guarantee had I bought a 182 or Archer or whatever, the wife and kids would not have embraced flying nearly as much as they have. Cirrus did nail it there. They innovated not only with the planes themselves but the overall message. No one else in the piston market has done that, which is why everyone else is struggling.

Absolutely. At an airshow... Pretend you have the bank and are are shopping for a plane.

Sit in a brand new Cessna and then a new Cirrus of any type with the Garmin Perspective system. The Cirrus is awe inspiring with it's modern feel and ergonomics.

 

[Tantalum]

The Cirrus is awe inspiring with it's modern feel and ergonomics.

100%! No rivets, smooth clean modern lines, etc. Granted, Diamond's product looked nice too, but where Cirrus beat the pack was in their customer centric approach. People from all walks of life were waiting in line to sit in the jet and their planes.. no "by appointment only" sign.. which makes you think that "hey, one day I can buy one of these, even if today I can't. I feel like an actual customer". The store as well was properly stocked. It was not just a stack of XL T-shirts with "Cirrus" generically written across the front (as you saw from Piper, etc.) but they had all sorts of "stuff" to sell the image and the lifestyle, much of it geared towards a female buyer it seemed. It's a great marketing case study.. if I told you two decades ago that there would be a company out there selling single engine non pressurized GA planes for close to $1M in a struggling industry.. and not just doing so, but selling hundreds more than their competitors, I would have been called patently crazy. But here we are. Really any successful brand sells a lot more than just a product.

 

[Tantalum]

Sure enough, part 23. http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_G...05648625825600573cba/$FILE/A00072CE_Rev_2.pdf

TCDS shows 8 pax plus crew.

I remember part 23 was a big deal for them. The 8 pax plus crew, I wonder how they define crew. In all their marketing they were showing 11 + 1 for people it can carry. Either way, a really cool plane.. I do wonder how much its grass field capabilities will be used though