EAA's President, Rod Hightower, resigns

[flyingcheesehead]

This press release just hit my inbox:

HIGHTOWER RESIGNS AS EAA PRESIDENT/CEO

EAA AVIATION CENTER, Oshkosh, Wis. – October 22, 2012 – The Experimental Aircraft Association (EAA) Board of Directors accepted the resignation of President and CEO Rod Hightower today. Hightower will be returning to St. Louis to reunite with his family.

“Maura and I have five children ranging in age from pre-school to college freshman,” Hightower said. “When I accepted the position two years ago I believed that we could as a family relocate to the Oshkosh area. But our family and school involvement have increased as our children advance in the schools they, and we as their parents, love. It would simply be too great a hardship on my family to move them to the Oshkosh area.”

Jack Pelton, recently retired Chairman, president and CEO of Cessna Aircraft, has been elected Chairman of the Board of Directors of EAA. In his role as EAA Chair, Pelton will guide the organization through the leadership transition.

“I will be working closely with the EAA Board of Directors to ensure a seamless transition to a new leader,” Pelton said.

“The directors of EAA and I thank Rod for his service. We understand how difficult it is to relocate a family of school-age children,” Pelton said.

“EAA, as all of aviation, faces many challenges with the continuing economic slump and the decrease in personal aviation participation. As an association we must remain focused on the original mission of our founder, Paul H. Poberezny, to welcome all members no matter what they fly, celebrate our volunteers, and treat our employees fairly,” Pelton added.

 

[jtheune]

I wonder how this will effect all the promises made about fixing problems at Osh?

 

[tonycondon]

hopefully this doesn't mess up Jack's work on getting his glider add on. congrats to him though.

 

[jesse]

Nice cover story.

 

[tonycondon]

Nice cover story.

"my kids didn't want to move, oh yea and many many members didn't really like me"

 

[flyingcheesehead]

"my kids didn't want to move, oh yea and many many members didn't really like me"

C'mon, most people are going to ***** and moan no matter who's at the top with both EAA and AOPA because of the current state of GA, which those two don't have nearly as much control over as we wish they did.

I have heard an awful lot of stories about everything at EAA being ridiculously political. I choose not to play those games, so I try to ignore it all as best I can. You can't do that when you're the president of the org.

I'm not sure what my prediction is for the replacement - Either it'll be someone promoted from within because they're good at playing the game, or it'll be someone from outside because nobody within wants to be the guy who gets blamed for the inevitable problems.

BTW, just got an updated press release that adds the following:

“EAA, as does all of aviation, faces many challenges with the continuing economic slump and the decrease in personal aviation participation. As an association, Rod and the senior team have put the organization on a solid path to our future, while honoring our legacy and focusing on the mission our founder, Paul H. Poberezny, established 60 years ago. The EAA mission is to welcome all members no matter what they fly, celebrate our volunteers and enjoy the World’s Greatest Aviation Celebration,” Pelton added.

 

[wabower]

Management Succession 101

Rule 1: Never follow a legend.

Rule 2. Always follow the guy who followed the legend.

Rule 3. If you play county fairs, never follow a dog act or a banjo player.

 

[kyleb]

Nice cover story.

This.

Hightower was akin to the capitan of the Costa Concordia. He took something that was working just fine and ran it up on the rocks.

The question is how "New EAA" can reassemble the mess that he made of things. A whole lot of institutional knowledge and goodwill was thrown overboard in Hightower's year and a half.

 

[AdamZ]

I find it ironic that a guy from Cessna is going to take the helm of the Experimental Aircraft Assn on an interim basis.

 

[N801BH]

I find it ironic that a guy from Cessna is going to take the helm of the Experimental Aircraft Assn on an interim basis.

Jack ain't no angel either...

http://www.aero-news.net/index.cfm?do=main.textpost&id=d75a19ed-4ce3-4ddf-abc4-7b2da56dc1db

 

[jesse]

I find it ironic that a guy from Cessna is going to take the helm of the Experimental Aircraft Assn on an interim basis.

A guy that should be pretty damn busy running Cessna you'd think.

 

[bbchien]

The trouble is you get guys from corporate America trying to run a grassroots organization.

Just think about that one sentence for a bit...

 

[denverpilot]

A guy that should be pretty damn busy running Cessna you'd think.

Already ran it into the ground as a GA manufacturer and well on its way to losing to numerous other bizjet players.

Pretty much makes Caravans now as its only product line that beats the competition.

Had to get out and find something else to "accomplish".

 

[wabower]

Which competitor are you thinking did better? Has is occurred to you that 2008 took them all down?

Already ran it into the ground as a GA manufacturer and well on its way to losing to numerous other bizjet players.

Pretty much makes Caravans now as its only product line that beats the competition.

Had to get out and find something else to "accomplish".

 

[denverpilot]

Which competitor are you thinking did better? Has is occurred to you that 2008 took them all down?

Was referring to product development and choices. The overall economy crushing revenues was shared pain.

Citation? Also-ran. Skycatcher? Not living up to the hype. Single piston line? Priced so high only a Senator swinging the money for CAP orders saved the G1000 Skylane. Dead otherwise.

The point was, what leadership has this guy shown that he deserves a shot at EAA? I'm willing to listen and hear a plan.

Will wait and see what he says. In 2010 he announced Cessna was half the size when he took over but had no ideas on how to fix it.

And what is "success" when it comes to EAA? Will his compensation be based on an objective measure?

He accurately stated NexGen as an additional economic draw on an industry that couldn't afford it, though. Points for that. Think EAA will take up the banner of anti-NexGen? Haha. Right. Not happening.

We all know our membership dues aren't paying EAA's bills. So I see this as wooing advertisers. We shall see.

 

[wabower]

So you think Cessna's unprecedented profits for the five years prior to 2008 when Jack was CEO/Chairman was an accident?

Whose product line outperformed the Citation in it's market segment?

What other company devoted the same resources to its ongoing commitment to piston singles as Cessna?

Pelton's only failure was that like many others he thought (hoped is probably more accurate) that the downturn would be of shorter duration and the industry would right itself by 2010 as was originally forecast, or 2011 at latest. The estimates were off by at least two years and they all paid the price.

Pelton and his wife are both pilots, and Jack flew his old airplanes for fun (including a 195 IIRC) while he ran Cessna, and was a strong advocate for our part of GA. Who else in the industry are you thinking did a better job for us?

I don't know if he wants the job or not, but of the likely candidates who understand running a big aviation organization and are dedicated to GA, he would be near the top of any list I could conjure up. Who's on yours?

Insofar as the difference it will ever make to me is concerned, they could hire Monica Lewinsky.

Was referring to product development and choices. The overall economy crushing revenues was shared pain.

Citation? Also-ran. Skycatcher? Not living up to the hype. Single piston line? Priced so high only a Senator swinging the money for CAP orders saved the G1000 Skylane. Dead otherwise.

The point was, what leadership has this guy shown that he deserves a shot at EAA? I'm willing to listen and hear a plan.

Will wait and see what he says. In 2010 he announced Cessna was half the size when he took over but had no ideas on how to fix it.

And what is "success" when it comes to EAA? Will his compensation be based on an objective measure?

He accurately stated NexGen as an additional economic draw on an industry that couldn't afford it, though. Points for that. Think EAA will take up the banner of anti-NexGen? Haha. Right. Not happening.

We all know our membership dues aren't paying EAA's bills. So I see this as wooing advertisers. We shall see.

 

[Everskyward]

 

[N801BH]

So you think Cessna's unprecedented profits for the five years prior to 2008 when Jack was CEO/Chairman was an accident?

Whose product line outperformed the Citation in it's market segment?

What other company devoted the same resources to its ongoing commitment to piston singles as Cessna?

Pelton's only failure was that like many others he thought (hoped is probably more accurate) that the downturn would be of shorter duration and the industry would right itself by 2010 as was originally forecast, or 2011 at latest. The estimates were off by at least two years and they all paid the price.

Pelton and his wife are both pilots, and Jack flew his old airplanes for fun (including a 195 IIRC) while he ran Cessna, and was a strong advocate for our part of GA. Who else in the industry are you thinking did a better job for us?

I don't know if he wants the job or not, but of the likely candidates who understand running a big aviation organization and are dedicated to GA, he would be near the top of any list I could conjure up. Who's on yours?

Insofar as the difference it will ever make to me is concerned, they could hire Monica Lewinsky.

I think Jack did a fair job while at Cessna, altho it was during good times and back then alot of marginal management styles were able to look good.

I still contend his dishonest education porfolio paints him in a bad light in my eyes... Care to comment on that fiasco ?

http://www.aero-news.net/index.cfm?do=main.textpost&id=d75a19ed-4ce3-4ddf-abc4-7b2da56dc1db.

My money is on Tom P coming back to guide the ship till a decent replacement can be found.

 

[denverpilot]

So you think Cessna's unprecedented profits for the five years prior to 2008 when Jack was CEO/Chairman was an accident?

Whose product line outperformed the Citation in it's market segment?

Looks like Embraer went UP in market share while Cessna lost twice the market share their competitors did after 2008 there, in the numbers someone else posted...

Relative performance-wise, they did great on the way up, and lost more than their share of the sales on the way down.

Tons of companies made "record profits" in the pre-crash bubble. Cessna did well on the upside. I can't come up with reasons why a different exec than Pelton would have done any worse.

What other company devoted the same resources to its ongoing commitment to piston singles as Cessna?

Remove the Civil Air Patrol orders from their piston single numbers and see how the numbers look. There's a bit of an artificial prop up (pun intended) by those large orders.

My contention is Pelton sat in the chair and watched Cessna go up with the rest of the industry and then watched it get clobbered harder than competitors when the bottom fell out and didn't adjust.

Compare and contrast to Garmin, who destroyed their competiton. Personally, that bums me out, but their shareholders have to be impressed. They obliterated their competiton in the aviation market. Cessna probably had a window of opportunity to do the same. They didn't.

Pelton's only failure was that like many others he thought (hoped is probably more accurate) that the downturn would be of shorter duration and the industry would right itself by 2010 as was originally forecast, or 2011 at latest. The estimates were off by at least two years and they all paid the price.

To use your famous question, what evidence did any of them have that there was an upturn coming in two years?

Pelton and his wife are both pilots, and Jack flew his old airplanes for fun (including a 195 IIRC) while he ran Cessna, and was a strong advocate for our part of GA. Who else in the industry are you thinking did a better job for us?

Uhh, not quite sure your point here. He plays with his toys that are as outrageously outdated and expensive as ours are, on weekends, so he's somehow helping GA? What's flying around in a 195 doing to lower GA costs or get new pilots to buy Cessnas?

Skycatcher was a weak attempt, but it's not turned out to be much of an aircraft. If he wedged himself into a Skycatcher every weekend, I'd be on your side on this one, but flying stuff made by his predecessors decades before him, doesn't make him a GA champion. It just makes him a weekend caretaker of another museum piece, like the rest of us.

Buying the Corvalis lineup, was that well-timed? Not sure about that either. Did he make the airplane cheaper to manufacture? How does Corvalis fit Cessnas goals as a company? It's certainly not a stepping stone to a Citation. What's it doing at Cessna anyway? It needs to be sold off.

I don't know if he wants the job or not, but of the likely candidates who understand running a big aviation organization and are dedicated to GA, he would be near the top of any list I could conjure up. Who's on yours?

I bet there is a line a mile long who have the drive and skill to reorganize EAA back down to a grassroots organization, but I don't think that's where they're headed.

The 30-40 something's who'd be cheap and able to do it, don't have the industry contacts to make the deals necessary. They'd learn quick, but it depends a lot on where the organization wants to go. They'd need a risk-taking Board to be strong mentors and put in a lot of hours with them.

Number one thing killing GA piston singles for decades now, is rising aircraft prices and rising fuel prices. Experimentals have the aircraft price piece under better control than manufacturers do, by a wide margin, but you have to live in your garage for five years to do it. Fuel prices, MoGas powered aircraft win there too. We aren't going back to $1.50/gallon fuel.

So in my opinion, EAA is set up to take the GA world by storm, if they have the willpower to make it really about Experimental Aircraft again. Where's the docile GA trainers in the homebuilt world? Why aren't they pushing the easiest to build versions of those? Why are the RVs the successful crowd? We going to teach new students in RVs?

I'm glad the RV crowd loves their airplanes, I really am. But the world needs an affordable new trainer that can haul more than an LSA. Not a lot more, but something 172 sized. New. Cheap. Anyone in the modern middle class can afford to build and fly it.

We have to adjust the hobby to fix the student starts. Until we figure that out, we're dead. Pelton, whoever... Doesn't matter.

I have no beef with Pelton other than he won't show up wanting to climb into a homebuilt trainer and show it off to eager broke 20-something's so they'll get started and have one built and will fly it eight or ten hours one way to show it off at OSH 2017.

Or I very much doubt he will, anyway... We'll see.

EAA either has to go big, and destroy AOPA... The corporate route... Big tent. Merge or die. Must have "growth" to survive...

Or go small and get back to builders as the main crowd.

Dropping big sponsorships... that'd alienate Ford and Cessna and Piper and what-not, and maybe rightly so... They haven't had products the general flying public could afford to buy in over two decades.

(Ford being an exception I suppose, but not many of us buying new cars these days if we spend our money on flying. I laughed my butt off that they were showing off their new pickup trucks at OSH. Yeah... Right. Nice trucks, but is the aviation crowd really buying? Rousch Racing Mustangs? Come on.)

 

[wabower]

Looks like Embraer went UP in market share while Cessna lost twice the market share their competitors did after 2008 there, in the numbers someone else posted...

Was Emb's entry into the market solely in light jets? Did they take share from any others? Is sale of new planes the only revenue/profit measuring stick for established manufacturers with extensive parts, service, support (how many Citation service centers can you count) and used sales? Have other companies been selling light jets for years? How's Beech doing with theirs? Is Eclipse still kicking Mustang's ass sales-wise because it's cheaper?

Relative performance-wise, they did great on the way up, and lost more than their share of the sales on the way down.

What were other manufacturer's unit sales and backlogs on 9-30-08? How far out were the back-logged deliveries for Cessna and other manufacturers? Are you suggesting that the manufacturer with the lowest units of backlog could somehow be the one with the lowest loss during a market crash? Can you explain how that might happen?

Tons of companies made "record profits" in the pre-crash bubble. Cessna did well on the upside. I can't come up with reasons why a different exec than Pelton would have done any worse.

So the guy who headed the company gets no credit for the ups but takes it in the shorts for the downs? Is that the way it works at your company? I noticed you were recently taking credit for bringing a job in at less cost than others had done. Was it really you that was responsible, or could somebody else have done it better?

Remove the Civil Air Patrol orders from their piston single numbers and see how the numbers look. There's a bit of an artificial prop up (pun intended) by those large orders.

Who cares? Would the CAP have gone without new planes they planned to buy or bought them from another source? Is Cessna to be faulted for selling them, or congratulated for winning the competition? Did Cessna help create the demand for new planes by producing the predecessors that the CAP had successfully used for years?

My contention is Pelton sat in the chair and watched Cessna go up with the rest of the industry and then watched it get clobbered harder than competitors when the bottom fell out and didn't adjust.

Which manufacturer adjusted better? How would you have adjusted? Would you have lowered orders in prior years to reduce backlog?

Compare and contrast to Garmin, who destroyed their competiton. Personally, that bums me out, but their shareholders have to be impressed. They obliterated their competiton in the aviation market. Cessna probably had a window of opportunity to do the same. They didn't.

What's the average unit sale at Garmin? Does GE sell more toasters or engines for wide-body jets? Does comparing any avionics manufacturer to airframe manufacturers demonstrate a profound lack of understanding of both industries?

To use your famous question, what evidence did any of them have that there was an upturn coming in two years?

What would you have used?

Uhh, not quite sure your point here. He plays with his toys that are as outrageously outdated and expensive as ours are, on weekends, so he's somehow helping GA? What's flying around in a 195 doing to lower GA costs or get new pilots to buy Cessnas?

How many other heads of GA manufacturing orgs spend weekends at the airport? Do you want somebody who walks the walk or talks the talk? Who cares what they fly? Pelton was criticized by the bean-counters as being a pilot who was a staunch GA supporter.

Skycatcher was a weak attempt, but it's not turned out to be much of an aircraft.

Which other US manufacturer has done as much? Is Cessna to be applauded for continuing to produce new trainers to replace the ragged-out fleet that is the subject of ongoing complaints or skewered because they are little two-seaters that lack coast-to-coast range?

If he wedged himself into a Skycatcher every weekend, I'd be on your side on this one, but flying stuff made by his predecessors decades before him, doesn't make him a GA champion. It just makes him a weekend caretaker of another museum piece, like the rest of us.

Then why don't you convince your co-owners to buy a 162? It obviously seems to you like it's the right thing to do for the industry. I think you should show your stuff and take one for the team.

Buying the Corvalis lineup, was that well-timed? Not sure about that either.

Too early to tell. They paid for the technology, got the product line free. Whether the current plane or whatever they have on the boards will ever pay back is YTBD. Beech has used that same argument for the lessons learned in the Starship program and how the mandrel-spun tubes have revolutionized their mfg process, but haven't been able to convert that knowledge to sales and appear to be toast.

Did he make the airplane cheaper to manufacture? How does Corvalis fit Cessnas goals as a company?

The airplane Cessna is selling isn't the plane Columbia was producing. I'd guess it costs more to build, but Cessna decided to play in the light GA market and needed a product to fill the line. Was buying Columbia a more cost-effective move than producing a clean-sheet.

It's certainly not a stepping stone to a Citation. What's it doing at Cessna anyway? It needs to be sold off.

When was the last time Cessna produced an airplane that was a stepping-stone to a jet? Did Cessna's big sales growth in jets occur before or after that date?

I bet there is a line a mile long who have the drive and skill to reorganize EAA back down to a grassroots organization, but I don't think that's where they're headed.

I asked for a name, not a ramble. Pick one.

The 30-40 something's who'd be cheap and able to do it, don't have the industry contacts to make the deals necessary. They'd learn quick, but it depends a lot on where the organization wants to go. They'd need a risk-taking Board to be strong mentors and put in a lot of hours with them.

More ramble. Who's your guy? First-name, last-name. It's not that hard.

Number one thing killing GA piston singles for decades now, is rising aircraft prices and rising fuel prices. Experimentals have the aircraft price piece under better control than manufacturers do, by a wide margin, but you have to live in your garage for five years to do it. Fuel prices, MoGas powered aircraft win there too. We aren't going back to $1.50/gallon fuel.

Yada-yada-yada. Any chance for this discussion to stay on topic?

So in my opinion, EAA is set up to take the GA world by storm, if they have the willpower to make it really about Experimental Aircraft again.

Where's the docile GA trainers in the homebuilt world?

Why in the world would a pilot spend five years of his life in his garage building a trainer? What would he have when he's done?

Why aren't they pushing the easiest to build versions of those?

Because the market doesn't want them? Would you want one?

Why are the RVs the successful crowd?

Because their planes perform more like real airplanes than trainers. And look good while they're doing it.

We going to teach new students in RVs?

Nope, and not many in Corvallis either. That's why Cessna built the 162 you don't like. For pilots who like docile trainer handling combined with decent utility for travel, the population of 172's will last well past the time when all the PPL's are dead and gone.

I'm glad the RV crowd loves their airplanes, I really am. But the world needs an affordable new trainer that can haul more than an LSA. Not a lot more, but something 172 sized. New. Cheap. Anyone in the modern middle class can afford to build and fly it.

And cars that get 100 mpg, a 40% decrease in health-care costs and a social security fund that won't go broke in our lifetime. What are the odds of any of it happening?

We have to adjust the hobby to fix the student starts. Until we figure that out, we're dead. Pelton, whoever... Doesn't matter.

Name your guy to get us out of the hole.

I have no beef with Pelton other than he won't show up wanting to climb into a homebuilt trainer and show it off to eager broke 20-something's so they'll get started and have one built and will fly it eight or ten hours one way to show it off at OSH 2017.

Facts to support or pure speculation?

Or I very much doubt he will, anyway... We'll see.

If he won't, who will?

EAA either has to go big, and destroy AOPA... The corporate route... Big tent. Merge or die. Must have "growth" to survive...

So should the leader have Pelton's background or similar?

Or go small and get back to builders as the main crowd.

If you were on the EAA board, would you allow that to happen?

Dropping big sponsorships... that'd alienate Ford and Cessna and Piper and what-not, and maybe rightly so... They haven't had products the general flying public could afford to buy in over two decades.

What's wrong with corporate sponsors who help fund non-profits? Should they be demonized or welcomed with open arms? Every pilot I know also has more than one car, except for the pro pilots who can't afford afford to keep a clutch in their beater.

(Ford being an exception I suppose, but not many of us buying new cars these days if we spend our money on flying. I laughed my butt off that they were showing off their new pickup trucks at OSH. Yeah... Right. Nice trucks, but is the aviation crowd really buying? Rousch Racing Mustangs? Come on.)

You think maybe they looked around in the parking lots and campgrounds and concluded that their brand was well-represented and that having a presence at the show might be of benefit when the time comes to trade cars? How many pilots might look at a car at OSH because they have time to do so and are tired of walking the line? We did a few years ago.

 

[Everskyward]

Citation? Also-ran.

Not that it matters in the context of EAA but Cessna did a much better job keeping up with the times in the light to supermidsize niche of the market than either Learjet or Hawker which are its main competitors.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

Citation? Also-ran. Skycatcher? Not living up to the hype. Single piston line? Priced so high only a Senator swinging the money for CAP orders saved the G1000 Skylane. Dead otherwise.

Actually, I've heard that the Citation Mustang is a really nice plane compared to the rest of the VLJ crowd. Cessna's MO isn't to be an envelope-pusher, they wait to see where the market goes, and then they come in and do it right.

I'm not a fan of the Skycatcher, but aside from Piper's short-lived sponsorship of the SportCruiser, no other established US manufacturer has made a new trainer LSA. Without the Skycatcher, I think the LSA segment might already be dead because nobody would take it seriously.

The point was, what leadership has this guy shown that he deserves a shot at EAA? I'm willing to listen and hear a plan.

He's not the new president. He's the chairman of the board. Big difference.

He accurately stated NexGen as an additional economic draw on an industry that couldn't afford it, though. Points for that. Think EAA will take up the banner of anti-NexGen? Haha. Right. Not happening.

Why the hell would they go against something that's going to happen no matter what and provides a lot of advantages for us? I can see them fighting for some help equipping our aircraft, but they'd have to be truly nuts to try to take on the entire NextGen system.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

Buying the Corvalis lineup, was that well-timed? Not sure about that either. Did he make the airplane cheaper to manufacture? How does Corvalis fit Cessnas goals as a company? It's certainly not a stepping stone to a Citation. What's it doing at Cessna anyway? It needs to be sold off.

It's there to keep Cessna in the higher-end GA market. I'm guessing that it was a whole lot cheaper to buy Columbia than it would have been to finish certifying the NGP, and I bet the Columbia is a much better airplane.

And sure, a Corvalis could be a stepping stone to a jet - Train in a 172, move up to a 400TT to get some good up-high cross country experience, and then buy your Mustang. But who cares?

So in my opinion, EAA is set up to take the GA world by storm, if they have the willpower to make it really about Experimental Aircraft again. Where's the docile GA trainers in the homebuilt world? Why aren't they pushing the easiest to build versions of those? Why are the RVs the successful crowd? We going to teach new students in RVs?

We have to adjust the hobby to fix the student starts. Until we figure that out, we're dead. Pelton, whoever... Doesn't matter.

I don't follow here. You think EAA should save GA by promoting a *trainer* homebuilt to increase student starts? I think you're WAY off here, Nate - How would the conversation go then?

Prospective student: "I'd like to learn to fly!"
Nate, as EAA prez: "Great! We'd love to have you!"
Student: "How much does it cost?"
Nate: "Well, you used to have to spend lots of money renting an airplane, but now you can have your own!"
Student: "Yeah, but how much does it cost?"
Nate: "It's way cheaper than those darn Cessnas like the one I used to fly."
Student: "Yeah, but how much does it cost?"
Nate: "Well, the kit costs $50K, and then you'll need an engine and some avionics..."
Student: "Whadda ya mean, 'kit?' I have to build a freakin' airplane to learn to fly?"
Nate: "Yeah, but when you're done it will be cheaper! You'll be able to do your own mechanical work on it too. Oh, and you'll need to be building it in every bit of free time you have for the next 5-10 or more years."
Student: "Y'know, I don't want to build an airplane. I really wanted to learn to fly and I was expecting to spend $10K over the next six months, but if it's going to be $100K and six years instead, I'm out. I'm headed to the boat store. Seeya."

 

[zaitcev]

I still contend his dishonest education porfolio paints him in a bad light in my eyes... Care to comment on that fiasco ?

You linked an article on Jim Campbell's site, Ben. I'm sorry, but no go. Find an honest source and I'll read.

 

[zaitcev]

I'm not a fan of the Skycatcher, but aside from Piper's short-lived sponsorship of the SportCruiser, no other established US manufacturer has made a new trainer LSA. Without the Skycatcher, I think the LSA segment might already be dead because nobody would take it seriously.

Skycatcher took about a third of LSA market. Its share is a fair indication of how many school owners are in Cessna's pocket (with Cessna Pilot Centers) and/or lead by crusty oldtimers who want an air-cooled direct-drive overweight lump of metal in the nose of their trainers. Also, when Jack was kicked out, the new leadership announced a steep price increase: from $105k to $145k. In the next month the bottom fell out from Skycatcher sales. There was no full year yet though, but it was pretty dramatic. Even crusty oldtimers felt compelled to investigate Rotax and plastics at that point.

LSA would of course be doing fine without Cessna. Maybe even better in some respects. The undisputed LSA leader is Flight Design, and they are so flush with profits that they are introducing a certificated 4-seat airplane. Unfortunately, it had to be powered by IO-360-AF. Cessna put up a fine fight, but without Jack they did not have the will to stem the advance of Flight Design and their ilk. I think Jack realized that eventually those airplanes will eat 182 from below.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

Skycatcher took about a third of LSA market. Its share is a fair indication of how many school owners are in Cessna's pocket (with Cessna Pilot Centers) and/or lead by crusty oldtimers who want an air-cooled direct-drive overweight lump of metal in the nose of their trainers. Also, when Jack was kicked out, the new leadership announced a steep price increase: from $105k to $145k. In the next month the bottom fell out from Skycatcher sales. There was no full year yet though, but it was pretty dramatic. Even crusty oldtimers felt compelled to investigate Rotax and plastics at that point.

The reason the Skycatcher has been successful is that Cessna has been around approximately forever and some people do worry about things like future parts availability when they buy an airplane. Regardless of the price (and the fact that the Skycatcher is not really a good airplane), Cessna's presence has helped the LSA market. Even though they may have (or had) a third of it, I highly doubt they took 1/3 of the sales away from the others.

Cessna put up a fine fight, but without Jack they did not have the will to stem the advance of Flight Design and their ilk. I think Jack realized that eventually those airplanes will eat 182 from below.

Um... I don't think so. There's still a place in the market for the 172, although if they keep jacking up the price the way they have been, they may change that. The 182 does not need to fear anything from LSA's, the two have completely different missions. If anything, the LSA will help 182 sales by allowing more people to afford flight training and increasing the size of the GA market. The 182 is a great step-up all-around travel/hauler kind of bird for someone with a family once they're finished training.

 

[zaitcev]

The 182 does not need to fear anything from LSA's, the two have completely different missions.

You misread me. I am not saying that LSAs are going to eat 182s, I'm saying the makers of LSAs will introduce more powerful airplanes that will eat Cessna's market share. It happens pretty often in all industries.

 

[Henning]

This.

Hightower was akin to the capitan of the Costa Concordia. He took something that was working just fine and ran it up on the rocks.

The question is how "New EAA" can reassemble the mess that he made of things. A whole lot of institutional knowledge and goodwill was thrown overboard in Hightower's year and a half.

I know, they should embrace the 'Owner Maint Experimental' category for Pt 91 aircraft line of thinking. That is the future of GA and the EAA and what will make panel upgrades much more affordable than they are now.

 

[steingar]

Geef. Who else were they really going to get? I just hope the leadership of the EAA doesn't start resembling the drummers of Spinal Tap.

 

[denverpilot]

I missed that Pelton wasn't appointed into the same role as Hightower yesterday, it does make a difference. But...

Wayne: You just throwing questions out to pretend all those questions are relevant to me? Or that anyone in the general GA population cares? The BoD already judged (probably on those criteria and more, but they're not going to say) and fired him. I don't really need any more information as an outsider. When all your BoD buddies fire you, that's probably quite enough information, thanks. Me not knowing the deep internals of Cessna's books, is a non-sequitur, and proves nothing. All I need to know about his performance is that he's not there anymore. Speaks volumes, really.

Kent: There is no reasonable fiscal step up from a (new) LSA to a (new) 182. Going from an LSA to a new Skyhawk is a 3.5X increase in price, from an LSA to a 182 is over a 5X increase in price. That's not feasible for anyone sane. We're all flying on borrowed time on old aircraft. Cessna is limping along with large fleet orders for 172s from giant flight schools, and large fleet orders for 182s from CAP. Half a million bucks for a 182 isn't a market, it's a niche.

There IS NO market. No private buyer market that can sustain their pricing. I can tell ya where the private buyers are... not in aviation.

The folks flying the LSAs and renting the 30 year old trainers aren't exactly slackers. They're often well above 50th percentile earners who can easily go out and buy a (ground-based) RV, a boat, some four-wheelers, a sports car... they're not fiscal slackers.

When even THAT crowd balks at new aircraft prices, the game is over. It has been for a while now.

For those of us flying the old airplanes, there isn't a market of people ready to step-up and buy them behind us. They weren't trained, and they don't exist. That's the problem GA needs to fix, and hasn't found a solution for in two decades. You don't exactly have people beating down your door to pick up the Ovation, right? That's because there isn't a pool of aviators trained in the last ten years that can afford Skyhawks who want to step up.

Pete: As one of the only people here who really does their homework on the LSAs, I appreciate your input on them. They may be the only option soon for flying something that's not a classic.

Wayne wants "a name" for someone to head up EAA. I say that we probably won't find "a name" inside the in-bred halls of Corporate Aviation. Pelton was deemed a failure by his peers on the last BoD he worked for, now he's a BoD member at a new place?

Yeah... that makes sense... just keep playing those musical chairs games. That'll fix it.

Wayne's view is that saying there's probably someone "out there" is ramble. Fine. I'll ramble. None of the current crony leaders are getting the overall job done. It's going to take a huge shake-up.

Henning: Owner maintenance isn't going to happen in the U.S. - I like your idea, but the maintenance system way too entrenched in people's brains to allow it. Plus, let's get real... that non-existent group of Skyhawk owners that didn't get trained in the last ten years, even if they HAD been trained, wouldn't know how to work on anything. To make owner maintenance really work, a mentoring program and some way to pass on the knowledge has to take place, and people would need a month more of time off a year to get it. The 90th percentilers who can't afford a Skylane, don't have time for that.

Private purchase, non-business use, single-engine certified NEW aircraft, is a wasteland at this point. Folks that are above the 90th percentile in income can't swing them. Cessna is great for still selling them, but it's mostly a "last man standing" type of thing. They can't figure out how to cut their prices in half (which is where a 182 would have to be for the majority of 90th percentile income earners to afford one privately), and the LSAs aren't enough airplane for travel.

Kent completely misunderstood my comment about aircraft availability and EAA. I think the Experimental category is the only place left that can possibly create an affordable four-place trainer that can match the Skyhawk for half the price. I didn't say every student would be BUILDING that airplane themselves, just that they'll be FLYING someone else's eventually. The old aircraft from the 70s are eventually going to wear out. Building an RV is fun for some, and really fun flying for someone with some experience, but no one is going to lease it out to an FBO for training primary students.

It's a wide gap between the FBOs renting typical older trainers (and maybe they picked up a used DA-40 along the way), and where the new airplane "market" is. I'm flying out of one of the top ten GA airports in the country, and there's no significant numbers of new Cessnas on the lines. There's some Cessnas that were bought used out of places like Riddle. That's about it.

There's also a Cirrus-only place, filling a very high dollar niche. Won't find that outside of the city...

Cessna trickles out a few singles a year, which fills the tiny niche of new single buyers and the fleets. I wouldn't call that "leading" GA. Leading would be whoever and whatever comes up with a way to build certificated stuff cheaper. A LOT cheaper.

 

[Everskyward]

Pelton is an advocate of small GA. His wife learned to fly in a Skycatcher. They live on an airpark in Wichita. Many people at Cessna were unhappy about his ouster. I think it had a lot to do with the fact that Cessna is owned by the conglomerate Textron.

 

[jesse]

If it were possible to provide an experimental in a "for hire" role as a rental plane with instructor provided then you could fully expect great experimental trainer designs to flood the market for much less money.

But it's not, so it hasn't happened. There is just no way the FAA is ever going to let it happen.

 

[Sam D]

When all your BoD buddies fire you, that's probably quite enough information, thanks. Me not knowing the deep internals of Cessna's books, is a non-sequitur, and proves nothing. All I need to know about his performance is that he's not there anymore. Speaks volumes, really.

Last night I was eating dinner and I set down my knife and picked up my fork. Did that action speak volumes about the utility of the knife?

 

[N801BH]

You linked an article on Jim Campbell's site, Ben. I'm sorry, but no go. Find an honest source and I'll read.

No prob..... Just google Jack Pelton diploma.. You will get dozens of hits... I thought the one I linked was a CBS 60 minutes segment ?

 

[denverpilot]

Last night I was eating dinner and I set down my knife and picked up my fork. Did that action speak volumes about the utility of the knife?

So you're saying Jack was never cut out to be a knife, but he'll make a good fork?

Not sure your point.

Jack may be a good guy. He may even enjoy light aviation. It doesn't mean Cessna got any better at the light aircraft manufacturing role while he was there. By better, I mean driving costs down to normal American higher income levels. Building new designs that are affordable. Moving forward, not building 40 year old designs.

EAA is a vastly different role. It'll be interesting to see what he does. I suspect "more of the same" which at least a decade of decline in pilot starts that "stick", and few aircraft that people can afford, is the result.

EAA = Nice magazine. Best fly-in around. Great "hook". People see EAA stuff, they want to fly. Then they ask someone how much it costs. Gone. Poof. That's the broken part.

No significant battles won against government over-reach and product liability which all lead back to one place, cost -- which is still ravaging recreational aviation.

Selling big tents at a huge fly-in to the manufacturers isn't helping the average EAA member other than keeping dues low. It makes us all happy to gawk at airplanes we can't afford, but it's not saving the hobby.

Pushing regulatory change to allow Experimentals to exist, truly changed the hobby, but that was in the 70s and 80s. How about going after the onerous certification process?

Can the pilot organizations push harder? I don't know. But I think they have to, or die of attrition.

If Jack can pull it off, he's the right person for the job. We shall see.

 

[nddons]

I nominate Kent to fill Hightower's place. Who's with me?

 

[Henning]

Henning: Owner maintenance isn't going to happen in the U.S. - I like your idea, but the maintenance system way too entrenched in people's brains to allow it. Plus, let's get real... that non-existent group of Skyhawk owners that didn't get trained in the last ten years, even if they HAD been trained, wouldn't know how to work on anything. To make owner maintenance really work, a mentoring program and some way to pass on the knowledge has to take place, and people would need a month more of time off a year to get it. The 90th percentilers who can't afford a Skylane, don't have time for that.

Owner Maint will have A&P condition inspection annual, and the condition is 'safe for purpose of non commercial flight' eventually with some temporary restrictions to not flying over densely populated areas. If you want to know the definition of it is if you can't always make a safe landing due to people or their stuff like houses and cars. 10 years ago I would have agreed with you, but 103 as well as Ex/AB lead to LSA/SP and a rather hands off approach as to most things involved. They even broke a chink on SSRI SI, that's pretty damned progressive if you ask me. Last but not least, the FAA are the ones who started making noise about it. I'm actually hopeful that the FAA is going to step way back from pt 91.

 

[KSCessnaDriver]

Jack may be a good guy. He may even enjoy light aviation. It doesn't mean Cessna got any better at the light aircraft manufacturing role while he was there. By better, I mean driving costs down to normal American higher income levels. Building new designs that are affordable. Moving forward, not building 40 year old designs.

The sooner anyone and everyone in aviation realizes this simply isn't going to happen, the better. Flying has never been something affordable for everyone. Never will be. New airplanes will never be affordable to anyone who makes less than 6 figures a year or more, simply the sign of the times.

 

[wabower]

I missed that Pelton wasn't appointed into the same role as Hightower yesterday, it does make a difference.

Ya think?

Wayne: You just throwing questions out to pretend all those questions are relevant to me?

They were point-by-point responses to your post. If they weren't relevant, why did you include them?

Or that anyone in the general GA population cares?

Dunno. I was responding to your post, not to the editor of the EAA magazine. Ball is in your court to respond.

The BoD already judged (probably on those criteria and more, but they're not going to say) and fired him.

No question about it.

I don't really need any more information as an outsider.

Evidently. Everybody knows there's only one side of the story re every BoD action and that they are always right.

PS: How is Jack's replacement doing? Lots better? Some better? Any better? About the same? Even worse?

When all your BoD buddies fire you, that's probably quite enough information, thanks.

Please provide your basis for thinking that parent company boards are buddies with subsidiary officers, especially when things aren't going well.

Me not knowing the deep internals of Cessna's books, is a non-sequitur, and proves nothing.

Maybe not to you, but it proves to me that you may not have sufficient information to back up the stuff in your post. Hence my questions.

All I need to know about his performance is that he's not there anymore.

Quite a few execs in various aviation companies were also replaced. Evidently a lot of guys who were pretty smart prior to 9-30-08 took stupid pills at the same time.

Speaks volumes, really.

Doesn't mean squat other than that Textron's milk-tit at Cessna went dry and they freaked. Their golf cart biz tanked at the same time. Should Jack take the blame for that as well?

There IS NO market. No private buyer market that can sustain their pricing. I can tell ya where the private buyers are... not in aviation.

When I first went to Beech to run the audit field-work, the cost of a new Lincoln or Caddy was $6k. Bonanzas were $36k. Nobody but the rich could afford them then, same as now. Ratios are worse now, but the equipment and amenities are much more elaborate and expensive.

The folks flying the LSAs and renting the 30 year old trainers aren't exactly slackers. They're often well above 50th percentile earners who can easily go out and buy a (ground-based) RV, a boat, some four-wheelers, a sports car... they're not fiscal slackers.

But they couldn't buy a new plane in 1963 either. The dynamics haven't changed.

When even THAT crowd balks at new aircraft prices, the game is over. It has been for a while now.

Negative. That crowd has always bought used and still do.

For those of us flying the old airplanes, there isn't a market of people ready to step-up and buy them behind us. They weren't trained, and they don't exist. That's the problem GA needs to fix, and hasn't found a solution for in two decades.

And it's not going away. You're beating a dead horse.

You don't exactly have people beating down your door to pick up the Ovation, right? That's because there isn't a pool of aviators trained in the last ten years that can afford Skyhawks who want to step up.

The problem would have been simple to solve at the time. Another world war in the 80's would have provided the pilot population needed to sustain the market. But we would have probably lost the war so all bets are off.

Pete: As one of the only people here who really does their homework on the LSAs, I appreciate your input on them. They may be the only option soon for flying something that's not a classic.

Wayne wants "a name" for someone to head up EAA.

Are you thinking somebody in the witness protection program would be better?

I say that we probably won't find "a name" inside the in-bred halls of Corporate Aviation. Pelton was deemed a failure by his peers on the last BoD he worked for, now he's a BoD member at a new place?

To the contrary, Jack was criticized by the parent for his position as a strong proponent of our part of GA. The company didn't really like his affinity for small planes. He was trying to help the grass-roots segment while the parent company wanted more jets. He lost the battle.

Yeah... that makes sense... just keep playing those musical chairs games. That'll fix it.

Or maybe some IT guy would fill the bill. They know everything about everything.

Wayne's view is that saying there's probably someone "out there" is ramble. Fine. I'll ramble. None of the current crony leaders are getting the overall job done. It's going to take a huge shake-up.

Who's your guy? The president of the Pueblo chapter?

There's also a Cirrus-only place, filling a very high dollar niche. Won't find that outside of the city...

Marketing 101. High-end providers have always been part of the picture in most industries.

Cessna trickles out a few singles a year, which fills the tiny niche of new single buyers and the fleets. I wouldn't call that "leading" GA. Leading would be whoever and whatever comes up with a way to build certificated stuff cheaper. A LOT cheaper.

How much time have you spent on the manufacturing floor or accounting/finance office of an airplane manufacturer? Of the big cost components (make parts, bought parts, labor, overhead, equipment, etc.) which can you find ways to reduce? The problem is at least 50 years old. If it could have been done, wouldn't somebody have figured it out by now? Why has Mooney gone broke seven times, Piper a few less and now Beech?

 

[DaleB]

New airplanes will never be affordable to anyone who makes less than 6 figures a year or more, simply the sign of the times.

I would say new Cessnas are not affordable for anyone who makes less than the mid to high six figures. You could make an argument the that statement might exclude the Skycatcher, but I'd then argue that someone in the top 6% of earners is probably going to want something a little bigger and a little faster.