Endangered Species - Retractable Piston Singles?

GRG55

GRG55

Final Approach
Gone West
Joined
Dec 29, 2015
Messages
9,306
Display Name
Display name:
Aztec Flyer
The Cirrus electric car thread, with a post about "real" airplanes having gear that gets sucked up, got me thinking about all the yabbering that's gone on about the death of light piston twins and such. So I had a browse through the GAMA 2016 stats. What with Cirrus, TTx, Diamond, etc. welding (or gluing) the gear permanently down and locked I wonder which is the real endangered category, twins or retractable singles :eek:

2016 stats for all manufacturers worldwide:

Total piston engine aircraft delivered - 1142
Retractable piston twins - 97
Retractable piston singles - 65
Cirrus (all models) - 317
Cessna fixed gear singles (all models) - 217

Better line up and get your new Mooney or Beech Bonanza soon...time might be running out.
 
Last edited:
But how many people do you know who are buying brand new planes?
 
James331 said:
But how many people do you know who are buying brand new planes?
Click to expand...

I don't hang around with that cohort - other than here on PoA :D
I only know one pilot personally who bought a new airplane, and that was an A-36 Bo back in 1985. He sold it when he permanently retired from flying in 2015.

The point is, if you look at the stats, high performance retractable singles are dying as fast or faster than light twins. Last year Piper sold 34 turboprop M500/600s compared to 26 piston Malibus. Even the used prices for this category of airplane are reflecting that.
 
Last edited:
James331 said:
But how many people do you know who are buying brand new planes?
Click to expand...

New planes eventually become old planes and old planes often times get crashed or scrapped eventually.
 
asicer said:
New planes eventually become old planes and old planes often times get crashed or scrapped eventually.
Click to expand...

I've seen tons of planes from the 40s around, if you know of people scrapping them let me know! :)
 
Oh god please don't get him started
 
With computer simulation and advanced manufacturing techniques there are few advantages anymore to a retract. Guys with well faired fixed gear Ventures are only about 15-17 knts slower than the retracts if that. Small price to pay for reduced insurance and build complexity. The main advantage to a retract is the added drag when you need it now.
 
That's nonsense respectfully, the insurance difference is tiny with experience and when singles are approaching a million, the gear mechanism is a drop in the bucket. And good avionic systems can prevent gear ups.

15 knots is A LOT

I think fast fixed gear will eventually be overcome with another generation of designs like the Panthera, and we will look back on this as a fad that all these planes had fixed gear...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
In ten years our avionics will be able to glide us to an auto land in an emergency kind of like pulling the chute, and high glide ratios will be even more desirable...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Grum.Man said:
With computer simulation and advanced manufacturing techniques there are few advantages anymore to a retract. Guys with well faired fixed gear Ventures are only about 15-17 knts slower than the retracts if that. Small price to pay for reduced insurance and build complexity. The main advantage to a retract is the added drag when you need it now.
Click to expand...

15- 17 knots can make up for a headwind..and believe me for longer trips I'd much rather see ground speeds of 100+ knots as opposed to 85..
 
Grum.Man said:
With computer simulation and advanced manufacturing techniques there are few advantages anymore to a retract. Guys with well faired fixed gear Ventures are only about 15-17 knts slower than the retracts if that. Small price to pay for reduced insurance and build complexity. The main advantage to a retract is the added drag when you need it now.
Click to expand...


17kts and speed brakes (dropping draggy gear) and a HUGE addition.
 
And finally, people plunking down that much money wanna look cool. Wait til they realize that the training wheels are very uncool :)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
gsengle said:
That's nonsense respectfully, the insurance difference is tiny with experience and when singles are approaching a million, the gear mechanism is a drop in the bucket. And good avionic systems can prevent gear ups.

15 knots is A LOT

I think fast fixed gear will eventually be overcome with another generation of designs like the Panthera, and we will look back on this as a fad that all these planes had fixed gear...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Yea but we are talking 240 knt airplanes flying in the 8-14k altitude range. Airplanes that fly in the 150-180 knt range will see even less of a difference and turbos flying in the high teens and low 20's will likely see no difference at all.
 
There is no 240knot fixed gear airplane :)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
gsengle said:
That's nonsense respectfully, the insurance difference is tiny with experience and when singles are approaching a million, the gear mechanism is a drop in the bucket. And good avionic systems can prevent gear ups.

15 knots is A LOT

I think fast fixed gear will eventually be overcome with another generation of designs like the Panthera, and we will look back on this as a fad that all these planes had fixed gear...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
I agree. The fact is most older light retracts are not taking full advantage of being able to pull the feet up. Open or partially open wheel wells, poorly sealing doors, and basically squeezing the gear into a wing that was not really intended for retract, all adds drag. This negates a lot of the potential advantages. Planes like cars are being asked to be more efficient and faster while using less fuel and being cheaper to run. In that game every small advantage you can gain means something.

Why do you think car companies are trying to lighten cars up, even if it is only a few pounds, become more aerodynamic, and using start/stop systems. These thing may only save a few percentage points each, but they add up. Planes are becoming the same way.

Also look at all jets, including Cirrus, and all turboprops, they all have retract. The advantages are there, even if they are smaller then we would like. I think Cirrus made a marketing decision keeping the gear fixed not a production or efficiency one. The simpler plane allows more lower experienced pilots with less training to get right in the plane. Plus, they have also stated the fixed gear was needed foe the G force impact resistance with landing under the CAPS system.

As was stated, the new Mooney is retract, the M10 will also be availible as retract, and the Panthera is retract. So the next generation of new designs is going the other direction.

Caramon13 said:
15- 17 knots can make up for a headwind..and believe me for longer trips I'd much rather see ground speeds of 100+ knots as opposed to 85..
Click to expand...


Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk
 
gsengle said:
And finally, people plunking down that much money wanna look cool. Wait til they realize that the training wheels are very uncool :)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Last year for every person that wanted to look cool and bought a new Bonanza or Mooney, 9 others chose an uncool Cirrus. Mooney has upped their game with the Ultras, but it's prettty clear many of the changes they made were in direct response to what is driving their traditional buyers to Cirrus, including two large doors to facilitate ingress/egress & the automotive style interiors.

I think what Mooney has done with the Ultras is fantastic, and I hope they sell a bunch of them. Cirrus is selling the equivalent of a well fitted Mercedes sedan, Mooney is marketing the equivalent of a Ferrari FF/Lusso. Slightly different target markets. ;)
 
GRG55 said:
Last year for every person that wanted to look cool and bought a new Bonanza or Mooney, 9 others chose an uncool Cirrus. Mooney has upped their game with the Ultras, but it's prettty clear many of the changes they made were in direct response to what is driving their traditional buyers to Cirrus, including two large doors to facilitate ingress/egress & the automotive style interiors.

I think what Mooney has done with the Ultras is fantastic, and I hope they sell a bunch of them. Cirrus is selling the equivalent of a well fitted Mercedes sedan, Mooney is marketing the equivalent of a Ferrari FF/Lusso. Slightly different target markets. ;)
Click to expand...

Tastes change, and look at the links for those planes under development. I don't know of a new fast fixed gear under development.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
drotto said:
... Plus, they have also stated the fixed gear was needed foe the G force impact resistance with landing under the CAPS system...
Click to expand...

Clearly this statement is not true. If it was, the Cirrusjet would also have fixed gear.
 
gsengle said:
Tastes change, and look at the links for those planes under development. I don't know of a new fast fixed gear under development.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

I doubt anybody working on a fixed gear competitor to Cirrus is going to tell you, or anyone else, during the development. But if there is a company that might be well placed to go head to head with Cirrus with a high performance fixed gear variant, its Mooney.
 
Having gear auto extend as part of a chute pull isn't technically hard.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
GRG55 said:
I doubt anybody working on a fixed gear competitor to Cirrus is going to tell you, or anyone else, during the development. But if there is a company that might be well placed to go head to head with Cirrus with a high performance fixed gear variant, its Mooney.
Click to expand...

Perhaps, but I posted links of folks working on retract competitors... they don't seem to be shy... the Valkyrie is gunning for 260 knots top speed. Fixed gear won't get you there.

As for Mooney they were even planning a retract version of their trainer variant. Remember retract is needed for a commercial pilot trainer.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Grum.Man said:
But there is a 235 knot one called the TTx... close enough.
Click to expand...

Not when the 260 knot Valkyrie comes out. And to do it the TTx is, er, snug. I'd rather waste my drag on comfort...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
gsengle said:
Here are some new retracts coming up:

http://jalopnik.com/cobalts-valkyrie-pusher-prop-private-plane-looks-like-i-1742582735

https://iconaircraft.com/

http://www.panthera-aircraft.com/


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

The Panthera is the only one of the three links that might prove a legitimate competitor.

The Icon? Really, you are using a Rotax powered amphibian as a rationale for why future high performance singles will be retractable? Surely you can do better than that.

The Valkyrie reads like so many other airplane design wet dreams I've read over the years.

Building successful certified airplanes is an extraordinarily tough business. Ask Mooney or Cirrus. History is littered with the corpses of dead companies in that sector.

The future of truly high performance singles will be turboprops. They will be retractable, their slower piston engine siblings will remain increasingly fixed gear.
 
GRG55 said:
The Panthera is the only one of the three links that might prove a legitimate competitor.

The Icon? Really, you are using a Rotax powered amphibian as a rationale for why future high performance singles will be retractable? Surely you can do better than that.

The Valkyrie reads like so many other airplane design wet dreams I've read over the years.

Building successful certified airplanes is an extraordinarily tough business. Ask Mooney or Cirrus. History is littered with the corpses of dead companies in that sector.

The future of truly high performance singles will be turboprops. They will be retractable, their slower piston engine siblings will remain increasingly fixed gear.
Click to expand...

Ahem the question wasn't about fast piston singles... it was about retracts. It's a shipping retract. Also before you say the Valkyrie is vaporware, it first flew last year and has a lot of money behind it. It's not just a mock up.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
gsengle said:
Not when the 260 knot Valkyrie comes out. And to do it the TTx is, er, snug. I'd rather waste my drag on comfort...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

We'll look forward to hearing of your purchase of an expensive, complex airplane from an undercapitalized company, with a shoestring development budget. I don't think Cirrus has anything to worry about here.
 
When did this become about Cirrus? I think you're projecting a little bit :-o


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
GRG55 said:
Clearly this statement is not true. If it was, the Cirrusjet would also have fixed gear.
Click to expand...
Right from their own press statement.



"The final landing is absorbed by the specialized landing gear, a roll cage and Cirrus Energy Absorbing Technology (CEAT) seats."

Here is the press release.

https://cirrusaircraft.com/innovation/airframe-parachute/

The jet is a new airframe so the impact resistance is likely a new design also.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk
 
drotto said:
Right from their own press statement.



"The final landing is absorbed by the specialized landing gear, a roll cage and Cirrus Energy Absorbing Technology (CEAT) seats."

Here is the press release.

https://cirrusaircraft.com/innovation/airframe-parachute/

The jet is a new airframe so the impact resistance is likely a new design also.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Auto extending gear if that's helpful in a new design in conjunction with CAPS is also trivial...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
It's my aviation goal in life to own a retract plane.

I'll feel so much cooler when I can call out, "positive rate of climb, gear up!" and then in the pattern, "3 green, gear down and locked";)
 
midcap said:
It's my aviation goal in life to own a retract plane.

I'll feel so much cooler when I can call out, "positive rate of climb, gear up!" and then in the pattern, "3 green, gear down and locked";)
Click to expand...

There is nothing quite like the clunk as the gear locks down...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Tell that to Airbus and Boeing! Or for that matter Cirrus on their Jet.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Ok fine, I'll take a 242 knot Acclaim Ultra please. Amazing from a basically 50 year old design.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
There are certainly some cool retracts coming on the market, as far as long term success and viability I believe Panthera is the only real contender, reasons why below:

gsengle said:
http://jalopnik.com/cobalts-valkyrie-pusher-prop-private-plane-looks-like-i-1742582735
Click to expand...
*This is a COOL plane, and would appeal to a buyer like me, however I don't see this becoming more than a niche brand, if getting off the ground at all, and here's why, from most critical to least:
  • unconventional design. This plane is pretty much a modernized copy of Cirrus very own first airplane, the VK-30: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cirrus_VK-30
    • VK-30 was, and still is, a very cool RETRACTABLE pusher prop airplane..., one I'd love to own, so much so I wish they still sold the kit. However ultimately the company went for a more conventional design, and this has proven to be an incredible smart choice in their planes becoming mainstream
    • Yes, people like cool and unique things, but in general there is a herd mentality and people generally don't want to be too different. Taking this back to cars, Tesla toes the line very carefully between being just cool enough to make it wanted without making it strange and losing appeal. Unconventional designs always have a hard time catching on and becoming mainstream. So no, this will not be a plane that will become as large or proliferate like Cirrus
  • that cockpit will get very warm in the summer, sounds trivial but this is something buyers consider
  • what is the CG range of a plane like that?
  • prop strike risk being a pusher
  • with the intake on the bottom of the aircraft both a gear up landing and any kind of soft field situation are dicey at best
  • why is the forward canard mounted as if it were not part of the plane?
  • unconventional design - again. Even if you can get past the canard pusher thing the looks are very "curvy" and space aged... this will appeal to many folks, but to many it will not. There is something classic about clean lines on a plane (like a Mooney, etc.) and I've heard a *lot* of criticism of Diamonds that they're ugly, etc. Again, Cirrus has just the right amount of curves and sleek lines to toe the line between classic and modern
gsengle said:
https://iconaircraft.com/
Click to expand...
The little Icons are cool... but I see the retract as an amphib necessity and not a design choice to help make the plane go faster (which I think was the OP's point)... I put Icon (if they survive) in the same genre as Tecnams.. neat planes but not something that will proliferate and be seen on virtually every field like Piper, Cirrus, Cessna, etc. Amphibs in general are hard to come by, and many pilots lack amphibious training or the resources to pursue

gsengle said:
http://www.panthera-aircraft.com/
Click to expand...
This is the most realistic contender in my opinion... its design seems to push the envelope just enough to give that would be Cirrus buyer (but who doesn't want to be a Cirrus pilot) a cool and alternative option. Panthera to me is the Google Pixel phone where Apple is Cirrus (weird analogy, but I think it works)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top