Flying Cars for everyone!

[DaleB]

I honestly think BasicMed helped spell the end for many LSAs. The only appeal of most LSA aircraft was the lack of medical requirement. Otherwise, they were fairly high priced for their capabilities compared to their competition, 1970s and 80s Cessnas and Pipers.

I think Cessna's selection of the O-200 helped to spell the end for the Skycatcher. It was overweight (who am I to criticize?) and had very little useful load compared to the other choices available. Had they gone with Rotax they might have fared better... but we'll never know.

Just curious, how many LSAs do you see have dropped off the market since Basic Med? I know that was a common prediction, but there are still LSAs being sold by Van's, Evektor, Flight Design, Cub Crafters, Icon, Searey, Aerotrek, Kitfox, etc... not to mention a pretty healthy number of E-LSA builds every year.

 

[Cap'n Jack]

I think Cessna's selection of the O-200 helped to spell the end for the Skycatcher. It was overweight (who am I to criticize?) and had very little useful load compared to the other choices available. Had they gone with Rotax they might have fared better... but we'll never know.

Just curious, how many LSAs do you see have dropped off the market since Basic Med? I know that was a common prediction, but there are still LSAs being sold by Van's, Evektor, Flight Design, Cub Crafters, Icon, Searey, Aerotrek, Kitfox, etc... not to mention a pretty healthy number of E-LSA builds every year.

Why did they choose the O-200? I thought it was a market driven decision?

 

[Dan Thomas]

I think Cessna's selection of the O-200 helped to spell the end for the Skycatcher. It was overweight (who am I to criticize?) and had very little useful load compared to the other choices available. Had they gone with Rotax they might have fared better... but we'll never know.

The O-200 was lightened up. The old O-200-A was 190 pounds. The O-200-D, used in the Skycatcher, weighed 176.5 pounds. A Rotax 914 weighs 172 pounds. I don't think the O-200-D's weight was the deal breaker.

The 914 generates 115 HP for five minutes, 100 continuous thereafter. That would have been the benefit they gave up.

 

[Half Fast]

The O-200 was lightened up. The old O-200-A was 190 pounds. The O-200-D, used in the Skycatcher, weighed 176.5 pounds. A Rotax 914 weighs 172 pounds. I don't think the O-200-D's weight was the deal breaker.

The 914 generates 115 HP for five minutes, 100 continuous thereafter. That would have been the benefit they gave up.

Do you know how the Lycoming and Rotax compare in price? I suspect they went Lycoming to meet a cost target, but I don't really know.

 

[Salty]

Do you know how the Lycoming and Rotax compare in price? I suspect they went Lycoming to meet a cost target, but I don't really know.

The o-200 would be continental. And I believe they were more expensive than the Rotax available at the time.
And with the light sport limits, I’m not sure more power is useful.

 

[Daleandee]

The O-200 was lightened up. The old O-200-A was 190 pounds. The O-200-D, used in the Skycatcher, weighed 176.5 pounds. A Rotax 914 weighs 172 pounds. I don't think the O-200-D's weight was the deal breaker.

The 914 generates 115 HP for five minutes, 100 continuous thereafter. That would have been the benefit they gave up.

The O-200-A Continental engine is reported at 216.1 lbs. & the D model @ 196.8 lbs. according to their website: https://www.continental.aero/engines/200.aspx

The Rotax 914 is a bit harder to get numbers on but it is reported (as you stated) at 172 lbs. here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotax_914

The D model did help with the weight situation but with such limits as SLSA are under a gain of ~25 lbs by using a Rotax in addition to more power (115 vs 100) might have given the Skyscraper (OK Catcher) more of a fighting chance in the market. But at the end of the day I have no idea how much the actual installed weight of the Rotax 914 would have been so your point is taken.

When in doubt sell it to China and see what they can do with it ...

 

[Dan Thomas]

The O-200-A & D weights I quoted were from the TCDS. Your numbers would include the starter and alternator. The Rotax weight was also "dry," meaning that the radiator (for the liquid-cooled heads), the coolant itself, and the oil tank (it's a dry-sump engine) were not included.

 

[Dan Thomas]

Do you know how the Lycoming and Rotax compare in price? I suspect they went Lycoming to meet a cost target, but I don't really know.

They went Continental, not Lycoming. Textron owns both Cessna and Lycoming, but the Skycatcher engineers didn't want to use the Lyc engines after all the crankshaft AD hassles, so Textron let them buy the competition's engine.