Okay, so what would a low-cost airplane look like?

CaptainXap

CaptainXap

Pre-takeoff checklist
Joined
Aug 13, 2019
Messages
144
Display Name
Display name:
Captain Xap
Related to this Icon thread, where the suggestion is made that we need a sub-$100k airplane: https://pilotsofamerica.com/community/threads/icon-spirals-in.146811/post-3506186

How could such an airplane be made?

Let's assume such an airplane would be a two-seater, VFR only.

I think it's worth noting that before the pandemic, The S-LSA version of the Bushcat with the most basic panel was selling for around $85k. Sadly now I think it's more in the $115k range. The kit is manufactured in South Africa, but assembled in Illinois. Build times on Bushcat kits are low due largely to the simple construction process, and the fact the body, wings, and control surfaces are covered with pre-sewn trilam sailcloth that just needs to be pulled over the frame and laced up.

So my guess on how to get a cheap plane:
* Keep the engine cost low. At the very least stick to a 912 ULS, or even better go with an Aeromomentum or the Chinese rotax clone.
* Use a construction method that requires the minimum amount of labor, which probably rules out riveted aluminum. I think Peter Schiphol style hot wire cut foam with aluminum spars and heatshrink covering or something similar could be an interesting direction to go.
* Keep the instrument panel really simple. If you're going to go glass panel, make it something from MGL or Kanardia, max.

I think simplicity of construction probably beats out everything else on the list, though.
 
They already exist. Tube and fabric ultra lights are quite cheap.

I think you mean like something more substantial and usable?
 
CaptainXap said:
Related to this Icon thread, where the suggestion is made that we need a sub-$100k airplane: https://pilotsofamerica.com/community/threads/icon-spirals-in.146811/post-3506186

How could such an airplane be made?
Click to expand...
If it was possible, we would see someone doing it. The barriers to such aircraft are huge. The rules that apply to them are the same rules, pretty much, as the rules that apply to any Cessna or Piper.

It's more than the cost of an engine and the airframe and instruments. There is labor, of course, and paint and interior, but the certification costs are far too high. Too much government sucking up too much money and taking way too long to get it done. Besides that, not many people want to spend $100K for what is basically an old, barebones airplane.
 
Dan Thomas said:
It's more than the cost of an engine and the airframe and instruments. There is labor, of course, and paint and interior, but the certification costs are far too high. Too much government sucking up too much money and taking way too long to get it done.
Click to expand...

And the chance that some schmuck sues the builder after running his own plane out of fuel... Or tries to take off with flat tires... Or etc etc etc...
 
What would a low-cost airplane look like?

A Sonex, or a Kitfox, or a Rans, or an Airdrome, or a Fisher, or a Panther, or a Zenith, or any one of many other kit built Experimental planes. Don't want to build? Check Barnstormers. Want it brand new and built by professionals? Write a much bigger check. It really is pretty much that simple. It is what it is, you can't buy a new car for under $10K any more either.
 
StraightnLevel said:
Kit planes aren't low cost, unless you value your time at zero.
Click to expand...
No sh*t. That's kind of the point of the rest of my statement, the part that you didn't bother quoting.

That said, I value the time I spend idle -- watching the tube, sitting here typing stuff on POA -- at very close to zero in this context. But like anything else, you're going to spend either time or money. You get to pick which.
 
DaleB said:
But like anything else, you're going to spend either time or money. You get to pick which.
Click to expand...

Even cheaper kits are getting quite expensive. The Sonex B model quick build kit full finished price as listed on the Sonex website (with the VW conversion engine - no thanks) is over 50k. Add another 4-5k and you could ditch the small VW engine and go with a Corvair, Aeromomentum, etc. Adding a real paint job and a few other things that most pilots can't live without (GPS, ADS-B, strobes, wingtip & landing lights, etc.) and I'm guessing the finsh line is north of 60k.

Years ago when I built my current plane the prices were a bit more reasonable but mine is the original A model and I didn't buy a quick build kit. So as you say, I exchanged some labor for savings. The plane was built in 2-1/2 years. That worked because I had my tri-gear Sonex to fly while we built the tailwheel I have now.

But building isn't for everyone. If you like to build it's great, if you want to fly ... buy.
 
Dan Thomas said:
If it was possible, we would see someone doing it. The barriers to such aircraft are huge. The rules that apply to them are the same rules, pretty much, as the rules that apply to any Cessna or Piper.

It's more than the cost of an engine and the airframe and instruments. There is labor, of course, and paint and interior, but the certification costs are far too high. Too much government sucking up too much money and taking way too long to get it done. Besides that, not many people want to spend $100K for what is basically an old, barebones airplane.
Click to expand...

I thought that LSAs were built to an ASTM standard, not any FARs.
 
CaptainXap said:
I think it's worth noting that before the pandemic, The S-LSA version of the Bushcat with the most basic panel was selling for around $85k. Sadly now I think it's more in the $115k range. The kit is manufactured in South Africa, but assembled in Illinois. Build times on Bushcat kits are low due largely to the simple construction process, and the fact the body, wings, and control surfaces are covered with pre-sewn trilam sailcloth that just needs to be pulled over the frame and laced up.
Click to expand...
Yikes, looks like Skyreach just stopped making the BushCat:
https://www.facebook.com/TeamSkyReach/posts/pfbid02Vv3Eb3q9rhkPU8Erw95JENkv2MotP57yMRPkJ5mhC4f1WHQHobGJsLQEkdkCLdyXl
 
Here's one: Aerotrek $130,000 base, your choice of trigear or taildragger.
aerotrek-240-lsa-24.jpg


Looks like a pleasant little around-the-patch kind of airplane. If you wanted to get into aviation with a new airplane, you could probably get one of these with the few options you'd need and your light sport rating for $150,000 or so. For that same budget you can get one of these:

img1646219201-1527010123819.jpg


Or this:

profile.png


Both of which make the Aerotrek look kind of agricultural.
 
Just a couple of years ago, the tag line for aero trek was "LSA not 100k". They were $89k. Now $130k. Thanks inflation.
 
StraightnLevel said:
Kit planes aren't low cost, unless you value your time at zero.
Click to expand...
so learning to play guitar would make me worth thousands of dollars because of the effort, not the results?

your time has no value becuase no one is paying you for it. you can try and charge for it, but its not going to work out the way you think it will.
 
CaptainXap said:
So my guess on how to get a cheap plane:
* Keep the engine cost low. At the very least stick to a 912 ULS, or even better go with an Aeromomentum or the Chinese rotax clone.
* Use a construction method that requires the minimum amount of labor, which probably rules out riveted aluminum. I think Peter Schiphol style hot wire cut foam with aluminum spars and heatshrink covering or something similar could be an interesting direction to go.
* Keep the instrument panel really simple. If you're going to go glass panel, make it something from MGL or Kanardia, max.

I think simplicity of construction probably beats out everything else on the list, though.
Click to expand...
The obvious next step of giant scale RC ARFs is fullscale ARFs. Fabric covered foam, servo-actuated controls, keep it under 250lb, like an electric Piaggio the size of a Cri Cri.
 
StraightnLevel said:
I think you missed my point.

Most people who have the financial capacity to be involved with aviation value their time highly enough that they would rather buy a plane than build one. If your time is billed out at $500/hour, why would you spend it building a plane instead of paying the factory $150/hour and using that time to generate more billable hours?

The same is true with sports cars. You can build a very nice AC Cobra replica, but few people do, opting instead to just buy a Corvette or 911. Those who build aren't building because it costs less; they do it because they enjoy building more than they enjoy driving.
Click to expand...
This assumes that the person would have to give up revenue producing time to build their airplane/car/boat. I don't know of anyone who has done that, aside from doing it post retirement. I do, however, know quite a few people who have done those things and still make pretty good money. I know even more who play golf when they could, in theory, be doing billable work... yet still they persist.

Some of those who build do so because they recognize that they have time during which they are not engaged in activities that either produce income for them, or activities that they're not willing to give up. If I give up some leisure activity in order to build an airplane, and I enjoy the process of building, and doing so saves $100K of the cost of acquiring an airplane, then I've gained efficiency, increased my enjoyment of life, and saved money. I don't have to enjoy building more than flying -- I can do both. Building is, however, a leisure activity that I can enjoy during thunderstorms, in the dead of winter, and during zero visibility or high winds when it's not really practical or enjoyable to go flying/golfing/sailing/hiking or whatever. And in the end, I have an airplane that I built myself, to my personal specifications and preferences. I own it outright and can operate, alter, or maintain as I see fit.
 
StraightnLevel said:
I think you missed my point.

Most people who have the financial capacity to be involved with aviation value their time highly enough that they would rather buy a plane than build one. If your time is billed out at $500/hour, why would you spend it building a plane instead of paying the factory $150/hour and using that time to generate more billable hours?

The same is true with sports cars. You can build a very nice AC Cobra replica, but few people do, opting instead to just buy a Corvette or 911. Those who build aren't building because it costs less; they do it because they enjoy building more than they enjoy driving.
Click to expand...
I think this is why ease of construction is important. If you're building an RV, you know that you've got 3000 hours of bucking rivets ahead of you, so it's largely only going to be taken on by people who know that they'll enjoy spending years building the thing. If you can build an aircraft in less than 300 hours it's suddenly a lot more achievable and the kind of thing you might do just because you like the idea of really understanding how your plane works, and perhaps the idea of doing your own condition inspections rather than paying for someone else to do an annual appeals to you.
 
pfarber said:
so learning to play guitar would make me worth thousands of dollars because of the effort, not the results?

your time has no value becuase no one is paying you for it. you can try and charge for it, but its not going to work out the way you think it will.
Click to expand...
You cannot resell your guitar training. You bought it, you got it. Nobody can pay you for it and instantly be able to play the guitar.

But people regularly buy airplane kits for, say, $40K, put another $25K worth of engine and instruments in them, and sell them for well over $65K. There are outfits doing this for a profitable living. Their time becomes money.
 
An A&P/IA on my field just built a Carbon Cub to sell. He also buys damaged aircraft and makes them flyable.
 
Pinecone said:
An A&P/IA on my field just built a Carbon Cub to sell. He also buys damaged aircraft and makes them flyable.
Click to expand...
I used to know a guy that was an A&P/IA that did that for a side business. His main MX job was 7 on/7 off, so on his 7 off he would buy totaled planes from the insurance companies and rebuild them. He said that was his retirement gig.
 
Last edited:
Piper is building VFR 3 seat Cherokees for mid 200s. IFR for just under 300, and that gets you a GFC500, GTN 650 and G3x. And those are certified airplanes with Lycoming engines that can go places. Not 100K, but Piper will give you better financing than an experimental
 
N1120A said:
Piper is building VFR 3 seat Cherokees for mid 200s. IFR for just under 300, and that gets you a GFC500, GTN 650 and G3x. And those are certified airplanes with Lycoming engines that can go places. Not 100K, but Piper will give you better financing than an experimental
Click to expand...

If you’r referring to the Pilot, those are fleet sale prices dependent on order size. And Archer LX is mid-$500s
 
StraightnLevel said:
If your time is billed out at $500/hour, why would you spend it building a plane instead of paying the factory $150/hour and using that time to generate more billable hours?
Click to expand...
For multiple builders I've met, it's because they don't like, in one case hates, their day job and are trying to get away from it and do something they enjoy. Not everyone is living a life only in pursuit of maximizing revenue.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top