Part 23 Rewrite NPRM out...
- Thread starter Brad Z
- Start date
Checkout_my_Six
Touchdown! Greaser!
thank you Brad....
Brad Z
Final Approach
...and here's an Avweb article about it, in case you don't know why the Part 23 re-write is a big deal or haven't made it through the 238 pages yet.
bnt83
Final Approach
BRING BACK THE CESSNA 210 WITH SOME CARBON FIBER!!!!!!!!!!!!
drotto
Cleared for Takeoff
I have always thought it would be an interesting idea to take some of these legacy airframes and do this. What type of performance gains, and useful load gains would you see if you took a basic 172 or PA28 and made it carbon fiber, but really did not change anything else about the mechanics, or even the shape of the plane.
denverpilot
Tied Down
Looks to me like it mostly benefits manufacturers.
mkosmo
Pattern Altitude
Which hopefully will benefit us to a large degree. It doesn't do everything I'd like, but it's necessary regardless.
Tom-D
Taxi to Parking
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2005
- Messages
- 34,740
- Display Name
Display name:
Tom-D
There are many aircraft parts manufacturers that will fight this tooth and nail. think what the authorized usage of Electronic ignitions will do to Slick and TCM, or how about the authorized use of a electronic fuel injection will do to the 0-360- Lycoming carb'ed engine. Do you think Lycoming will like the liability of that ?
Another item is the solid state alternators that have been around many years and last a life time, Do you think the alternator rebuilders will like this idea?
I don't see this idea over yet.
denverpilot
Tied Down
Imagine the screaming and moaning from Garmin if you could installs Dynon and prove it works "by performance"?
Not going to happen. They won't even do the really obvious thing for redundancy: Require two. Still cheaper than Garmin.
Not going to happen. They won't even do the really obvious thing for redundancy: Require two. Still cheaper than Garmin.
drotto
Cleared for Takeoff
Yes it looks like it will mainly benefit new planes, but it in theory could provide downward pressure on the used market. If the cost of a new plane drops by a significant margin and more people can afford them, the cost of a used planes must follow suit if people want to sell them. In addition it may not help the STC market (although there seem to be some provisions for that area), but as far as new avionics, engine replacement, and even OEM replacement parts could see a price reductions. This would allow a greater number of people to upgrade and maintain existing planes.
Car makes are constantly pushing the new tech and leaving old tech behind. While in GA we have been forced by regulation to live in the past. Manufacturers are not going to want to lose what tiny market shares they have, but you may find them more excepting than you think once the ability to innovate is brought back into the market. As the end consumers we should welcome any small thread of hope change, but we may lose some old friends along the way. Plus, I fail to see how many of these small companies (by today's standards) would have that much sway at a federal level.
I want to be optimistic about this. In most cases when you reduce clearly burdensome regulation, the markets effected will get better, and many of the even more reluctant companies will benefit.
Car makes are constantly pushing the new tech and leaving old tech behind. While in GA we have been forced by regulation to live in the past. Manufacturers are not going to want to lose what tiny market shares they have, but you may find them more excepting than you think once the ability to innovate is brought back into the market. As the end consumers we should welcome any small thread of hope change, but we may lose some old friends along the way. Plus, I fail to see how many of these small companies (by today's standards) would have that much sway at a federal level.
I want to be optimistic about this. In most cases when you reduce clearly burdensome regulation, the markets effected will get better, and many of the even more reluctant companies will benefit.