What would you pay to fly a good LSA?

[flyingcheesehead]

OK, there's crappy LSA's out there (the local Allegro 2000 comes to mind), but there are also some good popular ones (Flight Design, Evektor, Cessna Sport, Sport Cub, etc.)

For the sake of argument, let's say there's a Cessna Sport on the line at your local FBO. It only carries two, but it's a bit faster and certainly much newer and nicer than that tired old 172N.

How much would you pay (per Hobbs hour, wet) to fly the Cessna Sport? And compared to a 172, how much would you pay?

 

[Dave Krall CFII]

OK, there's crappy LSA's out there (the local Allegro 2000 comes to mind), but there are also some good popular ones (Flight Design, Evektor, Cessna Sport, Sport Cub, etc.)

For the sake of argument, let's say there's a Cessna Sport on the line at your local FBO. It only carries two, but it's a bit faster and certainly much newer and nicer than that tired old 172N.

How much would you pay (per Hobbs hour, wet) to fly the Cessna Sport? And compared to a 172, how much would you pay?

I'd pay $55/hr, maybe $65, as long as baggage space wasn't a factor, in both cases.

 

[Shipoke]

I'd pay $55/hr, maybe $65, as long as baggage space wasn't a factor, in both cases.

Well Dave you wont get one at CXY fort that,atleast not a 172. I think the cheapest one there is around $105 Hr.
Dave G.

 

[Dave Krall CFII]

Well Dave you wont get one at CXY fort that,atleast not a 172. I think the cheapest one there is around $105 Hr.
Dave G.

Yeah I know, that's why I fly our club's $85 Skyhawks and $55 C150s out of Boeing Field.

 

[JRitt]

If I had to rent a plane and it fit my mission I would not mind $65hr

 

[SkyHog]

There is no excuse for planes to be as expensive as they are (well, there is an excuse, but every time I mention what needs to be done to fix it, I rub people the wrong way. Hint - it involves the PPL Checkride).

A brand new 172 should rent for no more $90/hour wet. Older planes? 50 - 60. An LSA? I'll be nice and say no more than 80.

In reality? Much, much more.

 

[Dave Krall CFII]

There is no excuse for planes to be as expensive as they are (well, there is an excuse, but every time I mention what needs to be done to fix it, I rub people the wrong way. Hint - it involves the PPL Checkride).

A brand new 172 should rent for no more $90/hour wet. Older planes? 50 - 60. An LSA? I'll be nice and say no more than 80.

In reality? Much, much more.

I think all of GA and commercial aviation costs are at least twice their actual value, probably more, purely from the negative affects we have allowed as a society from disproportional lawsuit settlements and cumbersome government involvement, coutesy of the FAA and now the TSA.

That estimate is computed by comparing the cost of comparable FAA commercially certificated aircraft to those similar models signed off by the FAA in the experimental category.

 

[jesse]

There is no excuse for planes to be as expensive as they are (well, there is an excuse, but every time I mention what needs to be done to fix it, I rub people the wrong way. Hint - it involves the PPL Checkride).

Lowering the requirements of the check ride will kill more people. More idiots will become pilots that shouldn't be. People will have less skill.

The check ride needs to be hard. Flying is not driving. I don't want the average idiot up in the sky with me. It takes a lot of work to become a good pilot. Most people are not willing to put this kind of time into it.

If more people die. There will be more stupid lawsuits. The cost will go up.

 

[tonycondon]

back to LSA - I paid 45 an hour for the Ercoupe at Green Castle and loved it. I wouldve paid 172 prices for it and still preferred to fly it. For one thing, I didnt do cross countries in it because it was slow. Depending on how fun to fly the new cessna sport is I would pay maybe a little more than a 172 for it but not much.

 

[JRitt]

The Jabiru J250 is an interesting design. Its a 2 seater 115kt cruise with a 120hp engine. The only difference between it and the J450 is that they install the back seat in the J450 (it just a large cargo area in the J250). The only negative thing I saw (I went to the MFG in Shelbyville Tn) was that the seat is not adjustable but it does have a rear door.
http://www.usjabiru.com/

 

[RogerT]

I built one of these: S Model

www.titanaircraft.com

Probably have around 30k in it with a Jab 2200 engine and
the radio and xpndr. Fun to fly. I get around 115 to 120 mph
out of it on 3 or 4 gal per hour.

RT

 

[AdamZ]

I would't pay more to fly an LSA than a normal category airplane. I learned on a Gruman AA1B and AA1C and paid around $65 per hr for it and that seems right to me. Now if they are selling LSA's for the same as a 172 then whats the use.

 

[jesse]

I would pay up to or a little more than the local rate of a C172. I wouldn't expect the Cessna Sport to be less money as it is worth more than the old beat up 172N.

The Cessna Sport would probably make a better XC machine for me anyways. A little faster, more fun, and I don't give a crap about IFR.

 

[tonycondon]

and I don't give a crap about IFR.

Yea, until you want to make sure you get to a certain fly in every June.

No wonder you are my friend.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

I would pay up to or a little more than the local rate of a C172. I wouldn't expect the Cessna Sport to be less money as it is worth more than the old beat up 172N.

See, that's what I'm after... Sure it only has two seats, which brings up all the negatives of a 152.

BUT...

It's wider than a 172, you can't fill all the seats on a 172 with normal-sized people anyway, it's NEW (nicer radios, fewer squawks, smells better), etc...

I'm trying to figure out whether people would actually pay a decent rate (like $89 with no fuel surcharge) to fly a BRAND NEW AIRPLANE.

If not, we're doomed.

 

[alaskaflyer]

I need a sturdy old cheap taildragger for now considering the places I fly in and out of in all seasons.

But if I ever get tired of her (bite my tongue) I would consider a nice LSA in approximately the same price range, especially to save on fuel. One that burned in the 4-6 gph range would be nice. But I still wouldn't buy one new. Too much depreciation. I'd pick one up about 3-7 years old, which by then (when I might move out of Alaska and back to the CONUS) is how old the first popular ones will be.

 

[alaskaflyer]

I would pay up to or a little more than the local rate of a C172. I wouldn't expect the Cessna Sport to be less money as it is worth more than the old beat up 172N.

The Cessna Sport would probably make a better XC machine for me anyways. A little faster, more fun, and I don't give a crap about IFR.

Point of order - as I understand it there is nothing that says a LSA can't be flown IFR so long is the pilot is otherwise qualified - or is Cessna not going to equip it for such? If so they are shooting themselves in the foot...

Just because an aircraft meets LSA requirements doesn't mean it can't be IFR certified.

The only way I would ever buy a new aircraft is to fly IFR, period. Something my 170 is basically equipped for but I haven't kept the checks IFR current.

Remember the restriction on VFR-only is for the light sport pilot, not the aircraft...

 

[Ken Ibold]

Point of order - as I understand it there is nothing that says a LSA can't be flown IFR so long is the pilot is otherwise qualified - or is Cessna not going to equip it for such? If so they are shooting themselves in the foot...

Just because an aircraft meets LSA requirements doesn't mean it can't be IFR certified.

The only way I would ever buy a new aircraft is to fly IFR, period. Something my 170 is basically equipped for but I haven't kept the checks IFR current.

Remember the restriction on VFR-only is for the light sport pilot, not the aircraft...

This is not quite true. An LSA can be flown IFR if properly equipped/inspected and the pilot is IFR current, yes, but only if the manufacturer has not prohibited IFR flight in the airplane's operating limitations. Some manufacturers are doing so as a liability reduction factor; others are not.

 

[Henning]

OK, there's crappy LSA's out there (the local Allegro 2000 comes to mind), but there are also some good popular ones (Flight Design, Evektor, Cessna Sport, Sport Cub, etc.)

For the sake of argument, let's say there's a Cessna Sport on the line at your local FBO. It only carries two, but it's a bit faster and certainly much newer and nicer than that tired old 172N.

How much would you pay (per Hobbs hour, wet) to fly the Cessna Sport? And compared to a 172, how much would you pay?

Uhhhh, you missed, "They'd have to pay me to fly it.".... I mean, how nice can it be? I have yet to see an LSA that wasn't cramped &/or over gross with 2 people in it, and they're all too dang slow to be a good one man commuter, plus I don't think they are IFR ships. All in all, no matter how nice they are, to me, they are useless. The only way I get in them is if someone is paying me to fly them, or someone is just letting me use it for a quick short hop I have to make. I saw one the other day with a full glass panel... what a waste. I guess it has a use in training small people on a glass panel, but you have to have two small people to fit in the plane.

 

[Henning]

Now if they are selling LSA's for the same as a 172 then whats the use.

Easy, you don't have to be medically qualified to fly it, so the Prozac pups can fly.... They can even charge a premium for the LSAs on those grounds.

 

[Henning]

Point of order - as I understand it there is nothing that says a LSA can't be flown IFR so long is the pilot is otherwise qualified - or is Cessna not going to equip it for such? If so they are shooting themselves in the foot...

Just because an aircraft meets LSA requirements doesn't mean it can't be IFR certified.

The only way I would ever buy a new aircraft is to fly IFR, period. Something my 170 is basically equipped for but I haven't kept the checks IFR current.

Remember the restriction on VFR-only is for the light sport pilot, not the aircraft...

Remember, the AIRFRAME has to be certified IFR as well. Even if fully equipped, if the airframe is not certified, no actual allowed. Note that the DA-20s are NOT so certified and are not legal in IMC. Whether the various manufacturers do so remains to be seen. Is anyone aware of any new IFR certified LSAs?

 

[Ken Ibold]

Remember, the AIRFRAME has to be certified IFR as well. Even if fully equipped, if the airframe is not certified, no actual allowed. Note that the DA-20s are NOT so certified and are not legal in IMC. Whether the various manufacturers do so remains to be seen. Is anyone aware of any new IFR certified LSAs?

With LSAs, the airframe does NOT have to be certified. Different certification standard than the DA-20.

 

[Henning]

With LSAs, the airframe does NOT have to be certified. Different certification standard than the DA-20.

It doesn't? Yikes, so now we'll have Prozac pilots with no medicals in uncertified aircraft, oh joy of joys. This is gonna turn out like one of them Redneck things, "Hey y'all, watch this..."

 

[tonycondon]

thats the most fascinating thing to me about LSA, they are built to an ASTM standard, not certified by the FAA. Opens a lot of interesting questions about maintenance, modifications, and avionics installations, just to name a few.

 

[Henning]

thats the most fascinating thing to me about LSA, they are built to an ASTM standard, not certified by the FAA. Opens a lot of interesting questions about maintenance, modifications, and avionics installations, just to name a few.

Exactly what I was wondering. Does it take an A&P and an IA to get through a year, or can anyone do the maint? Since the rest of the plane isn't certified, does my engine or avionics have to be? This could get really messy....

 

[SkyHog]

Exactly what I was wondering. Does it take an A&P and an IA to get through a year, or can anyone do the maint? Since the rest of the plane isn't certified, does my engine or avionics have to be? This could get really messy....

Experimentals have the same issues....I'm not taking a side here, but do you feel the same way about homebuilts?

 

[flyingcheesehead]

Uhhhh, you missed, "They'd have to pay me to fly it.".... I mean, how nice can it be?

Compared to a beat-up ratty old 172? Quite.

I have yet to see an LSA that wasn't cramped &/or over gross with 2 people in it, and they're all too dang slow to be a good one man commuter, plus I don't think they are IFR ships.

The C-Sport is supposed to be as wide as the 182. When you have a speed limitation, having the extra drag of a wide cabin is OK. Now you're not gonna get two of ME in there, but there is a maximum empty weight limitation for LSA's too. I think it's 845 lbs IIRC, so you're guaranteed a useful of at least 475 lbs. Most of 'em don't have real big fuel tanks because they don't burn much... Figure a standard 4 hours of fuel at 5gph is 120lbs of fuel which leaves 355 payload. That means you can go full fuel with an FAA-standard person in every seat, something that most small airplanes can't pull off.

As to the speed... It's faster than a 172.

They can be IFR. No word from Cessna on this AFAIK, but as it'd be the perfect replacement for all the 152's and aging 172's at flight schools, i kinda hope they do allow IFR.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

With LSAs, the airframe does NOT have to be certified. Different certification standard than the DA-20.

Ken,

I've been curious about this. For instance, a Sport Cub has been spin-tested, but not "spin certified" because, well, it hasn't been certified period. So, is it OK to spin such a plane from a legal standpoint?

 

[flyingcheesehead]

Exactly what I was wondering. Does it take an A&P and an IA to get through a year, or can anyone do the maint? Since the rest of the plane isn't certified, does my engine or avionics have to be?

I don't think so. Cessna is planning on using a Rotax engine, though I guess that must be certified 'cuz the original DA20 used it.

But, the Sport Cub is available with a Dynon EFIS/engine monitoring system. I hesitate to call it a PFD but that's basically what it is, albeit a simple one. Not certified, either, to my knowledge.

 

[Henning]

Experimentals have the same issues....I'm not taking a side here, but do you feel the same way about homebuilts?

Nope, I have a problem when you combine it with some of the pilots who are going to go LSA to avoid a medical, mostly the the ones who are on mental health meds. Experimentals up to now still required a PPL or above to fly with the exception of ultralights, and they don't exactly have a stellar safety record. Personally, I have stated it many times before, I am all for experimental aviation so long as the attitude behind it is correct. Another issue difference is profit motive. Experimentals can't be rented out. They are typically maintained by the people with their butts in the seat. There will be flight schools & FBOs operating these things into the ground. With no A&P/IA requirements... shoot, some places are pretty bad already. We rented a 172 from a place the other day that would only make 2100 rpm, and the FBO owner said "That's OK."

 

[grattonja]

I voted for the 80-89 group. The local light sport retailer, selling Flight Design CTs and Evectors, is looking at opening a flight school with their light sports, and also doing rentals. I'll get checked out and rent some if I can do so for around $80 per. The flight design CT is a nice looking, well equipped little 2 seater, and my wife and I could use it to putt around sometimes, not burning the fuel or spending the $ that the Saratoga eats/costs. But for much more than that, I can rent a fairly new 'hawk from the local flight school.

They gotta come in competitive with or slightly higher than the local 152s (they are newer and less ratty, after all), to make a go of it, IMO.

Jim G