New Tecnam P2008 Photos

[FastEddieB]

The LSA market is in a state of flux and on another post, if anybody is interested, I will give you my take on how things might play out over the next few years. Obviously, only one person's opinion.

I, for one, would be very interested.

I looked at around 20 LSA designs at Oshkosh in 2006. Many seemed cobbled together and fly-by-night, leaving me to wonder if their "manufacturers" would sell a single plane. I suspect some did not.

I was enamored with the 3i Sky Arrow for several reasons. I ended up buying one in 2007, for $75,500, which I still own today. One thing that helped me take the plunge was that the parent company had been in business since 1946. Even so, that did not save them from bankruptcy, though they're now back in business under new ownership. I believe a new one similar to mine is now close to $100k. At that price point I might have considered a certified Citabria instead.

It's a tough business. I had hoped LSA's would sell for $50k or so. A LOT of people could afford that. Instead of a new Lexus or Jag this year, why not a plane? But at $120k to $140k and beyond*, it puts them in competition with lots and lots of used certified planes with a lot more capability. Of course, there are other reasons to go Light Sport, but the nosebleed prices will keep the market tiny unless the economy has a huge rebound.

But, like I said, interested in an insider's view.

*I know a Cirrus pilot that dropped $192k on an E-LSA Carbon Cub. I'm sure its nice, but sheesh!!!

[drseti]

As for making life interesting we do have a P92 tail Dragger

That's gorgeous, Phil! I can't wait to fly it. Will you have one at Expo?

[philsolomon]

As strange as it may seem, while price has been a point of contention/complaint there are a lot of low priced options out there in the $55,000 to $70,000 range for new LSA's but they have not sold in any great quantity. We have offered low priced versions of the Echo Classic at under $100,000 fully equipped - it is a great flying "real" plane - but people have continued to prefer the more expensive versions.

My personal belief is that people are actually suspicious of a low price point and wonder what corners have been cut to get there. Typically, the aircraft in this price range are using some type of sail cloth zipped around the airframe which is probably not going to pass the "spouse test". Also, at this price level, you are really competing with experimental aircraft that when completed will be worth far more and look like "real aircraft".

We have found that the vast majority of proclaimed "interested parties" are not serious purchasers at any price. A good proportion of those who do purchase are actually more interested in getting a fully loaded aircraft and are price sensitive to the degree that they want to get a good deal but not necessarily some bargain basement price.

There is a lot of price confusion due to significant dumping of some brands of new aircraft. Nothing is ever quite what it seems and that unsettles buyers. Even though Cessna reportedly had 1,000 orders and had registered 261 as of about a week ago, according to the FAA web site just under 90 of them are still owned by Cessna and are located in Kansas and are not obviously in the hands of the 1,000 people who ordered them. So, even though that is 70 more registrations than last year how many have actually been delivered to an end customer in 2012 and if they are not being delivered, why not?

In my view we have focused way too much on price and too little on what concerns most pilots - access to LSA's. The reality is that 90+% of pilots will never buy an aircraft themselves so whether the price is $60,000 or $160,000 it is actually of minimal concern. Most pilots rent and I will throw out a wild guess that 90+% of public use airports in the US have no LSA's for rent so when these pilots lose/drop their medicals they will be lost to aviation completely and this loss will be dramatic and brutal. Consequently, we and perhaps others, are more focused on finding ways to get LSA's into the rental fleets or flying clubs around the country.

When you look at typical existing private owners of planes, using our airport as an example, the planes are about 35 to 40 years old on average, fly maybe 40 hours per year and have ancient avionics and perhaps a decent hand held GPS. Add up all the expenses of ownership and hangar fees and the total cost per hour flown is in the region of $300! They can rent nice planes with good avionics for half of that or rent a brand new, or nearly new, glass panel LSA for just over a third of that. So, if financial considerations were really driving purchases almost nobody would ever buy unless they are flying 100 plus hours per year as a minimum.

The sad truth is that we, as an industry, are having minimal success at penetrating the "collective" markets in the forms of flight schools, flying clubs and rental fleets. There are a very large number of contributory factors at play including an unwillingness to change, suspicion of anything that does not have Lycoming or Continental in it, some poor results from existing schools who were often using unsuitable aircraft but, above all, a complete lack of any financing capacity for the commercial use of small aircraft. Traditional leaseback owners of the forty year old Cessnas are simply not there for the $140 or $150,000 LSA's and definitely not for the $308,000 Cessna 172's so every part of the traditional flight school model is slowly collapsing and we are likely to be left with a few mega schools who survive on foreign students and from non aviation tuition fees (Embry Riddle, for example). Businesses such as Chesapeake Sport Pilot who concentrate on Light Sport training have demonstrated that the demand is there.

The representative alphabet organisations have spent considerable energy trying to promote flying in a very generic way but not addressed any of the fundamental infrastructure challenges. There is little point in generating interest in flying if fewer and fewer airports offer flight training, aircraft rental or modern aircraft. The typical flight magazine writes more articles about the fortieth, fiftieth, anniversary editions of Cessnas, Pipers and Beeches than anything that would be of real interest to the future aviators that we need to be attracting. Aviation in the US is dominated by nostalgia and people of my age and above and that is not a recipe for success.

Another very disturbing factor has been the slow, or not so slow death, of the independent FBO. We have seen the locals at multiple airports pressure the airport owners (usually Counties, cities, authorities) for only one thing - cheap(er) fuel. An independent FBO is required under most airport leases to provide a full suite of services from flight training and maintenance to charter with seven day a week opening. The only way they can meet payroll is through the fuel sales as the other parts of the operation tend to be too variable. To meet the clamor of the locals (generally older) the owner is persuaded to take back the fuel concession to lower the price and either removes the independent FBO, he/she quits or simply goes out of business taking all the other services with them. Soon after, the self service pumps go in, the opening hours for the municipally run FBO reduce and there are no viable applicants for flight training, rental, maintenance etc because the fuel concession is not up for offer. How many municipalities are going to petition the taxpayers for funds to buy new aircraft and how many of them are going to take on the liability of flight training and maintenance? Next to none. Unfortunately the damage does not stop there. All the locals from surrounding airports flock to the "cheap fuel" and gradually all the independent FBO's in the surrounding airports lose business and close up shop or reduce services. The rules are even more pernicious than at first sight, because the municipality is not bound by the same minimum standards or requirements to provide services as a private operator.

Some food for thought, but as can be seen we have a major distribution disconnect - the demand is there for access to new LSA's (over 200,000 pilots in the US are 50 years and older and the vast majority will never buy a plane), the supply of aircraft is potentially abundant but we have strangled the service providers by driving them out of business and closing down all financial sources that would help them re-invest. The Alphabet organisations are tied up and promote loan providers.....none of whom will generally finance any use of aircraft in flight schools.

What about the medical exemption debate? While any decision is outstanding it is very disruptive to the industry but the reality in most other countries around the world is that this segment is very healthy even with a medical requirement. The whole LSA concept is not undermined at all other than for a relatively small segment of niche buyers. If a medical exemption does go through the average fleet age is not going to suddenly drop from about 39 years old, A 50 year old Cessna does not suddenly use three or four gallons of premium unleaded an hour instead of eight, the 40 year Piper will not miraculously sprout a new glass panel and autopilot and the engine overhaul costs for legacy planes will not suddenly drop by 60% or more. The insurance industry has also not indicated whether they will insure people in heavier planes with no medical.

And the FAA crack down? As unwelcome as it might appear at first sight, it is a necessary step to bring order to the market and restore consumer confidence. The challenge will be to ensure that it does not become a political pawn in the battle for funds and take on a life of its own.

So, where could the market go? If we can solve the problem of "access" - access to rental aircraft at airports and access to funding sources - LSA's will become the trainers and rental aircraft of the future, bring new pilots into the fold and allow the older ones to continue to enjoy aviation well into their twilight years.

How many of the 70 plus manufacturers of LSA's will survive long term as S-LSA's in the US market. Historically and statistically, the answer has to be "very few". So, the key factor buyers should consider is the probability that their chosen manufacturer will be one of those survivors.

One last thought. If you think about an aircraft in terms of "cost per use" the purchase price becomes irrelevant. If you can easily rent a fully configured glass panel LSA at between $100 and $120 per hour compared with a decent analog 172 at $145 an hour because of the much lower operating costs and the aircraft owner is able to make a return on his/her investment then for the 95% of existing pilots that is all that matters.

Everything I have written is PERSONAL opinion and not necessarily representative of my company (Tecnam North America) or of LAMA where I am a Director.

[philsolomon]

We will probably have a Tecnam P92 Tail Dragger at the AOPA Summit. In fact it is up for auction. It is the Lycoming version and retails at $153,000. I suspect that there is a bargain to be had so bid away and help the AOPA safety foundation in the process!

[jnmeade]

A couple of comments - purely my own and I will neither defend nor promote them. Just what I see. Others will accurately see other things.

I know of 5-6 local pilots who are flying LSA (when I say that, I mean any airplane that can be flown with sport pilot privileges) because the option is to not fly at all (some are also flying gliders). Established, older pilots almost always mention anxiety about passing the medical when they express curiosity about LSA. As a glider pilot, our local glider club gets some interest because of the medical question, as well. However, the glider industry, amateur radio industry, the RC airplane groups and others are not getting a connect from many younger people. That is one issue.

For the older pilot and passenger, some LSA are hard to get into and out of. Any low wing, for me. My wife could never get out if she could get in. Many old tail draggers are hard to enter. It's a practical matter for those of us getting old, fat and stiff (or any combination thereof). Some LSA do very well.

We are seeing some local pressure on airports and FBOs. My observation is that no FBO can make it long term anymore unless he is pumping jet fuel. Jets will pay for associated services like ramp and parking fees, overnight hangar, starting, etc. without pinching every penny like some of us old J3 pilots will. Jet's will tanker but don't as a rule fly much out of the way to save $0.50/gallon as many LSA fliers will. We see a disconnect between the local airport pushing cheap fuel and the local A&P - they're not a team anymore.

Local aircraft support groups like Flying Farmers, US Pilots Association are losing influence because the members get old and aren't replaced by the young. Loss of local support for airports and aviation activities. EAA is not as active in building airplanes anymore - I'm talking about what I see locally. The RV craze is still somewhat there, but you can now buy a nice LSA for under $100k and fly right away, so why spend 2-7 years building?

To my mind, the LSA is not the cross-country machine the C182 or Comanche was. We went from the J3 to the C182 so we could go cross country in speed and comfort. You want me to go backward? You can go 115-120 kias, but you have baggage restrictions, no IFR, no night (I"m talking SP fliers) etc. and it bounces the wife all over. If you don't use it or at least justify it as a X-C machine, then is it a $150k local sight seeing plane? You can rent a C172 and CFI if you want to do that. Yes, I've flown mine from the midwest to Florida and Denver in one day, but you don't count on it like you did with the Mooney or Piper.

The flight school issue is real. A local FBO got out of the flight school business and it was picked up by a local man. Will it work? He has a bunch of old Cessnas and an LSA.

The main effect of the FAA crackdown in the local discussions I've had is that pilots will make more SLSA into ELSA. As far as manufacturers is concerned, there is concern about being an orphan, but we do have a plethora of EAA composite experience out there and if the plane is made ELSA, many can do airframe work. The ubiquitous Rotax 912 makes engine maintenance and parts not a problem. (Maybe not a local 912 fixer, but some reasonably close.) Rotax is not doing much to push maintenance training and education, in my personal experience.

A plus for SLSA/ELSA is the ease of the pilot/owner, often an older, experienced man, to enter the maintenance arena. The owner may often have the time and money and expertise, with some training, to do many repairs and certainly inspections. We are losing our old A&Ps nearly as quickly as we're losing FBOs. A big shop is usually more formulaic than one A&P about just what and how they will maintain your airplane. I think the LSA industry might make some gains by emphasizing this aspect.

This is how I see it. How do you see it where you are? Rather than argue with me, which will just make me argue back, just tell me what you see locally - I'll believe you and the discussion will stay on a positive tone where we will all agree on what the core issues are and maybe we can address some of them.

Q - is fear of litigation a concern to you as an LSA owner/pilot?
Q - do you or would you like to take advantage of more LSA oriented maintenance training?

[drseti]

Q - is fear of litigation a concern to you as an LSA owner/pilot?

No fear; that's because I carry lots of insurance.

Q - do you or would you like to take advantage of more LSA oriented maintenance training?

I am a firm believer in lots of training -- maintenance and otherwise. That's probably because I spent a sizable life-fraction as an educator. At any rate, after buying my LSA, I went through the 3-week LSRM course, the Rotax service and maintenance courses, and the weight-shift and glider maintenance add-ons. And, in November, I'm taking the Rotax heavy maintenance course. (Back when I owned Lycoming engines, I took their courses.) You can never have too much training.

[drseti]

Everything I have written is PERSONAL opinion

Your personal opinions are very well received, Phil, and to me, many of them seem spot on. I'd encourage you to massage these thoughts (which are already very articulately expressed) for publication in one of the alphabet-soup organizations' magazines. These are thoughts that deserve to be shared widely.

[drseti]

We will probably have a Tecnam P92 Tail Dragger at the AOPA Summit

Here's hoping you'll also have one on the flight line at Sport Expo in January, for demo rides. I'd love to check it out. (I'm an old taildragger pilot -- with the emphasis on the old!)

[CBKERR]

Everything I have written is PERSONAL opinion

Your personal opinions are very well received, Phil, and to me, many of them seem spot on. I'd encourage you to massage these thoughts (which are already very articulately expressed) for publication in one of the alphabet-soup organizations' magazines. These are thoughts that deserve to be shared widely.

I agree 100%

Q - is fear of litigation a concern to you as an LSA owner/pilot?

No I also carry plenty of insurance.
I am interested in all training I can get my hands on

[philsolomon]

Lots of great thoughts out there!

I think that some of the concerns regarding cross country restrictions are very much context sensitive. If you have a full medical then you can fly a suitably equipped LSA at night and, as we do, travel all over the country with no specific restrictions other than not in real IMC. If the medical exemption is granted then the privileges retained by those without a medical will be broadly the same as with an LSA except that you would probably be able to carry more bags. The planes that will qualify under the proposal are not going to be any faster than an LSA and with the exemption both night and IMC are also out.

One of our most loyal customers sold a twin Comanche to buy the Tecnam Sierra and he flies it all over the country and is delighted with it because it is better equipped than his old plane, costs far less to own and operate and less stressful. Yes, it requires a different mindset to put the past behind you and enjoy what you have in front of you and that seems to be more of a challenge for aviators than almost any other demographic.

As for boring holes in the sky with a $150,000 plane that is true for most non-essential purchases. If you are looking for a financial argument to support the purchase of a new plane, new car, second home etc it does not exist. Quite frankly, if you have to be somewhere at a specific time and date irrespective of weather then a Mooney, Cessna 182 etc is really not going to give you that certainty either and you are looking at something way more sophisticated and expensive.

The happy customers are those that have accepted that they have moved on to a more relaxed part of their life and are just happy to be able to bore some holes! If we can get more planes into flight schools then the price of boring the odd hole will come down dramatically.

My biggest concern is how we help all pilots - existing and potential - get access to modern aircraft. A Sport Pilot license opens up aviation to a massive new group of people thanks to the possibility of accelerated courses (seven to ten days) and much lower training costs but with almost none available in most parts of the country we are allowing our aviation future to slip away, one aspirant pilot at a time.

In some ways, and this is not going to be a popular opinion (!), a medical exemption could do more to damage the long term health of aviation than the current situation because it will perpetuate the constant aging of the existing fleet and retard the move to modernize equipment. The LSA weight and speed regulations were somewhat based on the idea of reducing the potential for damage to other people in the event of an accident. Take away the weight restriction and you create a political time bomb. Much has been made of the lack of fatal accidents in Light Sport aircraft due to medical deficiencies thereby supporting the concept of self certification. However, only a very small subsection of existing pilots have been able to convert to Light Sport for financial and access reasons so those who do buy planes have tended to be healthier and wealthier than those who will choose to continue to fly their existing aircraft if given the option. It will only need one unfortunate incident for the 99.9% of the US population who are not pilots to demand restrictions from the politicians and we could end up losing what we currently have as well. How many of us were secretly relieved when our aging parents had to give up driving before they hurt themselves or someone else. Are we so sure that we no longer want any gatekeepers?

Now, should there perhaps be a forth level of medical like they have in Canada and elsewhere that can be done by a family doctor?

As for insurance and liability. There is a strong argument for less insurance....The more you carry the more you become a viable target in litigation in the US!

[jnmeade]

I'm sorry I posted.

[N331CW]

jnmeade-

I appreciated your thoughtful post. I am a very experienced private pilot who just turned 50, who has never been healthier. I possess a class 3 medical, but do not need this for most of the flying I do. I fly my Aerostar R40S a lot.

My craft began its life in the USA as an S-LSA. Using provisions of the very well crafted provisions of the suite of new light sport rules I liberated my craft from restrictions of S-LSA, and now it flies constantly by me as an E-LSA. My experience and appropiate methods allow me to do all maintenance and inspections of my Aerostar.

I do not squabble over the price of fuel. I have better things do do, like flying my airplane. I am not a geezer yet. I have little patience with vested interests selling their overpriced "well equipped" S-LSAs and Sport Pilot Training "business models". I believe the market really needs reasonably priced, reliable airplanes.

I fly a solid and very basic "steam gage" Light Sport airplane. But I also make extensive use of very current tablet/smart phone platforms that are affordable and easily updated as my needs call for it. The missions I fly are easier to fly with this technology. But I think it's absurd to saddle the basic airframe with fixed installation of this type of ever evolving avionics technology. All I ask of an airplane is that it be reliable, efficient, with good flying characteristics.

[philsolomon]

If you are not already familiar with the Dan Johnson web site here is a link.

http://www.bydanjohnson.com/index.cfm?b=7&m=2

There are currently 127 different S-LSA models on sale in the USA at every imaginable price level and there is an increasing number of used options out there including some qualifying certified aircraft that can be found from around $15,000 upwards depending on condition and age. Both new and used aircraft can be had with nothing but the bare minimum legal day VFR equipment so there is already a huge choice out there. Logically, based on most pilots stated desires for low price and simplicity, the lower priced models should be dominating the market but, to date, they have not. If "made in the US" is a critical factor in the decision there are also an increasing number of models now claiming US manufacture.

As N331CW states, moving an S-LSA to an E-LSA has some very attractive features for the private owner and does not require the owner to have participated at all in the aircraft manufacture/assembly, unlike most of the experimental market.

My sincere apologies if I upset JNMEADE. We just need to look at the fast decline in pilot numbers to know that whatever we have been doing is no longer working so the status quo has got to be challenged. I offer one, possibly narrow, perspective but if it generates debate and energy to move forward then perhaps it has some value, albeit, limited.

[N331CW]

I agree, putting energy into every possible avenue to stop the decline in the pilot is what is needed. I have have embraced the Light Sport rules fully since their inception. My current airplane is the second E-LSA I have owned. But I also support the the current proposal to eliminate the medical requirement, and have submitted my comments to the FAA. We need to both retain existing pilots as long as we can well as create new pilots. I make efforts to introduce new people to the experience of flight in fun positive ways, mostly by flying them to fun local destinations. I try to get them involved in the planning process for these flights (tablet computer/smart phone etc.), which they enjoy, and helps them feel vested in the mission. We need to both utilize the existing GA fleet more, as well as purchase new (Light Sport) aircraft. I really think that it would be great to see more partnership/club arrangements created as alternates to sole ownership verses renting.

[Jack Tyler]

My thanks to Phil for posting here, and to the other thoughtful posters who followed. The LSA industry suffers from many of the issues typical of an immature industry and accurate, knowledgeable dialogue in public forums like this one that involves customers and business operators is sorely needed. (This would be as opposed to the boosterism and self promotion of LSA 'spokespeople' like Mr. Johnson and the stillborne LAMA, where no LSA and no manufacturer is unworthy of full praise).

Phil emphasizes, in an earlier post, that one of the LSA's major liabilities is the absence of rental LSA a/c, and that has been pointed out here over and over. Phil's main financial rationale for a successful future for the LSA industry, as I read it, might be characterized as the "If only..." model. If only pilots and potential or existing owners would see and act on the (claimed but not necessarily applicable) lower cost of an LSA, then sales of privately owned and rental a/c would flourish. The problem with that model, as I think everyone realizes, is that the SP license which was to serve as the main driver for LSA sales, hasn't materialized. After the initial flood of 2000 SP issuances, only about 500 new Sport Pilots appear each year. There are only 4000 Sport Pilots in the entire USA (or about 80 SPs for each state), so it's unfair to expect an entire aviation segment will thrive on that. And while there might be 123 LSA accepted LSAs - and at odds with the 70+ models Phil mentioned - my estimate is that there might be 10 or 15 viable long term LSA models available in the USA. Much has yet to happen in this very young, under supported industry before we can know what it really will look like. But in the interim, discussions like this are certainly interesting!