Only $389,000 for Icon A5

Talk about airplanes! At last count, there are 39 (and growing) FAA certificated S-LSA (special light sport aircraft). These are factory-built ready to fly airplanes. If you can't afford a factory-built LSA, consider buying an E-LSA kit (experimental LSA - up to 99% complete).

Moderator: drseti

User avatar
MrMorden
Posts: 1733
Joined: Fri Aug 17, 2012 7:28 am
Location: Athens, GA

Re: Only $389,000 for Icon A5

Postby MrMorden » Wed Nov 08, 2017 2:26 pm

Warmi wrote:That video kind of settles it , doesn't it ?
Even if it was an engine failure , being so low and without any margin of error still would count as a pilot error.


Well he was low, but over open water in an amphibious airplane. Not sure that's unsafe, though he did have about 30-45° bank angle in at times. I only watched the video without audio, not sure if there was commentary describing anything further.

Certainly pilot error, but it's unclear to me how unsafe this was generally. I don't have a seaplane rating so I might be missing something about all this.
Andy Walker
Athens, GA
Sport Pilot ASEL, LSRI
2007 Flight Design CTSW E-LSA

Warmi
Posts: 157
Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2016 5:35 pm
Location: Frankfort, IL

Re: Only $389,000 for Icon A5

Postby Warmi » Wed Nov 08, 2017 3:14 pm

Yeah, me neither but it seems to me that regardless if this is over water or not , doing low level dives ( or in general "drastic altitude adjustment" ) seems like not the safest thing to do - not necessarily reckless but much more demanding and requiring skill and being on the top of ones game.
Flying Sting S4 ( N184WA ) out of Illinois

TimTaylor
Posts: 303
Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2017 7:17 pm
Contact:

Re: Only $389,000 for Icon A5

Postby TimTaylor » Wed Nov 08, 2017 4:20 pm

I would call what he was doing as "reckless." Look at the result. Now, if they determine some other mitigating cause, I may change my opinion. He probably made contact with the water at high speed flipping over. Or, he turned too soon and caught a wingtip.

Would you do that same maneuver in an ASEL over a runway? If not, why not?
Commercial Pilot Airplane Single & Multiengine Land; Instrument Airplane;
Sport Endorsement Airplane Single Engine Sea;
Flight Instructor Airplane Single And Multiengine;
Ground Instructor Advanced Instrument

JAM_MAN
Posts: 20
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2017 8:55 pm

Re: Only $389,000 for Icon A5

Postby JAM_MAN » Wed Nov 08, 2017 9:20 pm

Only if I was on fire and had no other recourse.

User avatar
CharlieTango
Posts: 1201
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2006 10:04 am
Location: Mammoth Lakes, California

Re: Only $389,000 for Icon A5

Postby CharlieTango » Thu Nov 09, 2017 7:40 am


foresterpoole
Posts: 165
Joined: Thu Sep 22, 2016 12:28 pm
Location: Alexandria, LA

Re: Only $389,000 for Icon A5

Postby foresterpoole » Thu Nov 09, 2017 7:56 am

I'm sure the NTSB report and onboard flight computer (I believe Icon's have a version of this) will figure out all the details. A few minutes of video is hardly a smoking gun. All that to say this: this is the third accident this year with this model of aircraft. It's the second fatal accident if it's deduced this was als o"pilot error" I'm inclined to believe marketing has a bit to do with this. It's really marketed as a "jet ski with wings" and "so easy to fly." Based on evidence, neither of those statements are correct. Not every plane has to be as stable as a 172 or as slow as a cub, but when you market to "fun, fast, big boy toy" types your going to get adrenaline junkies, show offs and inexperienced folks who want to impersonate Chuck Yeager. I know the box canyon was their test pilot, experienced as he was he still was flying low and with an new employee/engineer in the plane I can't help but wonder if he was pushing the envelope on purpose to impress the guy. I guess time will tell, but I think you can put a fork in Icon as a manufacturer, rising costs, production delays and now multiple accidents are not good for a startup and would be the nail in the coffin of even an established company...
Ed

Wm.Ince
Posts: 581
Joined: Sun Nov 17, 2013 3:27 pm
Location: Clearwater, FL

Re: Only $389,000 for Icon A5

Postby Wm.Ince » Thu Nov 09, 2017 11:52 am

foresterpoole wrote:. . . It's really marketed as a "jet ski with wings" and "so easy to fly." Based on evidence, neither of those statements are correct....

What "evidence" supports your premise that the iCon was not "easy to fly?"
Bill Ince
CTSW
Retired Heavy Equipment Operator

Warmi
Posts: 157
Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2016 5:35 pm
Location: Frankfort, IL

Re: Only $389,000 for Icon A5

Postby Warmi » Thu Nov 09, 2017 1:39 pm

foresterpoole wrote:.... I guess time will tell, but I think you can put a fork in Icon as a manufacturer, rising costs, production delays and now multiple accidents are not good for a startup and would be the nail in the coffin of even an established company...


I am thinking that too now .... bad publicity aside , given that these days trial layers can pretty much manufacture cases out of nothing ... with Icon having history of advertising this plane for the type of flying Halladay was engaging in ( safety videos or not ) when he died, vultures are probably already lining up.
Flying Sting S4 ( N184WA ) out of Illinois

User avatar
MrMorden
Posts: 1733
Joined: Fri Aug 17, 2012 7:28 am
Location: Athens, GA

Re: Only $389,000 for Icon A5

Postby MrMorden » Thu Nov 09, 2017 2:48 pm

Wm.Ince wrote:
foresterpoole wrote:. . . It's really marketed as a "jet ski with wings" and "so easy to fly." Based on evidence, neither of those statements are correct....

What "evidence" supports your premise that the iCon was not "easy to fly?"


I don't think his point was that it's not easy to fly relative to other LSA, but more the marketing seems to gloss over that this is a real airplane, and requires real piloting skills, is pretty technical like all airplanes, and requires commitment to master.
Andy Walker
Athens, GA
Sport Pilot ASEL, LSRI
2007 Flight Design CTSW E-LSA

TimTaylor
Posts: 303
Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2017 7:17 pm
Contact:

Re: Only $389,000 for Icon A5

Postby TimTaylor » Thu Nov 09, 2017 3:04 pm

Becoming a good pilot also requires good judgement and decision making skills.
Commercial Pilot Airplane Single & Multiengine Land; Instrument Airplane;
Sport Endorsement Airplane Single Engine Sea;
Flight Instructor Airplane Single And Multiengine;
Ground Instructor Advanced Instrument

Wm.Ince
Posts: 581
Joined: Sun Nov 17, 2013 3:27 pm
Location: Clearwater, FL

Re: Only $389,000 for Icon A5

Postby Wm.Ince » Thu Nov 09, 2017 3:16 pm

MrMorden wrote:
foresterpoole wrote:. . . It's really marketed as a "jet ski with wings" and "so easy to fly." Based on evidence, neither of those statements are correct....
I don't think his point was that it's not easy to fly relative to other LSA, but more the marketing seems to gloss over that this is a real airplane, and requires real piloting skills, is pretty technical like all airplanes, and requires commitment to master.

Point well taken.
I have never flown one, although, recently, I did receive an invitation from iCon, for a demo ride. I just wasn't interested.
From all accounts I have read, the airplane is easy to handle and has friendly flight characteristics, throughout the whole flight envelope. No big surprises anywhere.

Now . . . what one does with all that . . . that may be another story.
Bill Ince
CTSW
Retired Heavy Equipment Operator

ct4me
Posts: 328
Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2007 7:46 pm
Location: Phoenix, AZ

Re: Only $389,000 for Icon A5

Postby ct4me » Thu Nov 09, 2017 3:19 pm

More video from two weeks before the accident, showing more, worse, showboating...
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... -wife.html
Tim
-----
check out CTFlier.com

Chemguy
Posts: 12
Joined: Tue Jun 25, 2013 9:32 pm
Location: Long Island, NY

Re: Only $389,000 for Icon A5

Postby Chemguy » Thu Nov 09, 2017 3:39 pm

I tend to agree with MrMorden in that the advertising for this aircraft does tend to minimize the notion that it is, in fact, an airplane and requires piloting skills and commitment. Let's remind ourselves that a seaplane is,in fact, a separate licensing endorsement. I remember how during the development of the Skycatcher, it was marketed as an airplane for the common man though, it was clear, it was also being lined up for pilot training. This suggests that pilot training was one of its paramount intentions. Like the Skycatcher did, the Icon presumably has over 1000 orders taken. Like the Skycatcher, as well, many of these orders will probably be cancelled. In the case of the Skycatcher, I doubt that it was necessarily the price increase or the fact that it was produced in China that was the total cause of cancellations (as it is a neat little airplane though load challenged), rather, it was the realization upon the potential buyers that this activity (flying) does indeed require commitment and that piloting an LSA may, in fact, be somewhat more nuanced and weather dependent than they expected. For example, I was one of those who discovered the Skycatcher required a little more tlc (particularly landing) than does a 172. At the price tag of nearly 400K these, one would think, should be a tough sell. If I were going to go that route, I would rather buy a Cub (or similar) with all terrain tires and make my non airport (or non paved) landings on the grass rather than in the water, but that's just me.

foresterpoole
Posts: 165
Joined: Thu Sep 22, 2016 12:28 pm
Location: Alexandria, LA

Re: Only $389,000 for Icon A5

Postby foresterpoole » Thu Nov 09, 2017 8:05 pm

Sorry I left that too vague, I think MrMorden did a much more concise job of summing it up on my behalf. That second video was pretty damning, along with a tweet:
"keep telling my dad flying the Icon A5 low over the water is like flying a fighter jet" not good!!!
Ed

User avatar
zaitcev
Posts: 618
Joined: Tue Jan 05, 2010 11:38 pm
Location: Austin, TX
Contact:

Re: Only $389,000 for Icon A5

Postby zaitcev » Thu Nov 09, 2017 11:50 pm

I remain in a firm disagreement with the prevailing outrage. The video that TMZ posted showed absolutely no unsafe maneuvering, and the laymen in the boat had absolutely no clue as to what they were looking at. He was coming in their direction, then used the saved energy to zoom to a safe altitude, turned carefully to the opposite heading, then descended gradually back to the surface. It's really strange that so many actual pilots are no better than boaters at this.

It was exactly the type of the maneuver that I would've performed if I wanted to turn around within the confines of a bay or other safe area. Now, I would be concerned if I saw him doing the same turn within a wingspan or two off the surface. It's too easy to slip if there's not enough back-pressure and there's not much time to take wings level and recover if you get slow. Or, I would not like seeing him circling. That would invite a moose stall, which can happen to the best of us (that's how Shawn Lunt died - a bright young man that flew quite well, but alas didn't realize how dangerous that maneuver was). But the maneuvering in the video was quite benign.

What else? Comparison to a fighter? But of course. People compared Sky Arrow to a fighter, too. It's a pusher airplane that has visibility of a fighter.

Having said all that, I agree that showboating could be a factor. It's one of those things that take careful planning and discipline, and even so the risk is undoubtedly elevated when operating in a proximity to surface or objects. It just does not follow for me that there's a casual chain that so many people imply, or even claim. It's a pure observation bias fallacy.


Return to “Light Sport Aircraft”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests