Sport Pilot Talk

Agree. I've purchased 3 planes and never paid for a test flight for any plane during my searches. I'd likely cross a dealer off my list if they charged a bona fide prospective customer a demo fee.

Let me claifify, the prices I posted are for “discovery flights” not demo flights. There are flight schools everywhere here and they have a wide range of aircraft for you to fly from well equipped LSA to Cirrus for single engine.

I agree with others that if I’m a potential buyer and I’m serious I shouldn’t have to pay for a demo flight in your aircraft but we all know there are many tire kickers out there.

I know you can get free “demo” flights at the larger shows if you book in advance.

Another example, Icon has a sales and training facility here in Tampa and they charge $595 for a “demo” flight but it’s 2 hours.

When I was looking for a plane , for certain planes it was much easier to go for a discovery flight/lesson in some local flight school rather than traveling hundreds/thousands of miles to a dealer.
I wouldn’t buy a plane based on that single flight but at least it gave me some idea on whether to even bother with that particular model.

Warmi wrote:When I was looking for a plane , for certain planes it was much easier to go for a discovery flight/lesson in some local flight school rather than traveling hundreds/thousands of miles to a dealer.
I wouldn’t buy a plane based on that single flight but at least it gave me some idea on whether to even bother with that particular model.

Same here, I got lucky and the importer for the SportCruiser was "touring" Florida with a demo plane offering flights. I lived in Orlando at the time and they came to Kissimmee so it was in my backyard and I traveled about 30 minutes for a demo flight.

If they are charging for demo flights, I have to give them credit for trying to keep the price of the plane low.
I have watched as other manufacturers promote their pending design for years.
All the while they are adding the costs of trade shows, sales people, demo flights, fake grass, pretty girls, hot cars, etc. to the eventual cost of each aircraft.
These manufacturers have to stop paying to market to 10,000 customers to sell only 30 airplanes because the price became too high.
This company at least seems to be running it like a real business.

When discussing demo flights, we should distinguish between new and used aircraft, and between private sellers and dealers.

A decade ago, when I was trying to sell my Beechcraft, there were a lot of tire kickers who just wanted to get free instruction or flying time. It became pretty obvious that none could afford my plane. The prospects were mostly low-time pilots who had never flown a high-performance aircraft. I started to suspect they were all looking for a free complex checkout when they started asking for me to log dual for them!

I ended up asking a couple of hundred for a thorough checkout in the plane, which would be credited toward the purchase price. Nobody was willing to invest that much - so I ended up trading in Son-of-a-Beech to a dealer on an LSA purchase.

drseti wrote:. . . I ended up trading in Son-of-a-Beech to a dealer on an LSA purchase.

In a nutshell, how would you size up your experience, owning and flying the Beech?

It was a wonderful 30-year experience, Bill. That plane took me coast to coast and border to border more times than I can count. Great quality, very roomy and comfortable, stable IFR platform, easy to work on, good performance, and a pleasure to fly. Though the model was eventually orphaned, the Beech Aero Club always led me to a good source for parts. But toward the end I was generally flying it solo, and all those extra empty seats got expensive.

When I jumped into LSA, it was a completely different world, but suited my new mission perfectly (at a small fraction of the cost). Just as the Beech was well suited to a young industrialist traveling for business, LSA is perfect for a retiree!

drseti wrote:When I jumped into LSA, it was a completely different world, but suited my new mission perfectly (at a small fraction of the cost). Just as the Beech was well suited to a young industrialist traveling for business, LSA is perfect for a retiree!

Well said, Paul!

drseti wrote:It was a wonderful 30-year experience, Bill. That plane took me coast to coast and border to border more times than I can count. Great quality, very roomy and comfortable, stable IFR platform, easy to work on, good performance, and a pleasure to fly. Though the model was eventually orphaned, the Beech Aero Club always led me to a good source for parts. But toward the end I was generally flying it solo, and all those extra empty seats got expensive.
When I jumped into LSA, it was a completely different world, but suited my new mission perfectly (at a small fraction of the cost). Just as the Beech was well suited to a young industrialist traveling for business, LSA is perfect for a retiree!

Great answer, Dr. Shuch.
Thank you.

I have been invited to test fit the Vashon Ranger the next time I am in the Pacific North West by Amy their head of Marketing. There was no discussion of a required $200 charge. Perhaps because they know that I live in the North East and if I travel to Paine Field in Everett to see and test fly the aircraft that I am serious and not a tire kicker. BTW, I have already visited with Glasair three times over the last several to see the Merlin and each time there was an excuse why the plane was unable to be flown. I fear that the Merlin is now officially DOA.

I just received another update email from Vashon. If I was ready to purchase another airplane, I would order the basic Ranger today for $99,500. It is the perfect airplane for me (all metal, Continental engine). The 445 pound useful load is 45 pounds less than a SkyCatcher but that includes 28 gallons of fuel vs 24 in the SkyCatcher. Leave out 4 gallons and the Ranger is only 20 pounds less useful load than the SkyCatcher. The basic version includes auto pilot and pilot side glass panel. That is all I want. I'll put my iPad on the right side.

Fuel weight is normally part of useful load, right?

Or are you referring to full fuel useful load?

Useful load of SkyCatcher is 490. Useful load of Ranger is 445. Those are allowable weights for pilot, passenger, usable fuel, and baggage. SkyCatcher carries 24 gallons. Ranger 28 gallons. Difference is 4 gallons or 24 pounds at 6 pounds per gallons. Difference in useful load is 45 pounds. So, if someone were to load only 24 gallons on the Ranger, the 45 pound difference for pilot, passenger, and baggage is only 21 pounds.

And if you want to be really precise, I think the usable fuel difference is only 3 gallons or 18 pounds. That means if you load both with 24 gallons, the difference in allowable weight for pilot, passenger, and baggage would be 27 pounds.

THE POINT IS, while the Vashon seems really weight challenged, it's not that much different than the SkyCatcher, which is only somewhat weight challenged.

https://vashonaircraft.com/ranger-r7-specs.php

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cessna_162_Skycatcher

Regardless, the Ranger works for me as does the SkyCatcher.

Understood.

My Sky Arrow Empty Weight is around 860 lbs., so I’m aware of the juggling of fuel and passengers to remain under 1,320 lbs.