Looks like Cessna will be entering the LSA market on the hopes aspiring pilots will stay loyal to the manufacturer as they progress through their ratings.

I would think if Cessna does in fact follow through with this venture, they would capture a large part of the market if their pricing is competitive.

Has anyone come across research that shows the percentage of newbies entering the LSA market versus retired veterans scaling back? Either way, product loyalty should work in their favor.

If they follow in the steps of some of these other LSA manufacturers though, you're still looking at a $80,000+ aircraft. A new 172 is what, $180,000? That is really beyond the means of the normal man. I see them introducing a 152-like model that is a little lighter to make the LSA weight max, and in all likelyhood the price tag will weigh in above $100K. It's an interesting move on their part for sure, but how many of us would pay that much money for a scaled down 152?

I'm wondering how quickly will they depreciate? Unless you have a need to be LSA, they don't seem to offer very much. Although I have been thinking that once the kids get grown one of those is all I really need in an airplane. Anything that reduces government involvment is good.

a64pilot wrote:...........Anything that reduces government involvment is good.

You got that right. No medical = flying below their radar just that much more.....

Eric

What! The goverment or a medical will affect my flying.I just ordered a can of "FAA Medical" from wag aero.I put it in the back seat along with my gas can and Cooler. I hope it makes me fly better? The spam can has been flying with out it for a while. Maybe now I can come out of the moutains to see where all the land-o-matic and hand on the prop and cock know it pussy's are.Or the jerkin off bafoons in some airspace eatin ground from panic and mayhem. Yah rev en.

I am gonna build me one,

Hilander?

La Grande, John, LaGrande...La Grange is a ZZ Top song!

I'm kinda wondering what cessna's LSA is gonna look like. Standard Cessna "spam can" construction, or just what. Most if not all of the LSA-specific aircraft I've seen are either tube & fabric or some sort of composite (fiberglas,plastic,etc). In fact. the only metal airplanes I can think of that meet LSA parameters are some Luscombes & some Ercoupes.

Eric

PS you going with Doug and I? We are meeting at N86 on Thursday July 6, 2006. Gonna have lunch and then launch

It looks like we'll be launching for JC on 7-13. If my co-pilot can get off any sooner we will.
Dave

Jr.CubBuilder wrote:Didn't some of the early C150s fall under the weight limits for LSA? I'm guessing it wouldn't be hard at all for Cessna to start burping out little lightweight two seaters, I wonder if the biggest problem wont be liability driving the price way up over the six figure mark. If they could put them out for $60-80K as an LSA/primary trainer I bet they'll have the majority of the market.

See that's what I was wondering. How much over weight is a 152? Could you build a 152 with just a lower gross weight and make LSA that way? Can you use a LSA to qualify for your pilots license?

a64pilot wrote:Can you use a LSA to qualify for your pilots license?

Absolutely. A J-3 or a 7AC are both LSA eligible to my knowlege, and I think many folks have gotten their Private certificates in those aircraft. The Sport Pilot certificate is scaled back mostly to limit the pilot's range, pax carrying capability, and operations. I don't see why a guy couldn't do all of his PPL training in a LSA according to the PTS for Private Pilot and the 61.105 and 61.109 requirements.

FYI, the knowledge and experience req are outlined in Part 61 Subpart J - 61.309 and 61.313.

Here is a short list from the EAA. All I know is that the aircraft are not required to meet Part 23 certification, but have some other standard that I couldn't find:

* Gross weight = 1,320 pounds (600 kilograms)
* Max Continuous Full Power Speed = 120 knots (138 mph)
* Stall Speed = 45 knots (52 mph) · no more dual stall speeds
* Two Place - pilot and one passenger
* Day VFR
* Driver's License Medical Approved - however, if you have received a letter with the word "denied" from FAA, not from your doctor, you must get a one-time special issuance or FAA authorization. Even if you have been denied in the past, you can try again for special issuance (medicines have changed, for example).

I recall from my training in a 152 that the gross was about 1610 lbs, and she was 1120 or so dry. So it might be possible, maybe for a lightweight like CubChick to solo a 152 under LSA rules. 200 lb useful?

I don´t know exactly how that LSA thing goes, but I guess it should be something similar to what I know as VLA (Very Light Airplane), something between the ultralights and the REAL airplanes (sorry ultralighters, just kidding. I too fly them ).

If the conditions are similar and stuff, they´ll be way expensive, as Zane says, but be sure there´s always somene willing to pay for it. If the requirements to fly them are even lighter than to fly a 172, like an easier license and stuff, some wealthy men and women with more money than time or wishes to go to a school and spend some time there, will buy them.

Something like over here with the ultralights. The JAA airspace is way complicated, you can´t go from A to B not trespassing 1000 B or C class airspaces, you can´t go to certain airports on certain days because they switch from C to A class, you can´t get even closer to some others as they are A... to be clear, you have to be almost an ATP to fly a Cherokee here . Then the license. You HAVE TO go to classes and sign your presence there every hour to demonstrate you took at least a 75% of the required ground school hours (I think it was 75%, but in any case...). There´s an examination session ONLY every two months, it is not in your airfield or even close (I had to drive 300Km to go to mine when I got it)lasting for two days, with 8 different tests to write, taking around an hour each and all that for the PPL. For the ultralight license you don´t need to certificate your ground school, the examiner comes to your school whenever you are ready, the stuff to learn is easy (for the PPL they ask you things like what kind of taxiway should an airplane wich distance between main wheels is 15 meters. A? B? C? D?) and then, you have to fly below the 900 meters altitude, so you can just go anywere, land anywhere if you get the permission of the landlord, fly cheap, no need of radio, no need of nothing. Many, but really too many potential private pilots took the easy option. Some ultralights are faster than a Cherokee (see the Storm, the Jabiru...), there´s always a ultralights strip near your final destination, so well, the money they spent on their fast ultralights (most of them convertible to VLA´s) is well worth it.

What I mean with all this is that if it´s easier geting to fly a LSA and easier to go places with it, no doubt they´ll be sold, whatever their price is.

Jose

My old 1969 C-150 had a gross of 1600, the earlier ones are 1500. 152's are 1670. C-140's gross at 1450. LSA is 1320 max, so none of these Cessna's qualify. Not all Luscombes qualify (I think 8E's gross at 1400).
IMHO, that's the problem with LSA/Sport Pilot-- the weight limit is just too darn low. Again IMHO, the C-150 is probably the safest & easiest-to-fly small airplane out there- I think the feds should bump up the LSA weight limit to 1600 or 1700 pounds to include the 150 and similar designs,that would allow a much wider choice of mounts for sport pilots.
However, the whole LSA concept was not aimed at allowing sport pilots to fly more old airplanes, it was to "revitalize GA" by allowing easier certification for new designs. I think it would allow designers of new airplanes to provide for better,safer,& more useful new airplanes if the weight limits were bumped a bit.
I hope they'll eventually revise the LSA limits, but I'm not gonna hold my breath....

Eric

You nailed it, Eric.



The FAA deliberately set the LSA weight requirements unreasonably low. Personally, I think they did it in an effort to squash it, but time will ultimately tell the story of their true intentions.

I believe that the rule was meant to collect the Part 103 pilots who want to take passengers legally without operating under the guise of "instruction" in their ultralights. The Part 103 weight limits are insanely difficult to stay under, if you thought Sport Pilot was bad. I don't think the Sport Pilot cert and LSA class of aircraft were meant to be a B-string GA fleet, it was meant to be very light aircraft -- think glorified ultralights, and a cirriculum to train those pilots. In that light, I think the 1320 lb max is pretty reasonable.

There are actually several good planes being sold under the LSA rule that can haul more that 550 lbs...2 adults, 25 gallons of gas and 60 lbs of stuff. The trick is keeping the basic weight to less than 770 lbs. With CAD, finite element analysis software, better engines and metallurgy/composite technology as advanced as it is today, this is easily done while still developing a strong structure. I think Cessna will probably revise the 152 design to make it lighter, stronger, and more useful (wider cabin, skylight, less cheap plastic on the interior).

And 1320lbs is actually better than proposed. The mfgs in the soon-to-be-LSA market were working under the assumption that the max gross would be 1232lbs.

Problem is that these new LSA planes are going for $75,000 base price. Add a couple of nice-to-have doo-dads like a transponder and radios and the price quickly jumps into the 80s. Good for flight schools and FBOs but I still can't afford one. I guess I'll stick with the experimental scene.