Anyone here own/fly an A5?

Random selection from my Youtube recommended feed today:

https://youtu.be/eyCX3rVXbrQ?t=667

Most of the video is about the Icon but if you're interested in the company's troubles, watch from the timestamp or 11:07.

It feels like Icon has overpromised and underdelivered with price, timeline, useful load, and safety, and added on very restrictive ownership rules that most people weren't interested in signing. They've killed at least two of their own employees, and marketed the airplane as a hot rod in a way that has (perhaps) resulted in other deaths (Roy Halladay) that were sensational. This seems to attract bold pilots, and in a few cases, they won't become old pilots...

At the end of the day, it's a jet ski for the sky, and it is awfully expensive for something that is close to a toy. The number of people who have the free cash for a toy like this, the willingness to take risks like this (amphib flying and sporty handling), and who find any other utility in the plane is a short list, and they are probably close to the bottom of that list. With 700,000 marginally active pilots in the US, how many people are there? I'd love to fly on a nice day, but it doesn't check any box well other than fun. It just isn't much of a value to me.

It reminds me of a CanAm Spyder of the motorcycle world.

Is this not the way new issues of anything unfold in modern business startups?

No way I would ever agree to be handcuffed to the agreements portrayed in this video if they are accurate.

I'd guess for most of us here it was a failure from the beginning, as this group is likely more concerned about utility than the target market.
That said, I do think they certainly had some PR failure. Marketing it as a yank and bank blaster to folks who are possibly less exposed to aviation safety isn't exactly a recipe for 100% good outcomes, and some have paid with their lives.
There was also a pretty significant failure on project management, in that prices nearly tripled before delivery and the contract is laughably restrictive/onerous.
IMO though the primary failure has been in manufacturing/delivery. Virtually every manufacturer overpromises at first and there are near zero instances of coming in at expected costs. The market for this aircraft though is someone with disposable income who wants a dose of aviation fun. That type of client is not generally accustomed to waiting a long time. Sure, if you want one of ten custom Ferraris you might have to wait 6 months, or even a year. Icon isn't that. If they had aircraft ready to sell directly after they started a media blitz, I bet they'd have sold a pile. I'd almost bet they still could. That said, if I had 100 million to invest in aviation I can think of a number of places I'd go to first before I'd trust the team at Icon.

I don’t think the A5 failed, I think the company failed

The A5 is not more more of a jet ski than a pa18 on amphibs, but like lots of the cub clone amphibs it is what it is, this is not a long range mover, not a dirt bike hauler, etc

I think if cirrus took production, used their pilot training and marketing methods, and made a LSA and a non LSA model, it would do quite well

Problem wasn’t the A5, problem was icon


We also have a couple around here, flight school has one, seems cool for a new plane, probably be pretty quick if they deleted the LSA limitations on them

It has been interesting to watch the whole thing unfold, over the years. I have watched from the sidelines. There has been a lot of material from ICON, their proponents, and critics.

From the first concept and early promotional material, to the unlikely realization of a commercial product actually selling (most ideas fail before that!), to the inevitable cost increases and disappointed customers awaiting delivery, very public safety incidents, to the apparent finale of a top-heavy company becoming the downfall of yet another new aircraft concept which showed a lot of promise in the early stages.

It seemed like a great concept and a very believable price.

I saw that video the other day too, YouTube feed is responsible for a big part of our information intake.

Let’s see: Finance a company, hire a bunch of fighter pilots who know nothing about seaplanes to design and test it, and build a toy to “fly low and fast”. What could go wrong.

They sold delivery slots, with tons of caveats, and at one point stated they weren’t actually going to “sell” them in the conventional context.

Then hype this as an Uber get yer rocks off play toy, til a few of your employees and a very famous celebrity killed themselves in the things flying low and such. Suddenly, they’re all about responsible and safe flying.

What could go wrong? My understanding is the company was sold to China. More engineering data and products go east.

Is it dead? My guess is absolutely.

MTV

The A5 is too heavy for its horse power. ...and yeah, Icon has questionable business practices.

That was the trouble of going full on LSA,

Empty weight of a A5 according to wiki is 1080, empty weight of a cub crafters amphib is 1200

If they would taken a page from cub crafters and used a 180hp engine it would have been a excellent plane, speed wise it’s far more slick than most 2 seat certified amphibs
Use carbon cubs “power limited to” to get around LSA rules, then in the non LSA just delete that placard and artificial limit


Basically compete with all the PA18 amphibs, with the same power it would also hold 2, probably blow the doors off the cub in cruise, heck with how slick it is with the full 180hp on tap it probably would outrun lots of the GA fleet, all composite which is nice for salt, the wings fold, and overall is a new design, any of the cirrus demographic who wanted a fun 2 seat seaplane/commuter would have probably paid it some mind, especially if sold as a Cirrus A5.

If that does well

Later grow the design into a extra row for a 4/5 pax plane, install TKS, turbo engine and a few more boxes and AP to make the panel IFR, now you really have something

I know SR22t owners, 1M airframe, who probably would have liked a big A5 that’s a pusher, can land in water, and do everything else their cirrus can, but unlike the cirrus folks in say S FL could now land in the keys or Bahamas, and with hangar so scarce if it still had folding wings that would be huge in hangar limited places

Icon lost me when they decided to put the plane in exotic car dealerships.
Marketing it to rich people who were not pilots as toys.

It's kind of sexy. I give it a thumbs up for innovative design \ materials, etc.
However, as a Lake guy, I can't see why I would pay four times as much that could carry me and some fuel or me and another person with no fuel and no range. It had no utility. It's just a toy.

I agree with 93K
It could have been a great platform to grow from.

I was at Oshkosh in 2017, and the Icon booth was a huge pavilion with a giant screen showing exciting video of all the cool things you could do with their plane. The people in the video are all young, really healthy and had perfect teeth when they smiled. Loud upbeat music was playing over a big sound system and there was a thick crowd of gawkers wanting to be part of the scene. I went back to Oshkosh this year and Icon just had a modest tent with one plane outside. That told me more about the current status of the company than all the financial analysis out there. I was never in the market for a plane with such limited useful load, but I wished them all well. There are a couple of these planes that fly in for pie at our airport Cafe and they always draw admiring glances from the ramp groupies. Still, a lot of money for a penknife when there are lots of Swiss Army knives available for less.

http://www.thatmallardguy.com/on-the-step-podcast/

That mallard guy did a recent podcast with an Icon employee.....interesting info.

And if nothing else, all of his podcasts that I have listened to are excellent!

I know this thread is over a year old but it's still interesting. I got my COMM ASES at Jack Brown's in an Icon A5 Jan/Feb this year and it was such a joy to fly. I would be an owner if it wasn't so expensive. The pricing has gone up again to around 428K. Add to that 12-16K for insurance for a newly minted seaplane pilot and it becomes outrageously expensive to own.

Jack Brown's does not have the Icon anymore--they had some deal with Icon and never actually owned it. I suspect that they returned it to Tampa because the maintenance cost and downtime was too much to handle as a trainer.

mirassou3416 wrote:I know this thread is over a year old but it's still interesting. I got my COMM ASES at Jack Brown's in an Icon A5 Jan/Feb this year and it was such a joy to fly. I would be an owner if it wasn't so expensive. The pricing has gone up again to around 428K. Add to that 12-16K for insurance for a newly minted seaplane pilot and it becomes outrageously expensive to own.

Jack Brown's does not have the Icon anymore--they had some deal with Icon and never actually owned it. I suspect that they returned it to Tampa because the maintenance cost and downtime was too much to handle as a trainer.

Are they maintenance intensive?

I’d think composite with a rotax and what looks to be solid state panel would be easier, minus maybe the folding wing mechanism

yes

jcadwell wrote: The number of people who have the free cash for a toy like this, the willingness to take risks like this (amphib flying and sporty handling), and who find any other utility in the plane is a short list, and they are probably close to the bottom of that list.

I wonder this same thing every time some YouTuber shows off their new Carbon Cub, though.

https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/all-news/2024/april/04/icon-aircraft-files-for-bankruptcy-seeking-buyer
I think I can amend my previous post

Zzz wrote:Has the Icon A5 failed?

Yes.

NineThreeKilo wrote:That was the trouble of going full on LSA,

Empty weight of a A5 according to wiki is 1080, empty weight of a cub crafters amphib is 1200

Please provide that W/B certificate for said Cub Crafters amphib..... Every CC airplane I've been in was significantly heavier than the company's hype.

But maybe it's just me.

MTV

mtv wrote:

NineThreeKilo wrote:That was the trouble of going full on LSA,

Empty weight of a A5 according to wiki is 1080, empty weight of a cub crafters amphib is 1200

Please provide that W/B certificate for said Cub Crafters amphib..... Every CC airplane I've been in was significantly heavier than the company's hype.

But maybe it's just me.

MTV

MTV, have you flown non-DOI CC products? I have wondered how much the DOI fleet standardization adds to the weight of the CC-18s, but hadn't looked hard enough to figure it out.

Troy Hamon wrote:

mtv wrote:

NineThreeKilo wrote:That was the trouble of going full on LSA,

Empty weight of a A5 according to wiki is 1080, empty weight of a cub crafters amphib is 1200

Please provide that W/B certificate for said Cub Crafters amphib..... Every CC airplane I've been in was significantly heavier than the company's hype.

But maybe it's just me.

MTV

MTV, have you flown non-DOI CC products? I have wondered how much the DOI fleet standardization adds to the weight of the CC-18s, but hadn't looked hard enough to figure it out.

Yes, I have. Our CC-18 at the school was VFR only, as in no horizon/DG, totally basic, on 8.50 x 6 and weighed 1308. I've looked at weights on a couple of carbon cubs, and they were heavier than "advertised".

MTV