Menu Sign In Contact FAQ
Banner
Welcome to our forums

Buy new aircraft for Flying Club

Bathman wrote:

In the UK no extension is allowed on the Rotax 912 TBO.

Yeah, with Part-M Light(and also current opportunities for a self declared program) they cannot enforce that restriction.

Last Edited by Fly310 at 16 Dec 19:31
ESSZ, Sweden

Silvaire wrote:

Its a cramped anemic contraption that has a zillion hours in night VFR (as required for US private certificate) and IFR operations

It’s like comparing a VW Beetle to a modern small car. Around the time I was born, my grandfather told me every other car on the road was a Beetle. They are still around, and probably will be for all eternity. You can even re-build them to electric cars today, in Germany somewhere. Time moves on though.

The elephant is the circulation
ENVA ENOP ENMO, Norway

The popular WT9 is now VLA (LSA)

Two different things. So, is it VLA or LSA certified?

always learning
LO__, Austria

LeSving wrote:

It’s like comparing a VW Beetle to a modern small car. Around the time I was born, my grandfather told me every other car on the road was a Beetle. They are still around, and probably will be for all eternity. You can even re-build them to electric cars today, in Germany somewhere. Time moves on though.

Rotax powered LSA style aircraft are not commonly used as trainers in the US – it was tried for a while starting 10-12 years ago but failed to catch on. Resale value of the planes sold in that period has now sunk dramatically. The current basic trainer norm is the C-172 and some similar 160 HP Pipers, used for both PPL/night and instrument training, often for the same student in the same sequential program. The comparison now is similar to the past situation with cars: Europe is driven more by fuel (tax) cost, smaller runways and a more recreation-oriented objective and therefore is attracted to smaller, sportier but more fragile aircraft. Fuel cost and availability is not a major issue in the US so there is little interest in lightweight aircraft as workaday trainers, and as purely recreational planes in the US market they don’t compete successfully with RVs. As a result factory built Light Sport in the US now predominantly means Cubs etc.

C-150s and (particularly) C-152s are often used as rentals in the US for solo flying by pilots who have not yet moved on to (bought) something else. Like a white Toyota Corolla from the rental car agency Their depreciation cost is zero, they are cheap per hour (apparently $92/hr wet in my area) and I think a school or club can benefit from having a couple of them around. The aeronautical analogy would be old $10K Schweizer gliders in the US and yes I agree, both will fly on forever in substantial numbers.

Last Edited by Silvaire at 17 Dec 00:34

Silvaire wrote:

Their depreciation cost is zero, they are cheap per hour (apparently $92/hr wet in my area)

In my club we pay less for a brand new P2008 (VLA), about $90 per h, same as the -49 Cub btw Not that the P2008 is particularly quick, but it has a good cruise speed, a real stick, glass etc. Personally I like the C-152. I have lots of hours in the C-152 Aerobat some 20+ years ago. It’s just that comparing it with a modern VLA/LSA with a Rotax that just runs and runs for a start… It’s no comparison.

The elephant is the circulation
ENVA ENOP ENMO, Norway

Bathman

The Cessna 150 is a great training aircraft. That can teach day, night, IMC/ir and certain models aerobatics as well. The crosswind limit is 15mph and it handles that easily. None of the plastic fantastic can do that.

The A210/A211 is also a great training aircraft. It can be used for day and night VFR and has a crosswind limit of 15 knots, not mph. It also has a VP and many models have EFIS as well. It is a great training aircraft for this century, having 21st century ergonomics instead of a cockpit design that predates the very concept of ergonomics.

I agree that if one will keep flying aircraft from the last century after PPL training, and many do, the C150/C152 is still suitable. In all other cases, the A210/A211 series is superior.

Low-hours pilot
EDVM Hildesheim, Germany

There’s something out there for everyone, and they get to decide what it is all on their own. In my area if you want to rent cheaply, there’s an Aeronca Champ for $68/hr wet not too far away. I don’t rent planes, and for fun at the price of a new LSA this would be my choice (I’ve flown in this one with a previous owner). I’ve flown a Tecnam 2002 as well, there wasn’t much comparison but I did think of buying one in around 2006 based on the appeal of $15/hr fuel cost… the prospect of losing huge amounts in depreciation made me choose another direction (by now I would have lost roughly $100K)

The late model C-172 is the one being chosen and bought now for flight school training in the US, by those who are buying for that purpose, as I described. Personally I find them dull as ditch water but they are comfortable, easy to fly, are operated IFR every day and apparently do the job required by those buying them.

Last Edited by Silvaire at 17 Dec 15:07

I get the clear feeling that the different aircraft types operated by different schools in different countries are mostly a function of cultural preferences in the respective places.

In the UK, people are used to the GA scene being decrepit, so the businesses operating in it assume that this is actually something people really like, so they continue to deliver it But I bet that if you had two schools next to each other, one with a fleet of shagged C150/C152s, and the other with a fleet of the nice looking modern stuff, and both charged the same price, the 2nd one would get all the business. In reality the 2nd one will charge more – because they have to (because, according to some, these types get smashed up more) or because they think they can.

In some countries outside the UK, the GA scene has more money sloshing about so they can go for the more modern types to start with.

I think this mirrors other aspects of our society. When I started in business (electronics design and manufacture) in 1978, you just had to throw your product into some tin can and people would buy it. Well, the UK came out of WW2 as poor as a rat in a Baghdad sewer, so everything that actually worked was accepted. As the decades went on, expectations rose, but not all that fast. Whereas in some other places things developed differently.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom
48 Posts
Sign in to add your message

Back to Top