That’s a good article from Avweb, but I think it covers mainly bizjets, the low end of which are very utilitarian and the old ones are just as capable (in the right hands) – as @what_next will happily tell you.
I think piston GA works differently. There is a whole spectrum of pilots, from those struggling to buy a 10k 1972 C150, all the way to those who buy a fully loaded 1M new SR22T and change it each year or two to get the latest graphics and colour scheme. And from my travels it seems that most of the people who buy the latter are located right where the conventional transport options are the best: central-ish (and wealthiest) Europe! So I don’t think one can generalise too usefully. I think the piston decline in Europe is driven by all the things we discussed previously e.g. reducing relative utility, stupid airport managers increasing airport costs and hassles, etc. A number of European airports (like the one we had a fly-in to in May 
) may as well erect a piece of a brick wall inside the “GA terminal”, which arrivals can bang their heads into.
Why it is declining in the USA is probably different because they retain the utility value and the usable airports. I think Cirrus killed the GA market by dumping thousands of planes, of a type whose style doesn’t “age” fast because the technology is conventional and widely accepted, into it in a very short time, at one point outselling all piston manufacturers put together, and now we have a classic overhang where thousands of owners are sitting on planes which they think are worth X but which might sell for Y, and since Y=X/2, the market is frozen because nobody wants to take such a big hit – both financially and to their manhood. You get the same in the housing market – I bought one for 105k (1987) and sold it for 75k (1995). The overhang eventually collapses catastrophically; my buyer sold the house just 1 year later for 169k! (Which didn’t matter because when I sold up for 75k in ‘95 I was able to buy a “600k” house for 340k, but that’s besides the point… my ex got that house anyway in ’99 ). Whether the US piston market overhang will collapse like that is a good Q. Maybe not because while most people have to move house eventually, not many have to sell their plane.
I would just point out that whilst I have no way to do anything except pay the VAT on my private aircraft, and I cannot see how anyone else can be much different, BUT most aircraft I see for sale are price PLUS VAT!
I found this, FWIW
BeechBaby wrote:
Are New sales that grim? It would appear to be
That has been obvious for many years. New sales are in figures where most airplane manufacturers are hanging in there by their teeth and just hope for some light at the end of the tunnel only in most cases to find it’s an oncoming train.
For me, the main reason is that new airplanes are way too expensive for what they represent. Production and certification cost combined with all the overhead like insurances e.t.c. have created something which the “normal” Joe Bloggs can not even dream of and the larger incomes won’t afford as the value for the money simply is not there. Those who do want to buy and have sufficient money can easily satisfy the need for a newish airplane in the used market. And not that many who sell their plane on the used market are buying new to replace. There may be some who do, but much less so as in the car market, where buying new every year or so is still very common.
Of course I am sometimes looking at the new planes which come out as much as the next guy. But what is the real value? I can buy a new SR22 for almost a million $ or a new Ovation Ultra (yes I know but it happens to be my dream plane in that sector) for some 600k, but if I want a newish SR22 I can get one which is almost as good for 300k and Ovations start at 60k these days with later models (G1000 WAAS and FIKI) at maybe 4-500k. Same goes for the Corvalis, which is basically the only other traveller on sale today.
I reckon that is what it’s gonna be for the forseeable future. I do see chances for smaller planes with less cost to sell better, bringing flying back to the public which do want to fly certified (primarily in Europe) wheras the US Market will probably almost completely go uncertified.
My conclusion is that the certification regime should be totally revised to the point where for light airplanes with less than maybe 7 seats (to include the popular 6 seaters) there should not be a large difference between developping a kit or a certified model in terms of development and certification costs. That way, it would no longer be necessary for very successful companies with huge sales numbers to stay outside the certified envelope and would open a totally new market place for less rich buyers. Realistically speaking, I don’t see why any 4 seat traveller should be more expensive than maybe twice the price of a corresponding car, so starting at maybe 100k for simple trainers to maximum 250k for a turbocharged G1000 traveller. With such pricing, numbers would go up to levels where development cost can be distributed over a large amount of airframes. Right now, nobody really develops for that particular reason and those who do get screwed. It doesn’t have to be that way, but then certification and also product liability costs need to be done away with.
certification and also product liability costs need to be done away with.
There is however very little evidence that these items are significant costs – even with claims like discussed here
What I wonder, IF the cost is really depressing sales, why don’t the manufacturers get rid of their dealers? They would save about 20% right away. The dealer adds almost no value and some of them rip customers off on maintenance but retain the business due to warranty politics. Take Air Touring for example… at the time I bought my TB20 in 2002, most of their customers from that era were on the verge of suing over one thing or another.
However, it seems to be happening in the USA.
The fact that Cirrus sell as many Ts and non-Ts suggests that people are prepared to pay for the capability.
I have updated the Cirrus shipments graph with the latest available data…
Agreed. No reason a fixed wing SE plane should cost any more than a fancy car. In fact, it’s much less complex and has far fewer moving parts. I’m hoping electric propulsion and the reliability that comes with that, will in fact deliver this revolution eventually. Like I’ve mentioned in some other threads, I actually think GA and aviation has a great long term future. It is inevitable that we will all be flying in our own VTOL’s or aircraft at some point, just like the predicted in the 1920’s. They were just off by a hundred years or so. Roads, cars and infrastructure are a huge misappropriation of communal funds.
