If GA is down, why aren't used aircraft prices?

[Dallas]

If the number of private pilots is down from 299,000 to 236,000, why are
prices for used aircraft maintaining and even out pacing inflation?

Economics 101, first day of class - price is determined by supply and
demand. Yet I've noticed over the past couple of years the average price
for a late '70's Cessna 172 has floated up from $59,000 to $66,000.
Cessna 150s have gone from $22,000 to $26,000.

Mind you, this is a completely subjective observation on my part, but it
does seem accurate.

--
Dallas

[Doug Semler]

"Dallas" > wrote in message
...
>
> If the number of private pilots is down from 299,000 to 236,000, why are
> prices for used aircraft maintaining and even out pacing inflation?
>
> Economics 101, first day of class - price is determined by supply and
> demand. Yet I've noticed over the past couple of years the average price
> for a late '70's Cessna 172 has floated up from $59,000 to $66,000.
> Cessna 150s have gone from $22,000 to $26,000.
>
> Mind you, this is a completely subjective observation on my part, but it
> does seem accurate.
>


Not disagreeing, but have you considered that the demand for privately
(personal or club) owned planes might be increasing even though the numbers
of actual pilots are down? In other words, it may be more of a case that
there are more people now who can afford the planes...

--
Doug Semler, MCPD
a.a. #705, BAAWA. EAC Guardian of the Horn of the IPU (pbuhh).
The answer is 42; DNRC o-
Gur Hfrarg unf orpbzr fb shyy bs penc gurfr qnlf, abbar rira
erpbtavmrf fvzcyr guvatf yvxr ebg13 nalzber. Fnq, vfa'g vg?

[Bob Noel]

In article >,
Dallas > wrote:

> If the number of private pilots is down from 299,000 to 236,000, why are
> prices for used aircraft maintaining and even out pacing inflation?
>
> Economics 101, first day of class - price is determined by supply and
> demand. Yet I've noticed over the past couple of years the average price
> for a late '70's Cessna 172 has floated up from $59,000 to $66,000.
> Cessna 150s have gone from $22,000 to $26,000.
>
> Mind you, this is a completely subjective observation on my part, but it
> does seem accurate.

Does it reflect the higher costs of avionics such as all those moving
map gizmos that seem so popular?

--
Bob Noel
(goodness, please trim replies!!!)

[Dan Luke[_2_]]

"Dallas" wrote:

> If the number of private pilots is down from 299,000 to 236,000, why are
> prices for used aircraft maintaining and even out pacing inflation?

That was true from 5-20 years ago, not now.

--
Dan
T-182T at BFM

[Jay Honeck]

> Mind you, this is a completely subjective observation on my part, but it
> does seem accurate.

Dunno which stats you're looking at, but prices *have* dropped,
dramatically.

Our Pathfinder briefly flirted with a $90+ thousand dollar value, back
in '03 - '04.

Now, I'd be lucky to get $75K for it. The market is way down,
especially for planes powered by the big-bore Lycs (like mine) and
Continentals, thanks to $4/gallon gas.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[[email protected]]

On Aug 25, 11:24 am, Dallas > wrote:
> If the number of private pilots is down from 299,000 to 236,000, why are
> prices for used aircraft maintaining and even out pacing inflation?
>
> Economics 101, first day of class - price is determined by supply and
> demand. Yet I've noticed over the past couple of years the average price
> for a late '70's Cessna 172 has floated up from $59,000 to $66,000.
> Cessna 150s have gone from $22,000 to $26,000.
>
> Mind you, this is a completely subjective observation on my part, but it
> does seem accurate.
>
> --
> Dallas

Perhaps the supply of old airplanes is dwindling... hull losses,
scrapped out due to airworthiness issues that exceed the hull value,
etc. etc.

That is the other side of the equation. Does anyone have any data on
the rate of GA hull retirements/losses?

Dean W
AeroLEDs LLC
www.aeroleds.com

[Doug Semler]

"Bob Noel" > wrote in message
...

>
> Does it reflect the higher costs of avionics such as all those moving
> map gizmos that seem so popular?


Huh. Didn't even think of that...Probably reflects my youth <g>

--
Doug Semler, MCPD
a.a. #705, BAAWA. EAC Guardian of the Horn of the IPU (pbuhh).
The answer is 42; DNRC o-
Gur Hfrarg unf orpbzr fb shyy bs penc gurfr qnlf, abbar rira
erpbtavmrf fvzcyr guvatf yvxr ebg13 nalzber. Fnq, vfa'g vg?

[Dallas]

On Sat, 25 Aug 2007 12:57:32 -0700, Jay Honeck wrote:

> Dunno which stats you're looking at, but prices *have* dropped,
> dramatically.

Like I said... not very scientific, just thumbing through Aero Trader,
Controller and Trade-A-Plane.

It is true that I've been paying special attention to 150's and 172's,
maybe those are experiencing a boom market... I can tell you for sure that
150 prices have been rising very regularly.

I've got a stock that was worth $20,000 in 2005, about the same as a 150 in
2005. Now that stock is worth $25,000 and well outfitted 150's have gone
up to $26,000.

I should have invested in 150's for a better rate of return. :-)


--
Dallas

[Vaughn Simon]

"Dallas" > wrote in message
...
>
> I should have invested in 150's for a better rate of return. :-)

You don't have to pay maintenance, parking, & insurance etc. on a stock.

I have a chunk of vacant land that has increased to at least 5X its
original value over the last 20 years I have owned it. That sounds great right?
Wrong! When you consider the taxes I have been paying, the interest on the
original investment, the transaction costs and the continuing cost of capital,
it is a fool's investment.

Vaughn

[Jay Honeck]

> I have a chunk of vacant land that has increased to at least 5X its
> original value over the last 20 years I have owned it. That sounds great right?
> Wrong! When you consider the taxes I have been paying, the interest on the
> original investment, the transaction costs and the continuing cost of capital,
> it is a fool's investment.

Yes, but your children will enjoy the profits when they sell to
McDonalds...

;-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Marty Shapiro]

wrote in
ups.com:

> On Aug 25, 11:24 am, Dallas > wrote:
>> If the number of private pilots is down from 299,000 to 236,000, why
>> are prices for used aircraft maintaining and even out pacing
>> inflation?
>>
>> Economics 101, first day of class - price is determined by supply and
>> demand. Yet I've noticed over the past couple of years the average
>> price for a late '70's Cessna 172 has floated up from $59,000 to
>> $66,000. Cessna 150s have gone from $22,000 to $26,000.
>>
>> Mind you, this is a completely subjective observation on my part, but
>> it does seem accurate.
>>
>> --
>> Dallas
>
> Perhaps the supply of old airplanes is dwindling... hull losses,
> scrapped out due to airworthiness issues that exceed the hull value,
> etc. etc.
>
> That is the other side of the equation. Does anyone have any data on
> the rate of GA hull retirements/losses?
>
> Dean W
> AeroLEDs LLC
> www.aeroleds.com
>
>

The price of a used anything is a function of both demand AND the
price of a new one. Look at the price of a new C-172.

--
Marty Shapiro
Silicon Rallye Inc.

(remove SPAMNOT to email me)

[Mike Isaksen]

"Dallas" wrote in message ...
>
> If the number of private pilots is down from 299,000 to 236,000,
> why are prices for used aircraft maintaining and even out pacing
> inflation?
>
> Mind you, this is a completely subjective observation on my part, but it
> does seem accurate.
>

Wow, where are you looking?? Put down the CoolAid and check the Vref teaser
ad in ASO. Look at the value charts for normal and complex singles. If you
have a plane in the market, get an air sick bag first.

http://www.aso.com/i.aso3/staticcontent.jsp?which=asoinfo/vref_graphs/index_light_single

http://www.aso.com/i.aso3/staticcontent.jsp?which=asoinfo/vref_graphs/index_complex_single

And don't even look at the twins, which appear to be dropping faster than
single engine ops below Vmc.

There is a great lag in asking prices anytime the market switches to the
buyers side. We are "all in" emotionally deep when it comes to aircraft
ownership. And with the perfect storm coming, ... well, ... nevermind (walks
away, head down, mumbling to self).

[NW_Pilot]

"Dallas" > wrote in message
...
>
> If the number of private pilots is down from 299,000 to 236,000, why are
> prices for used aircraft maintaining and even out pacing inflation?
>
> Economics 101, first day of class - price is determined by supply and
> demand. Yet I've noticed over the past couple of years the average price
> for a late '70's Cessna 172 has floated up from $59,000 to $66,000.
> Cessna 150s have gone from $22,000 to $26,000.
>
> Mind you, this is a completely subjective observation on my part, but it
> does seem accurate.
>
> --
> Dallas


Have you looked at the cost of a new single? Ummm cost more than your
average home! Now say if a new Cessna 172 was 50K imagine what that would do
the price of used aircraft. We live in a Litigious Society! If it was not
for the attorneys and the insurance co's Aviation, Aircraft, & Avionics
would be affordable.

[NW_Pilot]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
ups.com...
>> I have a chunk of vacant land that has increased to at least 5X its
>> original value over the last 20 years I have owned it. That sounds great
>> right?
>> Wrong! When you consider the taxes I have been paying, the interest on
>> the
>> original investment, the transaction costs and the continuing cost of
>> capital,
>> it is a fool's investment.
>
> Yes, but your children will enjoy the profits when they sell to
> McDonalds...
>
> ;-)
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"
>
>

Jay, I would return from the grave and retroactively abort my child if they
did that.

[Ron Lee[_2_]]

>Wow, where are you looking?? Put down the CoolAid and check the Vref teaser
>ad in ASO. Look at the value charts for normal and complex singles. If you
>have a plane in the market, get an air sick bag first.
>
>http://www.aso.com/i.aso3/staticcontent.jsp?which=asoinfo/vref_graphs/index_light_single
>
>http://www.aso.com/i.aso3/staticcontent.jsp?which=asoinfo/vref_graphs/index_complex_single

I hate when people use the lower part of the price as "Zero." It
artificially makes it looks worse.

Ron Lee

[john hawkins]

"NW_Pilot" > wrote in message
. ..
>
> "Dallas" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> [snip]
> Have you looked at the cost of a new single? Ummm cost more than your
> average home! Now say if a new Cessna 172 was 50K imagine what that would
> do the price of used aircraft. We live in a Litigious Society! If it was
> not for the attorneys and the insurance co's Aviation, Aircraft, &
> Avionics would be affordable.
>

At the most afforable grass strip I've flown out of. the owner says up front
he has no insurance. You hurt it you pay for it.
His theory is that lawyers go after the deep pockets. His pocket doesn't
have 2 dollars.
Every thing in his business except for his one airplane in leased.
Riskey But he's been around for years.

[NW_Pilot]

"john hawkins" > wrote in message
. net...
>
> "NW_Pilot" > wrote in message
> . ..
>>
>> "Dallas" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>>
>>> [snip]
>> Have you looked at the cost of a new single? Ummm cost more than your
>> average home! Now say if a new Cessna 172 was 50K imagine what that would
>> do the price of used aircraft. We live in a Litigious Society! If it was
>> not for the attorneys and the insurance co's Aviation, Aircraft, &
>> Avionics would be affordable.
>>
>
> At the most afforable grass strip I've flown out of. the owner says up
> front he has no insurance. You hurt it you pay for it.
> His theory is that lawyers go after the deep pockets. His pocket doesn't
> have 2 dollars.
> Every thing in his business except for his one airplane in leased.
> Riskey But he's been around for years.
>
>

Yea, But first thing the leaches of society will go after is your home!
Aviation insurance on the plane is not that bad. It's for the manfactures
and sales and commercial movement of aircraft that is a nightmare.

I called for a Policy for my business $28,000 a year was the quote! With an
income of 54k a year no friken way I go as named operator or run under their
open pilot warranty. And like most every other ferry pilot most the time
zero insurance when crossing the pond 12k for insurance for the crossing.
Yea I know if there is a inciodent ither then somthing minor it's a total
loss to them. Cessna 150 U.S. to Peru liability only was about $1,600 USD
terminated upon parking at destination or 30 days. Clients insurance for
the plane was about $4,000 a year ouch! Mexico is cheap for liability about
$130.

I can immagin how much insurance Cessna, Beech, Piper Etc. have to carry to
preven another mid 1980's Civil Suit Hit!

Just becuse Cessna, Beech, Piper Etc Cessna made it don't mean you can blame
them for it. The faa regs also have somthign to do with keeping aviation
expensive by over regulating parts manfacture etc. There are some A&P/IA's
out there that I would not trust to work on my lawn mower!

Like I really need $40,000 in hotel allowance on my homeowners policy and
that's the Min!!!! I told them I don't want it they told me it's there! Min
$80,000 for household items Well I can replace most every thing in my home I
need for less then 30K (I Live Simple) Important jewelrey papers etc stays
in the bank for $22.00 a year in a locked box.

Also M.D. need to be a bit more regulated more in their
overbilling/insurance billing practices. If i go in for a Cut finger that
needs a stitch or 2 I don't need a full phicial exam and x-rays (yea I know
they are doing it to protect them form a law suit) Then you get a bill room
useage 8 hours, doctor 3 hours $x,xxx when you were there for only 2 hours?
whats this Light/Electric Charges? And What is this charge and that charge
the only reason why they do that is ins co's pay with out question.

If the laws limited on what one can wage a law suit attack for then this
would be a far more responcible country with low cost consumer goods and
medical care.

[Denny]

My Apache is worth less than half of what I have put into it
considering the initial cost, the upgrades, the AD's I have retired by
applying copious greenbacks, etc...
Still, I have my personal airplane (albeit old and tired) that is
reliable and available 24/7 without having to schedule time, etc...
Owning an airplane is a fools game, but so is a boat, jet ski, dirt
bike, yadda, yadda, yadda...
Those of us who own and may consider selling our used airplane see
that we will only get a part of what we have spent ...
Those who are looking to buy from scratch see it that used airplanes
are expensive (always have been, always will be)...
Depends on your point of view...

denny

[Matt Whiting]

Dallas wrote:
> If the number of private pilots is down from 299,000 to 236,000, why are
> prices for used aircraft maintaining and even out pacing inflation?
>
> Economics 101, first day of class - price is determined by supply and
> demand. Yet I've noticed over the past couple of years the average price
> for a late '70's Cessna 172 has floated up from $59,000 to $66,000.
> Cessna 150s have gone from $22,000 to $26,000.
>
> Mind you, this is a completely subjective observation on my part, but it
> does seem accurate.
>

What is your data source? I've been watching Skylane prices for the
last year or so as I'm toying with ownership again and I've seen
probably a 10% drop in prices in TAP over this time-frame.

Matt

[Dan Luke[_2_]]

"Matt Whiting" wrote:

>> Mind you, this is a completely subjective observation on my part, but it
>> does seem accurate.
>>
>
> What is your data source? I've been watching Skylane prices for the last
> year or so as I'm toying with ownership again and I've seen probably a 10%
> drop in prices in TAP over this time-frame.

Yep. Aviation Consumer just ran an article showing prices of most light GA
aircraft have declined since 2000.

Just try selling a 20+ -year old airplane these days; you'll find it tough.

If I hadn't luckily met just the right buyer on a ramp in Mississippi, I'd
probably still be trying to sell my 1984 172RG.

--
Dan
T-182T at BFM

[Aluckyguess]

A friend bought a 172 the asking price was 54k he offered 25 the guy called
a couple weeks later and took it. He put a 5k paint job on the plane and it
looks nice. No one thought he would get the plane. The guy needed the money
and had not another person even look at it.

"Dan Luke" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Matt Whiting" wrote:
>
>>> Mind you, this is a completely subjective observation on my part, but it
>>> does seem accurate.
>>>
>>
>> What is your data source? I've been watching Skylane prices for the last
>> year or so as I'm toying with ownership again and I've seen probably a
>> 10% drop in prices in TAP over this time-frame.
>
> Yep. Aviation Consumer just ran an article showing prices of most light
> GA aircraft have declined since 2000.
>
> Just try selling a 20+ -year old airplane these days; you'll find it
> tough.
>
> If I hadn't luckily met just the right buyer on a ramp in Mississippi, I'd
> probably still be trying to sell my 1984 172RG.
>
> --
> Dan
> T-182T at BFM
>

[Bertie the Bunyip[_19_]]

"Aluckyguess" > wrote in :

> A friend bought a 172 the asking price was 54k he offered 25 the guy
> called a couple weeks later and took it. He put a 5k paint job on the
> plane and it looks nice. No one thought he would get the plane. The
> guy needed the money and had not another person even look at it.

es, for the most part they're pretty cheap at the moment, particularly if
they're thirsty. OTOH, little anteeks are increasing all the time.
>
>

[Gig 601XL Builder]

Dan Luke wrote:
> "Dallas" wrote:
>
>> If the number of private pilots is down from 299,000 to 236,000, why
>> are prices for used aircraft maintaining and even out pacing
>> inflation?
>
> That was true from 5-20 years ago, not now.

It may be that the percentage of pilots that purchase their own plane has
increased. Perfect example is right here in El Dorado AR. As I've mentioned
here pre-1980 there were 3 places to rent from as of 1988 there were zero.

So now if you fly you own your own airplane. There are fewer active pilots
here now but a lot more aircraft.

[Dallas]

On Sat, 25 Aug 2007 23:11:22 GMT, Mike Isaksen wrote:

> http://www.aso.com/i.aso3/staticcontent.jsp?which=asoinfo/vref_graphs/index_light_single

Wow.. that shoots down my subjective observations. Of course another flaw
in my method was looking at "asking" prices not "getting" prices.

And I'm a bit shocked at the effect September 2001 had on prices.


--
Dallas

[Darkwing]

"Dallas" > wrote in message
...
>
> If the number of private pilots is down from 299,000 to 236,000, why are
> prices for used aircraft maintaining and even out pacing inflation?
>
> Economics 101, first day of class - price is determined by supply and
> demand. Yet I've noticed over the past couple of years the average price
> for a late '70's Cessna 172 has floated up from $59,000 to $66,000.
> Cessna 150s have gone from $22,000 to $26,000.
>
> Mind you, this is a completely subjective observation on my part, but it
> does seem accurate.
>
> --
> Dallas

Could there be demand for the 150's driving up price due to it being allowed
under the Sport Pilot rules?

--------------------------------
DW

[Gig 601XL Builder]

Darkwing wrote:

>
> Could there be demand for the 150's driving up price due to it being
> allowed under the Sport Pilot rules?
>

That might be the case if the 150 was legal under the SP rules. Unfortunatly
it isn't.

[Darkwing]

"Gig 601XL Builder" <wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net> wrote in message
...
> Darkwing wrote:
>
>>
>> Could there be demand for the 150's driving up price due to it being
>> allowed under the Sport Pilot rules?
>>
>
> That might be the case if the 150 was legal under the SP rules.
> Unfortunatly it isn't.

Is the 152 or was there people trying to make the case for it to be allowed?

----------------------------------------
DW

[Matt Barrow[_4_]]

"Gig 601XL Builder" <wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net> wrote in message
...
> Dan Luke wrote:
>> "Dallas" wrote:
>>
>>> If the number of private pilots is down from 299,000 to 236,000, why
>>> are prices for used aircraft maintaining and even out pacing
>>> inflation?
>>
>> That was true from 5-20 years ago, not now.
>
> It may be that the percentage of pilots that purchase their own plane has
> increased. Perfect example is right here in El Dorado AR. As I've
> mentioned here pre-1980 there were 3 places to rent from as of 1988 there
> were zero.
>
> So now if you fly you own your own airplane. There are fewer active pilots
> here now but a lot more aircraft.

And what is the population of aircraft? That's more significant than the
number of pilots.

IOW, what is the ratio of pilots to aircraft-in-service, now and 25 years
ago?

[Morgans[_2_]]

"Darkwing" <> wrote

> Is the 152 or was there people trying to make the case for it to be
> allowed?

Yep, people wanted to let the 152 and 150 to be allowed, but the weight came
in way lower than either would fit in.
--
Jim in NC

[Matt Barrow[_4_]]

"Dallas" > wrote in message
.. .
> On Sat, 25 Aug 2007 23:11:22 GMT, Mike Isaksen wrote:
>
>> http://www.aso.com/i.aso3/staticcontent.jsp?which=asoinfo/vref_graphs/index_light_single
>
> Wow.. that shoots down my subjective observations. Of course another flaw
> in my method was looking at "asking" prices not "getting" prices.
>
> And I'm a bit shocked at the effect September 2001 had on prices.

In early 2002 I got a barn-burner of a deal on a B36-TC from a guy who got
his ass reamed in the dot.com fallout and the subsequent economic woes post
9/11.

[Gig 601XL Builder]

Darkwing wrote:
> "Gig 601XL Builder" <wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net> wrote in message
> ...
>> Darkwing wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Could there be demand for the 150's driving up price due to it being
>>> allowed under the Sport Pilot rules?
>>>
>>
>> That might be the case if the 150 was legal under the SP rules.
>> Unfortunatly it isn't.
>
> Is the 152 or was there people trying to make the case for it to be
> allowed?
> ----------------------------------------
> DW

Nope the 152 isn't either. It weighs more than the 150. Yes, there was a
push before the rules went into effect to push the MGW up to a point where
the 150/152 would be covered. The 150 MGW is ~1600 lbs. so the allowable
weight would have to be increased as close to 300 or maybe a little more.

Looking back it wouldn't surprise me that Cessna didn't have something to do
with the 150 NOT being allowed.

[john hawkins]

Oh like you mean the Yak 52 and the AN 2 biplane not being certified by the
US.
Use of lawyers, congress etc is all part of the game.

"Gig 601XL Builder" <wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net> wrote in message
...
> Darkwing wrote:
>> "Gig 601XL Builder" <wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net> wrote in message
>> ...
>>> Darkwing wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Could there be demand for the 150's driving up price due to it being
>>>> allowed under the Sport Pilot rules?
>>>>
>>>
>>> That might be the case if the 150 was legal under the SP rules.
>>> Unfortunatly it isn't.
>>
>> Is the 152 or was there people trying to make the case for it to be
>> allowed?
>> ----------------------------------------
>> DW
>
> Nope the 152 isn't either. It weighs more than the 150. Yes, there was a
> push before the rules went into effect to push the MGW up to a point where
> the 150/152 would be covered. The 150 MGW is ~1600 lbs. so the allowable
> weight would have to be increased as close to 300 or maybe a little more.
>
> Looking back it wouldn't surprise me that Cessna didn't have something to
> do with the 150 NOT being allowed.
>

[Gig 601XL Builder]

john hawkins wrote:
> Oh like you mean the Yak 52 and the AN 2 biplane not being certified
> by the US.
> Use of lawyers, congress etc is all part of the game.
>
> "Gig 601XL Builder" <wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net> wrote in message
> ...
>> Darkwing wrote:
>>> "Gig 601XL Builder" <wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net> wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> Darkwing wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Could there be demand for the 150's driving up price due to it
>>>>> being allowed under the Sport Pilot rules?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> That might be the case if the 150 was legal under the SP rules.
>>>> Unfortunatly it isn't.
>>>
>>> Is the 152 or was there people trying to make the case for it to be
>>> allowed?
>>> ----------------------------------------
>>> DW
>>
>> Nope the 152 isn't either. It weighs more than the 150. Yes, there
>> was a push before the rules went into effect to push the MGW up to a
>> point where the 150/152 would be covered. The 150 MGW is ~1600 lbs.
>> so the allowable weight would have to be increased as close to 300
>> or maybe a little more. Looking back it wouldn't surprise me that Cessna
>> didn't have
>> something to do with the 150 NOT being allowed.


I don't know about the Yak or the AN2 but Cessna might not have +/-1000
orders for the Skycatcher right now if all those 150s were SP legal.

[Ken Finney]

"Gig 601XL Builder" <wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net> wrote in message
...
> Darkwing wrote:
>> "Gig 601XL Builder" <wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net> wrote in message
>> ...
>>> Darkwing wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Could there be demand for the 150's driving up price due to it being
>>>> allowed under the Sport Pilot rules?
>>>>
>>>
>>> That might be the case if the 150 was legal under the SP rules.
>>> Unfortunatly it isn't.
>>
>> Is the 152 or was there people trying to make the case for it to be
>> allowed?
>> ----------------------------------------
>> DW
>
> Nope the 152 isn't either. It weighs more than the 150. Yes, there was a
> push before the rules went into effect to push the MGW up to a point where
> the 150/152 would be covered. The 150 MGW is ~1600 lbs. so the allowable
> weight would have to be increased as close to 300 or maybe a little more.
>
> Looking back it wouldn't surprise me that Cessna didn't have something to
> do with the 150 NOT being allowed.

I know several people involved in writing the LSA rules, and I never heard
anything about Cessna being involved. One of the main goals of LSA was to
cause NEW aircraft to be built, so they intentionally wanted to exclude as
many existing aircraft as possible. I proposed (and it fell on deaf ears)
that for a period of 3 years that the weight limit be higher for LSAs then
drop, so that flight schools (and individuals) would have a population of
aircraft to draw from while production spun up.