On Jun 15, 9:08*am, Martin Hotze wrote:
John Smith schrieb:

wow. 650AMUs. (and a low wing-cessna)

Just remember, the original Cessna 500 was only $500 AMU's when it was
announced in the mid-60's.

IMHO an airplane isn't much more science than a car. The wheel is
invented, so there are only changes to the basics. I accept higher costs
due to lower production numbers, let's say 4 times higher, but then this
would buy you a real fancy plane.
well equipped car: 50AMUs(?) - 200AMUs for a plane: including leather,
heated seats, climatronic, etc. etc.
But today's planes are not really that fancy, this is also a
show-stopper for young people starting to fly. What they see are clapped
out C150 et-al.

I agree.

I wonder what would happen if every CEO of aircraft company could be
asked:

"Are you interested in making an aircraft for $50,000 with far more
amentities than what one gets with $200,000 aircraft?"

I wonder if the answer would be "yes", or if there would be concerns
about disturbing the status quo of price/performance expectations in
GA. Per-unit revenue would decrease, but the cost reduction would
increase number of units sold, thereby making overall revenue and
overall profit, higher, perhaps.

Perhaps it is the "perhaps" that aicraft companies worry about.

-Le Chaud Lapin-