Cheap Airplane

Phil wrote:
Recent discussions about whether or not general aviation is dying
prompted me to start thinking about why it doesn't seem to be possible
to build a really cheap airplane. I know that you can buy a trike or
an ultralight for around $20,000. But you can't really go cross
country in one of those, and you would probably have a hard time
convincing most wives to even consider going up in one at all.

I assume that the reason an airplane like a trike is so cheap is that
it is structurally simple and easy to manufacture. If that is the
case, then to make a cheap airplane that can cruise fast enough to go
somewhere, and do so in reasonable comfort, you need to simplify the
structure.

Which made me remember the article I read about the Facetmobile. For
those of you unfamiliar with this airplane, here is a link:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facetmobile

It seems like someone could manufacture a pretty inexpensive airplane
if they used this type of design. If someone could manufacture a
cross-country-capable airplane for around 30 thousand, I would think
they could sell a lot of them.

Making a cheaper airplane would certainly go a long way toward helping
general aviation to grow.


But, wasn't that what light sport aircraft were supposed to do?

--

Regards, Ross
C-172F 180HP
KSWI

On Aug 28, 12:32 pm, Ross wrote:
Phil wrote:
Recent discussions about whether or not general aviation is dying
prompted me to start thinking about why it doesn't seem to be possible
to build a really cheap airplane. I know that you can buy a trike or
an ultralight for around $20,000. But you can't really go cross
country in one of those, and you would probably have a hard time
convincing most wives to even consider going up in one at all.

I assume that the reason an airplane like a trike is so cheap is that
it is structurally simple and easy to manufacture. If that is the
case, then to make a cheap airplane that can cruise fast enough to go
somewhere, and do so in reasonable comfort, you need to simplify the
structure.

Which made me remember the article I read about the Facetmobile. For
those of you unfamiliar with this airplane, here is a link:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facetmobile

It seems like someone could manufacture a pretty inexpensive airplane
if they used this type of design. If someone could manufacture a
cross-country-capable airplane for around 30 thousand, I would think
they could sell a lot of them.

Making a cheaper airplane would certainly go a long way toward helping
general aviation to grow.

But, wasn't that what light sport aircraft were supposed to do?

--

Regards, Ross
C-172F 180HP
KSWI- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

The light sport license is cheaper to acquire than the PPL. But a new
light sport airplane is still too expensive for most people. In
looking at the Facetmobile, I am guessing that if it were made from
composites, the top and bottom of the aircraft could each be formed as
a single piece, including the vertical stabilizers. That seems like
it should be pretty inexpensive to manufacture. And it wouldn't have
to have flat surfaces, so it could be even more efficient than the
original. I would guess that with this design you could make a very
competitive light-sport 2-place aircraft with as little as 65
horsepower pulling it. That would make it inexpensive to operate.