Cessna Greenlights LSA

"Stefan" wrote in message
...
Ron Wanttaja schrieb:

One reason: They don't like 100LL.

Being designed to run on unleaded car gas is a disadvantage? Hilarious.
The world gets crazier every day.

Yeah, it does: first, car gas has other nasties, and second, it's seldom
available at airports. What's more, the FAA gets really ****ed if you pull a
LSA up to a Conoco or Diamond Shamrock station.

They have absolutely NO sense of humor.

They're going with a O-200, not a rotax. Unless they changed their minds
again?

Morgans wrote:

"Jim Stewart" wrote

Unfortunately for Cessna, that plane already exists.
It's called the Evektor SportStar. Oh wait, it's
made in the Chez republic...

Now, if they would put something in it other than a Rotax.

I'll bet Cessna doesn't use a Rotax! g

Different factors I guess. "everyone has heard of 2 stroke engine
stoppages", never mind the LSA's pretty much use the 4 stroke 9xx
series. The mechanics may be just afraid of having to learn new stuff
and buying metric tools.
The 4 stroke rotax engines are very economical and dependable. I would
imagine that Cessna may bring back the rotax version LSA in the future.

Nathan Young wrote:
On Tue, 10 Jul 2007 20:04:47 -0400, "Morgans"

Now, if they would put something in it other than a Rotax.


I have heard several pilots and my A&P express disdain for Rotax
engines. Why is this? They certainly seem to be popular with the
homebuilt and LSA crew. I have no experience with the aviation
versions.

-Nathan

In a previous article, "Matt Barrow" said:
Yeah, it does: first, car gas has other nasties, and second, it's seldom
available at airports. What's more, the FAA gets really ****ed if you pull a
LSA up to a Conoco or Diamond Shamrock station.

James Bond did it. Why can't I?


--
Paul Tomblin http://blog.xcski.com/
Don't even get me started on the MCSEs I know. It's a miracle of
modern technology that some of these fsckwits still draw breath,
much less a paycheck. -- Marc Bowden

"Paul Tomblin" wrote in message
...
In a previous article, "Matt Barrow" said:
Yeah, it does: first, car gas has other nasties, and second, it's seldom
available at airports. What's more, the FAA gets really ****ed if you pull
a
LSA up to a Conoco or Diamond Shamrock station.

James Bond did it. Why can't I?


Because you can't kill them if they give you lip.

On 2007-07-10 14:55:36 -0700, Jay Beckman said:

On Jul 10, 2:23 pm, Dallas wrote:
On Tue, 10 Jul 2007 14:00:13 -0700, Jay Beckman wrote:
Just got an AvWeb flash announcing same...

Are you getting your loan papers together?

--
Dallas

Not right this minute, but I'm hoping one or two migrate to a FBO here
in the PHX area. I'd love to try it out!

Jay Beckman
PP-ASEL
Chandler, AZ
www.pbase.com/flyingphotog

Glendale Aviation will probably be allowed to buy one this year and
they will probably be allowed to sell one to a customer this year. The
customer will have to go to Oshkosh with (what's his name, John?) with
a $10,000 deposit one week before the air show. You will probably camp
out, because all the hotel rooms are filled. Delivery will be in 2008
or 2010 or whenever.

--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor

On 2007-07-10 15:38:13 -0700, Eric Bartsch said:



This should have a pretty significant impact on the cost of people
getting a license. If a brand new 172 goes for $110 to $130/hr then
one of the Cessna LSAs should be able to be rented for maybe $70/hr
with the lower fuel burn, cheaper plane, and lower insurance (2 seats
vs. 4).

You hit it right on the head. That is how much we will rent it for at
PAVCO. We will get at least one, maybe two. They will be a great
replacement for our 152s, which are getting a little long in the tooth.

--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor

On 2007-07-10 17:45:35 -0700, buttman said:

On Jul 10, 2:00 pm, Jay Beckman wrote:
Just got an AvWeb flash announcing same...

Jay Beckman
PP-ASEL
Chandler, AZwww.pbase.com/flyingphotog

Thats really good news. I've not seen much about this plane, but a
"C-153" so to speak sounds like a good idea. In these days of high gas
prices, going smaller is the way to go. Actually I don't know what
they're going to call it, but I hope they go with C-153. Isn't that
basically what is it? An lighter (all though completely redesigned)
152?

Now if they'll only release details on the NGP...

I think they are just going to call it Cessna LSA. C-153 would be all
right with me, though.
--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor

On 2007-07-10 14:00:13 -0700, Jay Beckman said:

Just got an AvWeb flash announcing same...

Jay Beckman
PP-ASEL
Chandler, AZ
www.pbase.com/flyingphotog

This plane will be sold out before Oshkosh. They will exhibit the
prototype, but the entire production will have been sold a week before.
--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor

C J Campbell wrote:
On 2007-07-10 15:38:13 -0700, Eric Bartsch said:



This should have a pretty significant impact on the cost of people
getting a license. If a brand new 172 goes for $110 to $130/hr then
one of the Cessna LSAs should be able to be rented for maybe $70/hr
with the lower fuel burn, cheaper plane, and lower insurance (2 seats
vs. 4).

You hit it right on the head. That is how much we will rent it for at
PAVCO. We will get at least one, maybe two. They will be a great
replacement for our 152s, which are getting a little long in the
tooth.

Most of the guys renting LSA aircraft so far have them set at ~$100.00 and
some more. The ones I've looked at are all small operation though and they
might not have the volume to support them at lower rates.