Jump to content

Sky catcher airframes in dumpsters at Cessna-Literally

MyNameIsNobody
 Share

Recommended Posts

MyNameIsNobody Grand Master

MyNameIsNobody

Posted
Posted

This rivals my sadness about the Porsche PFM decision post hurricane.  Just a shame to see Cessna decide to scrap airframes vs. finding a way to get them out to flying public to be enjoyed.  Just seems like such a waste.  

A sobering visual for the future of GA...

We need some radical revision to grow GA.  Ra Ra support aside government and litigation have strangled the industry.

I remain optimistic that GA can again thrive.  I hope that I am still alive.  To look above at a swarming hive.  With smiles and grins ear to ear.  I patiently wait for a New Year.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Andy95W Grand Master

Andy95W

Posted
Posted
29 minutes ago, MyNameIsNobody said:

We need some radical revision to grow GA. 

But how do we get 16-25 year olds to actually WANT to put in the time and effort to get their pilot's licenses?

The problem remains that GA pilots are dying of old age but the current young generation is happy to sit at home (probably their parent's home) and not deal with reality as you and I know it.  How do we convince them that Facebook friends aren't really friends and virtual reality isn't real.

Everybody loves to point out that GA is so expensive, but flying has always been expensive and Americans have more disposable income today than at any time in history.  They're just choosing to dispose of it on things other than aviation.

I'm really not disagreeing with Scott, but he threw the soapbox out there and I couldn't resist standing on it. :)

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
jrwilson Experienced

jrwilson

Posted
Posted

 

2 minutes ago, MyNameIsNobody said:

I needed a mission a co-owner and some income to be able to pursue aviation...

Why do we live in a world where donating an airframe to a flight school is less feasible than putting it in a dumpster?

Well in the specific case of the skycatcher, I think it was about a small production run and the need to ultimately support the fleet that was sold.  If Cessna was going to discontinue production, then canibalizing the remaining planes for parts to support the rest of the flying fleet might be a good idea.  The article says the planes had all the usable parts removed before they were scrapped.  Donating a plane that can't be supported to a flight school isn't very helpful.

though I agree with you that it's sucks to see a new plane scrapped...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
cnoe Mentor

cnoe

Posted
Posted
5 hours ago, peevee said:

less a commentary on the future of GA and more a crappy product brought to market methinks.

Crappy product or not, they'd have sold a ton of these things if priced at $35K-$65K as originally projected. In January 2012 Cessna raised the Skycatcher's price to $149,900! We all know what $150AMU will buy in the used market, perhaps a pristine M20J with G500/GTN750/STEC55 or similar. You'd have to be crazy to choose the LSA at that price.

5 hours ago, jrwilson said:

 The article says the planes had all the usable parts removed before they were scrapped.

I'm not sure about that; it looks to me like the engines, etc. are still in place.

 

sc3.jpg

sc2.jpg

sc1.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites
gsxrpilot Grand Master

gsxrpilot

Posted
Posted

Hey, I'm one of those kids who wanted to play with computer games and the early internet instead of running around outside with real live friends. Now coming up on 50, I'm still in the same business and do pretty well for myself. I have a younger brother who's a senior Captain for a major airline and still hoping to match his older brother's income some day... and own a nice Mooney.

The smart kids today are learning how to code and make FB/iPhoneApps/video games, better.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted

How many of those airframes could have been used to introduce kids to aviation at public events at local airports across the country?  Or drop one off at the local school for kids to sit in and play with.

Clarence

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raptor05121 Grand Master

Raptor05121

Posted
Posted
45 minutes ago, MB65E said:

That's Textron for you!! 

Legal decision made by their Lawyers with Zero aviation background or passion. 

-Matt

 

Ironic how a company that owns Lycoming installed competitors engines in their airframes.

36 minutes ago, bonal said:

Didn't they use Conti O200's in those. If they didn't at least pull the motors well that's just a stupid waste 

Yes, and yeah they crushed them with the engines still on them, and in one picture, looks like the Garmin display suite is also still installed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raptor05121 Grand Master

Raptor05121

Posted
Posted
13 hours ago, N1395W said:

But how do we get 16-25 year olds to actually WANT to put in the time and effort to get their pilot's licenses?

 

 
1

Lower the cost of flying.

I've taken A BUNCH of my friends flying. A number of them are all like: "this is so cool! where do you learn?" etc

and then we get to "how much does it cost to fly?"

About $160.....an hour.

"How many hours are needed to get a license?"

About 50.


Don't get mad at us that aviation is getting more expensive while the income-to-expenditure bracket is widening drastically, along with record-high college debt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bonal Grand Master

bonal

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, Raptor05121 said:

Ironic how a company that owns Lycoming installed competitors engines in their airframes.

Yes, and yeah they crushed them with the engines still on them, and in one picture, looks like the Garmin display suite is also still installed.

Just think of all the old 150 Cessnas at flight schools that could have benefited from those engines and the Garmins what stupid accountant / manager made that choice 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Andy95W Grand Master

Andy95W

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Raptor05121 said:



Don't get mad at us that aviation is getting more expensive while the income-to-expenditure bracket is widening drastically, along with record-high college debt.

In 1991/92 when getting my instrument rating I was paying abut $45 / hour for a C172 and my car cost about $9000.  Today, at the local flight school, a 172 is about $140/ hour and my car is about $28,000.  Inflation seems to have affected both about the same, at about 3x the price of the early 90's.  (100LL is about 4.5x the 1992 price).

I bought my first Mooney in 1992 for $24,500.  I bought my current Mooney (same type) in 2011 for $37,500. I got a good deal on both.

So, on balance, aviation has NOT gotten more expensive, and used airplanes are more affordable.

It is true that I can't speak for the high college debt problem, but that was a factor in my day as well. (As for me, I worked my ass off to get the government to pay for my college then gave them 10 years service as my thanks.)

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raptor05121 Grand Master

Raptor05121

Posted
Posted

How is an ever-declining fleet getting more affordable? We have less and less "budget" airplanes every year. The original M20C was $13,995 in 1963. Adjusted for inflation, that's around $100k. Why are they now 7 times more than that? Your $45/hr in 1992 rental rate is about $70/hr today. Yet we're well north of $130/hr. The pilot population is in a steady decline since the 80s, and less and less are being certified every year. I only forsee things getting more expensive.

Personally, I think it is ridiculous that college tuition is out of control. No, I'm not a Bernie supporter, but $750 for the book, which the very next semester are outdated, is friggin lunacy.
 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
bonal Grand Master

bonal

Posted
Posted
5 hours ago, Raptor05121 said:

How is an ever-declining fleet getting more affordable? We have less and less "budget" airplanes every year. The original M20C was $13,995 in 1963. Adjusted for inflation, that's around $100k. Why are they now 7 times more than that? Your $45/hr in 1992 rental rate is about $70/hr today. Yet we're well north of $130/hr. The pilot population is in a steady decline since the 80s, and less and less are being certified every year. I only forsee things getting more expensive.

Personally, I think it is ridiculous that college tuition is out of control. No, I'm not a Bernie supporter, but $750 for the book, which the very next semester are outdated, is friggin lunacy.
 

What's a book?   I see the used market driven more by the decline of people in the market  than the decline of available supply. You are quite right about less available good used airplanes but if no one is interested in flying there is no market. The opposite of this is in the vintage car world. There are millions of people the can drive a car and a well preserved or restored pony car from the 60's can fetch over a hundred thousand. Sadly those 162's were destroyed by an F,ing accountant. I sometimes wonder how much the remaining manufacturing base really cares about promoting the small GA market and pilot base. When was the last time you saw a Cessna Beach Piper Mooney or Cirrus add on a non aviation format event commercial. There are lots of things we as pilots do to expose people to the passion for flying but nothing is being done by the industry outside of there own little church. I would love to see a commercial on TV during any kind of broadcast promoting GA and any brand of airplane. And sadly virtual reality keeps getting better and kids really are growing up in a different world. What's really going to be an eye opener is when the airlines can't find any pilots to fly the jets that everyone takes for granted. Of course with AI getting smarter we might end up with pilotless airliners. That's a scary thought and not too far away.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
KSMooniac Grand Master

KSMooniac

Posted
Posted
Too bad they didn't donate them to a few aviation trade school.  

Exactly...there is a giant aviation tech school in town, as well as a college with an engineering department and giant test facility. Engineering students could easily run structural tests on the big components to correlate to classroom work and learn by doing! Really aggravating.

The current Textron leadership doesn't like small planes and I fear they might stop production again.

Sent from my VS985 4G using Tapatalk

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.