Thirty years ago, 85 percent of students and instructors could conduct training in a two-seat airplane. Today, 85 percent of students and instructors need to use a four-seat airframe. It would be inconceivable for four typical GA-interested American adults to take off within safe weight & balance limits for the typical 1950s or 1960s-designed airframe.
Cirrus responded to the changed circumstances by making the SR22, a four-seater with 1,000 lbs. more gross weight and twice the horsepower compared to a 1960s four-seater.
Piper has done something interesting. They’ve taken a seat out of their four-seater (1960 design), put in an experimental glass panel, and delivered a new IFR-capable three-seat airplane, including the fantastic Garmin GFC 500 autopilot, for $285,000 (down from more than $370,000; compare to a Cirrus SR20 at $455,000 before options). And it probably will be able to take off with three adult Americans circa 2020!
One issue: the airplane will be called the “Pilot 100”. Did the marketing staff at Piper recently come over from Dorco USA?
See this article from Plane&Pilot.
One unusual twist is using a 180-horsepower engine from Continental, now under Chinese ownership. Industry experts say that Lycoming makes a more reliable engine, especially the IO-360 Lycoming. Also that Lycoming support is far superior. Cirrus recently dropped Continental as a supplier for its lower-powered model, the SR20.
(Out of a handful of SR22s in our T hangars, the premature failure rate on the bigger Continental engines has been high. One failed catastrophically at 300 hours. Another failed at about 900 hours (supposed to last 2,200) and one month after its three-year warranty expired. Continental refused to do anything for the customer other than sell him a new engine at the standard price.)
It’s a step in the right direction, but these piston aircraft companies are killing themselves, we need a reliable, low cost entry level airplane. Not likely to happen when the cheapest engines are over $20,000.00
Surprising that the article about an unveiling only shows the plane cloaked in a slinky dark gray number. It is very telling about the weight problem though.
It’s not just small airplanes. Look at the differences between a 1980 Honda Civic and a 2019 Honda Civic, for instance. The 2019 car is about 1,000 lbs. heavier (curb weight) than the 1980 model, more than 50%. Side by side they may have the same name on the badges, but they look like they were designed in different universes for totally different people.
I realize cars and small airplanes aren’t really comparable, Honda went upmarket, etc., but the differences are, well, very big.
1980 Pictures:
https://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2010/12/curbside-classic-when-hondas-mojo-was-working-1980-1983-honda-civic/
2019 Pictures:
https://www.thecarconnection.com/photos/honda_civic-sdn_2019
MSRP of a 3-Door Civic DX hatchback in 1980 was $4,599, approx. $14,250 today. MSRP of a 5-Door Civic LX hatchback in 2019 (there are no 3 door models!) is $21,450. It gets better mileage with a much more powerful engine, which it needs, because it’s moving a lot more mass. So the 2019 model costs about 50% more in equivalent dollars than the 1980 model. It’s more than 50% more car (at least in terms of curb weight)!!
Today’s Civic is also a substantially safer and more reliable.
Nice panel – I wonder how many years it will take until we run out of pilots that have received primary flight training on steam gauge instruments.
If you can buy a 1970s Cherokee for $30,000 or so, does it make sense to buy a new one for $300,000?