I agree, Jim, and -- if you don't mind me stating the obvious -- success of new FAR103-compliant aircraft probably depends much more on the availability of APPLICABLE training than the actual price/quality of the aircraft itself. This is where the FAA really sticks it to us (the FAR103 community).
-- Robert
On Tue, Oct 12, 2010 at 7:41 AM, Jim Bair <jimbair@live.com> wrote:
People vote with their dollars every day. We all decide how we want to spend our money. I'm really having trouble figuring out exactly what the complaint is here. Sure, I wish lots of things were cheaper. But if they were, then other people would bid them up and we'd be back where we are. Materials and labor cost manufacturers money, and if there isn't enough profit to make the risk of doing business worthwhile, the manufacturer does something else. Why aren't manufacturers emphasizing the lower end of the market. They could, if they wished, make a lower end aircraft. According to a manufacturer over on the trike list, they don't because people don't buy them when they do.My complaint is that I have a really nice trike, and it became obsolete as a trainer (commercially) on 1/31/2010. It's still a perfectly good trike. I don't do enough training to justify a new one. One just like it is all I would want. So, I'm stuck. My motivation to spend my hours training and renting illegally (I'm a commercial pilot and cannot have legal problems with the FAA) is low, my motivation to train and rent for free is even lower. My enthusiasm to continue teaching is waning. That's my issue with Sport Pilot. SP took a lot of machines out of circulation that were perfectly good trainers and unfortunately the economic timing of that happening couldn't have been worse.Jim
__._,_.___
No comments:
Post a Comment