Who buys LSAs?

[Bob Bevan]

I was having a discussion the other day with a colleague about who buys ‘Light Sports Aircraft’, specifically smaller aeroplanes with an MTOW in the 400 – 600 Kg range. His view was that it is mainly relatively new pilot who have recently gained a PPL and are looking for their first aircraft. My feeling it is just as likely to be experienced pilots who are looking for either a lower cost way of indulging their passion or a slightly more ‘raw’ flying experience.

It know it is a little subjective and I am not aware of any stats on ownership profiles so I was just wondering whether anyone has any views or even data on the subject.


Cheers,

Bob

[Maoraigh1]

either a lower cost way of indulging their passion or a slightly more ‘raw’ flying experience.


Lower cost - look at the buying cost.
More "raw" flying experience - look at the instrumentation most have, and they're mainly nosewheel.
( I fly a wood and fabric Jodel 1050 tailwheel aircraft.)

[sharpend]

I nearly did! Until I realised their limitations and the fact that many are not that robust. A new one to my spec might have been ok, but the cost was way too high. Bought a Scottish Aviation Bulldog instead which costs more to run, but not a problem given my low annual hours. Moreover, it was about a quarter of the price of a new LSA.

[IFMU]

I am building one, a Waiex by Sonex. I chose it more for cost and ease of assembly (so my kids can help) than the fact it is an LSA. I am not a beginner, but I want something fun and cheap. Plus I like to build.
Bryan

[bartonflyer]

I bought a CTLS, now into my third year of ownership, previous history as owner/group member was a C150, a PA28 and a PA32.
The aircraft is excellent, 110kt cruise on ~18 litres of MOGAS / hour and suits my flying perfectly these days.

The limitation compared to a "standard" Group A aircraft is the EASA Permit to fly restriction of Daytime VFR only. I used to have an IR and certainly flew the Cherokee6 mainly under IFR

Not sure about the "raw" flying experience: With comfortable leather seats, a larger cockpit than a 172 or a PA28, glass cockpit instrumentation and 3-axis autopilot slaved to the GPS (which works perfectly a first for me in any light aircraft!!) it is a very comfortable aircraft for doing long distances.

[thing]

I'm always amazed when people say they fly them because they're cheaper. With the amount of hours I fly I would have to do a lot of flying, probably more years than I've got left to live in something like our 172 to make it dearer than forking out 50K on a Jabiru and saving on the juice. I quite like the look of some of the LSA's but please don't come the old 'it's a cheaper way of flying' story.

Disclaimer: I know no one has yet by the way...

[bartonflyer]

But that's not comparing like with like!
Compare buying and operating a NEW LSA with a NEW 172 or PA28 then you certainly can argue that they are cheaper to operate.

[tecman]

I chose a used Tecnam P2002JF which, while being the certified VLA model, is to all intents an LSA. Previously I'd owned or co-owned Cessna's and Pipers, including a PA24. I enjoy flying anything I can, and have flown many different aircraft over the years.

The scene is probably slightly different in the UK and Australia but the vast majority of our GA aircraft under the $80/90/100k mark are very dated and well used. The P2002 had 600 hr TT when I bought it. A big factor in the decision was that, despite good intentions, a lot of my flying involved solo time, and relatively local jaunts. That said, my WA base and the need for the occasional long-distance trip makes it important for the aircraft to have good endurance (at least 5.5 hrs in the P2002). Most importantly, I wanted an aircraft that handled well, and was fun to fly. While it'd be nice to have an aerobatic capability, I can't really fault the P2002 on handling and it's an added bonus that my Sunday sanity flight consumes only 15 lph of 98 octane mogas.

I find that with 2 people and modest luggage (that's the only choice you get!) we can still enjoy very useful excursions up to 3 hrs away. There's no doubt that for a long cross-country, with more luggage, I'd happily hire a C182 or similar.

There is quite a big spread in the design, build quality and maintainability in the LSA category and I looked at a number of options before giving the P2002 a try. It's not perfect but it's a nicely performing aircraft with few vices. The selection process was almost de-railed by an errant RV6 but the Tecnam withstood the challenge. It's not as agricultural in its build as e.g. a C150 but you'd have to work hard as a private owner to do any damage. The 150 kg you save in weight translates into excellent climb performance, something that is very helpful in the hot summers here.

I am quite happy to accept the day VFR limitation although, in fact, the P2002JF is now certified by EASA for NVFR. Again though, I'd be more than happy to hire something better suited for night work (which is effectively instrument work in some of the low population black-night areas of Australia). That said, I do enjoy having decent, reliable instruments - just gotten used to it over the years.

If you've been flying for a while it becomes abundantly clear that the perfect aircraft doesn't exist. I firmly believe in enjoying whatever is on offer at a given time which is perhaps a sanitized version of a maxim held by an aviation mentor: the best aircraft is one that gets your a**se in the air on the day.

My observation on cost is that an LSA will help, but it won't make flying a low-cost hobby. Obviously there is some saving on the fuel (consumption and type) but for many private pilots that won't add up to much over the course of a year. My biggest saving has been on maintenance: a nicely built and maintained aircraft with 600 TT is proving much cheaper than older alternatives. The only cheaper way of flying would be to build and maintain the aircraft yourself, which is a worthy alternative if you have the time (which I currently don't).

Happy flying!

[Rod1]

My aircraft is coming up to 8 years old. I sold my AA5B (1978) for £42k and built my MCR for £50k. Total saving in operating cost in the last 8 years is just over £70k. Aircraft is still in 1st class condition and the performance for long distance VFR touring round Europe blows the canopy off the AA5. I would say I gained performance and utility and saved a lot of cash. The fun factor is also huge.

Rod1

[Bob Bevan]

The point I was trying to make to my colleague is that it is wrong to see LSAs as some form of starter aircraft for newly qualified pilots. I believe people who have just gained their PPL are more likely to initially rent or join an ownership syndicate than to rush out to buy an LSA.

As has been pointed out, acquiring an LSA is not cheap and most of the people I have spoken to who own one are in fact experienced pilots.

Cheers

Bob

[Silvaire1]

If you're asking about LSAs, the FAA certification category, versus microlights in general, the buyers are enthusiastic pilots who want to use their driver's license as a medical. Typically older, as would be expected, and the purchase price is manageable because they sell their Bonanza or whatever. My observation is that they fly them a few years and then sell, taking a huge depreciation loss. That is acceptable because they are typically fairly wealthy and they want to fly as much as they can before it is no longer physically possible. Good luck to them.

[m.Berger]

Silvaire makes sense. Although many of us revere old aircraft, the cost of running them and the potential for large unexpected bills or a tech issue grounding the aircraft for the summer due to scarcity of parts scares us off.Then there is the efficiency issue.Which aviator wants to fly something heavy when he could fly something light? or uncomfortable or with potential unreliability.
No, sleek, fast and modern always win which is why the great unwashed will lose the price of a good Jodel in the first year of BMW/Audi/Mercedes ownership.
I'm an old stick in the mud who would accept anything I could fly but it doesn't stop me lusting. As somebody once said when the parachute business seemed to be besieged by gorgeous young women one day - "I might be married but I'm not blind."
NB. If I could afford a BMW, I'd buy the Jodel instead.

[Rod1]

Silvaire1

The US LSA cat has a speed restriction and does not accept VP or retracts and the cat has its own special license aimed at people who cannot get a full medial.. The equivalent European CS-VLA code has none of these restrictions and no special license so you get aircraft which do 135kn out of 350m with VP etc which blow the doors off traditional types. My MCR out performs my old AA5B in every way by a big margin and it is £10k a year cheaper to run. In Europe the picture is very different from the US.

Rod1

[moosp]

I am interested in them purely for the modern technology that they bring. For years I have sat in a glass cockpit airliner designed in the late 1970s and it got a bit stale.

Seeing what modern glass cockpits are available in the LSA world for a very reasonable price compared to a new Cirrus or Cessna 182 with G1000, the LSA route becomes a very attractive proposition.

If I had the money I would go for a Cirrus, but I don't. If I get a Bristell with all the fruit on it, I have a toy for the next 10 years for around 80,000 USD. Two seater true, but like a car you rarely use the back seats.

FWIW

[Silvaire1]

Rod1 - I spend a lot of time in Europe so its unnecessary to point out the differences in the certification, regulation, and tax regime - its only too familiar to me.

Your own kit built aircraft is quite different than a factory built LSA Aircraft and bears a fair bit of resemblance to the plans built composite homebuilts of the 80s, albeit with a shorter build time and higher cost. In 1983 I was flying a two-seat, 60 HP carbon/glass composite homebuilt with my dad, not unlike what you are flying now, that would do approximately 150 mph, or 130 kts. It was an efficient aircraft that burned about 3.5 gallons/hr or 13 liters/hr of auto fuel. But when the time came to buy and fly my own aircraft, I went in a different direction because I'd already 'been there and done that' a long time ago. Different people, in different places and stages of life have different priorities.

Near religious zealotry in favor of homebuilts, kit builts, LSAs, any of the several different types of Euro microlights, certified aircraft or anything else is misplaced. You might assume that what you're doing is new and important, and perhaps in a sense it is true for you, but be assured that for others its less important and less novel.

m.Berger - I'm not much with you on the appeal of new for its own sake, but I am with you on the 'BMW versus Jodel' thing :) I bought a new 275 HP Japanese car, plus my first aircraft :ok: for about the same total cost as a middle of the road BMW... The cheaper car is actually better for my needs, and the aircraft is nice enough to have won best of show at the national type fly-in the year before I bought it. What's not to prefer, if you any imagination at all? Otherwise, and on topic, if you enjoy owning things as I do (I have 13 vehicles, all kept in good order, including 2 aircraft) depreciation is the big enemy of your financial well being.

[flyinkiwi]

I just want to add my 2c and say Silvaire has it pretty much sewn up. All of the guys I know who own LSAs are older blokes who are finding it difficult or in some cases impossible to maintain a class 2 medical. The reduced purchase and running costs are a bonus, they are just happy they get to continue flying.

[tecman]

There are options around the Western World that allow you to fly a GA aircraft on a driver's licence medical. An older GA pilot in Australia (for example) does not need to move to an LSA to keep flying.

The age thing is pretty specious too, in my view. The "older guy" profile is often the stereotype about home-building, as well. I guess the selection effect does favour people with some disposable income but, looking across the homebuilt and LSA sector that I see, I hesitate to generalize. The youngest LSA flyer I know is 18 and the oldest is 87 (recently given up aerobatics!). And the "cattle cockies" here in Oz doing their mustering with LSA C150 replacements don't fit any stereotype, either.

Bob, I think the short answer to your original question is: lots of different pilots, with a variety of motivations.