Cessna 162 SkyCatcher

[Justiciar]

find simple things like undercarriages not lubricated and door catches smeared in grease to give the impression some work as been done.

Certified aircraft maintenance is a captive market with little real competition as the maintenance regime militates against swapping maintenance organisations and the private owner has little leverage to negotiate prices. So they can charge what they like and few owners are sufficiently knowledgeable to police the work they do (or often don't do).

The ethos in the Permit world is quite different. More owners do some maintenance and the relationship with the LAA engineer is far more personal and works on a huge degree of trust. Because the engineer is not supporting huge overheads the cost is so much less and of course parts without the paper trail cost a lot less.

The LSA process is something of a half way house with cheaper maintenance but still sufficiently regulated that it will permit the use of certified LSA for training (or so I understand, as the regulations are not yet in force).

This seems the way forward for much flight training. I think the risk is that as organisations invest in new fleets the capacity to do IMCR training will disappear. With the current uncertainties over the continued existance of the IMCR, who would base their purchasing decisions on the need or the wish to do IMC training? The problem for the FTOs is that they will have to either go the conventional certified aircraft route if they think they might want to train for the IMCR or make a business decision to abandon that area with all its uncertainties in favour of much cheaper operating costs for mainstream flight training using LSAs. I suspect that training organisations operating certified aircraft will become few and be those offering specialist training such as aeros or formation flying.

[EDMJ]

There is no "LSA" category in Europe yet. As far as I understand it, a number of light aircraft (e.g. variants of the Flight Design CT LS and Remos GX) have gained EASA Permits to Fly as an interim measure but these may not be used for commercial flight training. Almost all of the flashy, composite, Rotax powered designs gracing the pages of various periodicals at the moment are flying in Europe as microlights, which is a completely different kettle of fish.

A Cessna representative told me at the "Aero" trade fair in Friedrichshafen in Germany in April that the Skycatcher will be certified in Europe in the VLA category, and the process has already been started.

The question remains whether European flying schools are willing to pay in excess of €100k for a trainer which cannot use MOGAS when there are several established European designs around in the same price category which can (Katana, Aero VL-3, various Tecnam designs).

But then again I felt confident in another thread that Cessna would never, ever certify the Skycatcher in Europe...

[2hotwot]

An old flying instructor once told me that the reason he liked Cessnas and Pipers on a club fleet was that students and ppls allways seemed to manage to kick something in the aeroplane getting in and something else getting out. They also pushed and pulled in the wrong places and generally pulled things off wherever they could. In this old instructors view the modern breed of aeroplanes simply did not stand up to this constant abuse without breaking and becoming unserviceable, he believed that only the Cessna/Piper era aeroplanes stood up long enough for him to make a profit.
Now someone tell me the modern aircraft that can cope with the proclivities of flying club pilots!
Oh and is the 162 robust enough?

[EchoMike]

$12,000 annual?

I find it difficult to comprehend that an annual inspection on a C150 would cost GBP 8000 unless someone is getting really, really screwed, big time.

We've had a fleet of as many as 15 of these things (and a few 152s), some of which have been around since 1991, and have been enthusiastically and regularly abused by legions of student pilots - and we have not seen anything like "major airfarme parts wearing out". Someone is getting hosed . . .

I'm also a technical advisor to the Cessna 150/152 club (since 1982), and if this was an ongoing problem, I would have heard of it by now from more than a few of our several thousand members worldwide.

The Cessna 150/152 is one of the most rugged, durable and trouble free aircraft you can buy. No, it isn't fast, no it isn't sexy, but it will NOT eat you out of house and home - parts are widely available, and if you shop around at all, quite reasonable, even by aircraft standards.

The airframe parts that "wear out" are as follows - the seat pans crack in high hour trainers from all the people jumping in and out of them. These can be patched. The flap tracks sometimes wear, this is a fiddly repair, but not hugely expensive. Sometimes you will find corrosion on the inside of the flap well, get out the drill and rivet gun and a bucking bar. Firewalls and engine mounts take a beating in rough landings, but that is accident damage, not "wearing out". Finally, every once in a while you might see corrosion on the main spar cap. Again, not a trivial job, but nowhere near $12,000 (much closer to $2,000, and that's at retail).

For $12,000, I'd expect most of a restoration, this much for an annual inspection is downright criminal. For $12,000 I could make a garden-variety Cessna 150 or 152 fly like a new airplane. For $24,000, you'd also get a zero time engine, new windows, new paint, upholstery, and other stuff. For $36,000, you'd have a Garmin 430 in it as well.

I'd be VERY interested in seeing the actual repair order which resulted in this bill, not once, but what, two years running? Or was it three? I think this tale has grown in the telling.

Best Regards,
Echo Mike

[A and C]

Echo Mike

As the owner of two C152's I agree with most of the technical content of what you say, however your opinion on costs is not good for the eastern side of the Atlantic.

With most parts prices will go up by 75-100% by the time they get to the maintenance company due to shipping, import, and the issue of a 8130 (no yellow taggs in EASA land).

The new EASA regulation requires a lot more paperwork and most company's have had to employ another paper-pusher to keep up with this, not to forget the payment to EASA to keep the approval to do the work. This costs about £600 per year for each aircraft just to do the paperwork.

The costs of local taxes on business and push the labour rate to £40/hour (about $60) and add 15% VAT to this and you get the idea of costs of running aircraft in Europe.

[EchoMike]

PM, pls

A and C, pls PM me re Cessna parts. Thx!