The New Orwellian Norm has come to GA...

  • Thread starter Thread starter Deleted member 27505
  • Start date Start date
The target demographic isn't a pilot. It's for people with more money than brains with the need for an expensive toy in the garage with no practical application. In that effect, I think they'll have no issue.

I've been critical of this thing since they released W&B numbers. I still think it's one of the most worthless airplanes built in a long time. I cannot figure out why anyone would buy one.

A useful load of 430lbs. So 2 180lb adults and 10 gallons of gas. A fuel burn of 4.9gph at 75% power, you have about 1.5 hours of flight time with reserves. With a cruise speed in the 75kt range, you can go a whole 57nm in a straight line before needing to turn around to land with 30 minutes of gas!!!!!!

Want to bet most of the purchasers are significantly over 180lbs.
 
Want to bet most of the purchasers are significantly over 180lbs.
I mean I guess if you take the second seat out to save some weight, since for all practical purposes, this is a 1 seat airplane anyways. That's maybe 30lbs? So 460lbs - the 250lb fat guy that can afford this thing gives you 31 gallons of gas and about 440nm straight line with reserves. That... works. Just don't bring any bags and plan to do all of your flying by yourself.
 
The target demographic isn't a pilot. It's for people with more money than brains with the need for an expensive toy in the garage with no practical application. In that effect, I think they'll have no issue.

I've been critical of this thing since they released W&B numbers. I still think it's one of the most worthless airplanes built in a long time. I cannot figure out why anyone would buy one.

A useful load of 430lbs. So 2 180lb adults and 10 gallons of gas. A fuel burn of 4.9gph at 75% power, you have about 1.5 hours of flight time with reserves. With a cruise speed in the 75kt range, you can go a whole 57nm in a straight line before needing to turn around to land with 30 minutes of gas!!!!!!

This is the problem with all light sports, not just this aircraft...build and certify a plane to a cookie-cutter spec and ignore it's actual engineered capabilities. RIP C162
 
The target demographic isn't a pilot. It's for people with more money than brains with the need for an expensive toy in the garage with no practical application. In that effect, I think they'll have no issue.

I've been critical of this thing since they released W&B numbers. I still think it's one of the most worthless airplanes built in a long time. I cannot figure out why anyone would buy one.

A useful load of 430lbs. So 2 180lb adults and 10 gallons of gas. A fuel burn of 4.9gph at 75% power, you have about 1.5 hours of flight time with reserves. With a cruise speed in the 75kt range, you can go a whole 57nm in a straight line before needing to turn around to land with 30 minutes of gas!!!!!!

Is any LSA useful or practical?
 
I mean I guess if you take the second seat out to save some weight, since for all practical purposes, this is a 1 seat airplane anyways. That's maybe 30lbs? So 460lbs - the 250lb fat guy that can afford this thing gives you 31 gallons of gas and about 440nm straight line with reserves. That... works. Just don't bring any bags and plan to do all of your flying by yourself.
Taking the seat out probably violates the contract!

After all, all the marcom shows a dude and a hotty reposed on the deck with the gull-wings open drinking wine from long stems while Icon floats serenely on a lake (usually with mountains in the mid-distance). So taking the seat out is going to violate the whole marketing ethos.

Also, you forgot to factor in the weight of the wine.;)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Taking the seat out probably violates the contract!

After all, all the marcom shows a dude and a hotty reposed on the deck with the gull-wings open drinking wine from long stems while Icon floats serenely on a lake (usually with mountains in the mid-distance). So taking the seat out is going to violate the whole marketing ethos.

Also, you forgot to factor in the weight of the wine.;)

Ah, but that assumes that they flew there. It's a toy to pose with, not actually use.
 
I would like to put those Silicon Valley bros that designed this hunk of junk through a season of flying working airplanes just to see the confusion and bafflement.
 
Dudes...this is a toy. It's designed to be towed behind the family SUV up to the lake to take friends around for a few minutes at a time. Not actually GO ANYWHERE. It's literally a jetski with wings. You don't load your whole family in a jetski and go cross country down a lake do you? No. You take the boat.
 
This reads like a really bad timeshare contract that you hear people complaining about. Because of this "agreement", and how this company is leveraging people to sign at the last minute after having their deposits tied up for years, I hope ICON's "brand image" achieves the same status of a really bad timeshare.
 
Me and my brother were really interested in an Icon for a toy, but I would never sign their agreement.

6000hr or 30 year lifespan and after that it has to be scrapped?!? Airframe Overhaul's at 2000hr intervals and All MX to be done by Icon?!?!

If I want to sell it, Icon has to approve the purchaser and I have to pay icon $2,000 to do so?!?!

They are out of their •ing mind!
 
“All it’s doing is trying to put the responsibility where it belongs,” Hawkins said. “We believe in extreme personal responsibility … we also believe that the vast majority of people actually believe that, too. If you don’t like that philosophy … we don’t want a relationship with you.”

But they don't think the buyer is responsible enough to sell it without their approval. "Sell" seems like the wrong term, "transfer the lease" seems more accurate.
 
I think Icon sees themselves as not selling to current pilots.

Instead, they're selling the winged jet-skis to Russian & Chinese bazillionaires. The US market is tiny, but has the risk of taking down the company. I think they're trying to find a way to target the foreigners while keeping out of the domestic market.
 
One of the reasons I left my last job is the Falcon 900 owner was getting and Icon and I was the only pilot with a CFI.

Nope.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
The target demographic isn't a pilot. It's for people with more money than brains with the need for an expensive toy in the garage with no practical application. In that effect, I think they'll have no issue.

I've been critical of this thing since they released W&B numbers. I still think it's one of the most worthless airplanes built in a long time. I cannot figure out why anyone would buy one.

A useful load of 430lbs. So 2 180lb adults and 10 gallons of gas. A fuel burn of 4.9gph at 75% power, you have about 1.5 hours of flight time with reserves. With a cruise speed in the 75kt range, you can go a whole 57nm in a straight line before needing to turn around to land with 30 minutes of gas!!!!!!

Sorry I'm LOLing so hard at this right now. You hit the nail on the head but let me tell you what the response from the typical owner pilot would be.

I only need 5 minutes or less for reserve I can land anywhere on the lake.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
There's a certain degree of Schadenfreude in watching the New Creatorz buy a pretendo-commodity which embodies the spirit of all of the warnings that have been made about the "new" (nothing new about attempting to illegally control commerce, contrary to popular belief) industrialism. I keep waiting for Silicon Valley to pillory Peter Thiel,
 
Wait. I don't understand. Please explain?

One ugly human trait that is nearly always consistent and is highly associated with air disasters is assigning blame.

I'm the kind of CFI that has worked for months to fix students that were "unsalvageable" but I'll tell you straight up "nope you just are not capable of that."

I didn't want the be the bag man. The guy left holding when you get rolled on. I've seen enough wealthy idiots with a new toy to know when a good time to bail is.

A vivid memory is helping a newly minted pilot push his turbine converted P210 into his hangar. I was a brand new CFI and of course wanted turbine time. This pilot was sold that his aircraft had so much power it "couldn't stall." He was killed in his aircraft with two others a month or so later.

I've seen stuff like that happen enough times to see when a product and a personality combine to create a pilot that feels he is invincible. Macho hazardous - isn't that what the impotent FAA calls it? We have all seen it we joke about the 'chute on the Cirrus and the plastic dot com killer.

The v tail Doctor killer was no different and provides us with an interesting look at social demographics as well. The 1%er Jetski is the same thing.

I saw this coming for ICON.The mix of: client that believes the claim the "aircraft can't stall, who can not be bothered to at least obtain a private license, an impotent and utterly worthless regulatory body and a versatile lightweight short range seaplane all add up to one thing.

Disaster

Now the company is tightening screws to make sure they don't get a bad name.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I would like to put those Silicon Valley bros that designed this hunk of junk through a season of flying working airplanes just to see the confusion and bafflement.
One of my friends - who decries (not unjustifiably) the booth-babe/Silicon Valley brah culture - points out (correctly) that brahs are, in fact, the target market.

Let's go to the gym and get swole.
 
Back
Top